The SDGs: A change agenda shaping the future of business and humanity at large

To Achieve a Sustainable Blue Future, Progress Assessments Must Include Interdependencies between the Sustainable Development Goals

Can we learn survival and success in isolation? Can Luxury Companies afford to think of Corporate social responsibility (CSR) as an optional aspect? This paper discusses pioneering steps towards CSR in the context of the rapidly expanding luxury market. This further impels these brands to tradeoff between Profit-Planet, revisiting the initiatives and impediments pragmatically. The scholars have advocated the inspirational forces behind CSR contributions varying from the environment's need to strengthen goodwill to serve sustainability/existential crisis to institutional expectations. The stakeholders have augmented expectations from luxury brands towards society with each passing year in proportion to the revenue. This shift not only bags goodwill and promotes positive word-of-mouth in the industry but also enhances the brand's reputation. Luxury brands, often seen as symbols of opulence and exclusivity, are inherently expected to demonstrate social and environmental responsibility. Additionally, there is a growing awareness among consumers who seek brands that align with their values, making CSR a strategic imperative for luxury companies to maintain their brand reputation and customer loyalty. CSR is crucial for luxury companies, especially from a long-term sustainability and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) perspective. These market giants are at par with the SDG goals: SDG 1(No Poverty), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 8 (Decent work and economic growth), SDG 10 (Reducing inequalities), SDG 12(Responsible Consumption and Production), etc. In essence, CSR is not just a moral imperative for luxury companies, it is a strategic necessity that aligns their business objectives with the global agenda for sustainable development, ensuring long-term viability and relevance in a rapidly evolving world.

No pixel left behind: Toward integrating Earth Observations for agriculture into the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals framework

Rural women have an important and crucial role in the progress and prosperity of households and thereby local and national economies through significant contributions every day from bringing an income to her household as an employed wage earner, to taking care of her family and elders, to creating jobs as an entrepreneur. Mushroom cultivation, an agro-based microenterprise, seems ideal for rural women folk to get a new livelihood and income generation option without much additional investments of money and time. The potential of promoting mushroom growing as an important vocation for women is significant in this context. United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) such as SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being), SDG 5 (Gender Equality), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and SDG 15 (Life on Land) can be achieved.

Rwanda’s Off-Grid Solar Performance Targets

Sustainable development goal disclosures: Do they support responsible consumption and production?

<p>AuScope is Australia’s National Geoscience Research Infrastructure Program. As outlined in is 2020-2030 10-year Strategy<sup>1</sup>, AuScope seeks to provide a world-class research physical and digital infrastructure to help tackle Australia's key geoscience challenges, in particular, food and water sustainability, minerals and energy security, and mitigating impact from geohazards. These challenges tie in directly with the following United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): SDG#6 (Clean Water and Sanitation); SDG#7 (Affordable and Clean Energy); SDG#8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth); SDG#9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure); SDG#13 (Climate Action) and SDG#15 (Life on Land). </p><p> </p><p>The SDGs were set in 2015 by the UN General Assembly to be achieved by the year 2030. If the global research sector is to support achieving them, is a rethink required? Current practices tend to focus on building infrastructures in domain and/or national/regional and/or sector (research, government, private) and/or institutional/network silos. These are not necessarily enabling global interoperability, reuse and open sharing of data. For example, AuScope is building high-quality geoscience research data and software infrastructures that are at the heart of positioning Australia to meet these SDG challenges. Equivalent geoscience research infrastructures are also being built internationally (EPOS (Europe); EarthScope, EarthCube (USA)) and AuScope is looking for ways to interoperate more effectively with these.</p><p> </p><p>Within the international geoscience community some interoperable networks are in place to enable global collaborations that share data and software (e.g., Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF), which develops software infrastructure for the management, dissemination, and analysis of model output and observational climate data; the Federation of Digital Seismograph Networks (FDSN) enables members to coordinate station siting and provide free and open data). However, these are the exceptions rather than the rule. </p><p><br>None of the SDGs depend exclusively on geoscience data: all require integration with data from other domains, particularly from the social sciences and humanities. Some initiatives trying to assist data combination between the social sciences and the physical or environmental sciences are emerging (e.g., the Data Documentation Initiative - Cross Domain Integration (DDI-CDI)<sup>2</sup>; the CODATA/ISC Decadal programme on “Making data work for cross-domain grand challenges”<sup>3</sup>) , but traditional organizational and funding arrangements do not usually facilitate this. While there are exemplars of how to achieve integration of global domain and cross-domain research infrastructures and data sharing frameworks, we urgently need to leverage these to develop a roadmap that enables global integration of data and research infrastructures, both within the geosciences and beyond, to ensure sustainable production of data, products and services that support the realisation of the UN SDGs by 2030. In doing so, potentially the main tension will be to ensure that in enabling the broader, global transdisciplinary goals of the SDGs that deeper domain science is not compromised, scarce expertise is not misdirected, and that infrastructure developments within the domains are not unduly hampered.</p><p><sup>1</sup>https://www.auscope.org.au/news-features/strategy-and-investment-plan-launch  </p><p><sup>2</sup>https://ddi-alliance.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/DDI4/pages/860815393/DDI+Cross+Domain+Integration+DDI-CDI+Review  </p><p><sup>3</sup>https://codata.org/initiatives/strategic-programme/decadal-programme/ </p>

Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals Requires Transdisciplinary Innovation at the Local Scale

Land, including soil resources, makes important contributions to the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, there are challenges in identifying land/soil measurable information (e.g., indicators, metrics, etc.) to monitor the progress toward achieving these goals. This study examines the role of land/soil in selected SDGs (SDG 2: Zero Hunger; SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production; SDG 13: Climate Action; SDG 15: Life on Land) and provides practical examples on how to use geospatial analysis to track relevant qualitative and quantitative land/soil data using the contiguous United States of America (USA) as a case study. The innovative aspect of this study leverages geospatial technologies to track the intersection of land use/land cover (LULC) change and soil resources to quantify development trends within the overall land cover matrix to evaluate if these trends are sustainable. Classified land cover data derived from satellite-based remote sensing were used to identify the extent of developed areas in 2016 and the change in development areas since 2011. Most land development through time in the USA has caused losses (area loss of nearly 355,600 km2, with projected midpoint losses of about 5.7 × 1012 kg total soil carbon (TSC) and about $969B (where B = billion = 109, USD) in social costs of carbon dioxide emissions, SC-CO2). All ten soil orders present in the contiguous USA experienced losses from developments, which represents a loss for both biodiversity and soil diversity (pedodiversity). The contiguous USA experienced an increase in land/soil consumption between 2001 and 2016 at the expense of deciduous forest (−3.1%), evergreen forest (−3.0%), emergent herbaceous wetlands (−0.6%), and hay/pasture (−7.9%). These “new” land developments (24,292.2 km2) caused a complete projected midpoint loss of 4.0 × 1011 kg TSC, equivalent to $76.1B SC-CO2. States with the largest developed areas and the highest TSC losses with associated SC-CO2 were Texas and Florida. The proposed methodology used in this study can be applied worldwide, at various spatial scales, to help monitor SDGs over time. With improved tools to monitor SDGs, progress on these SDGs may require linking the SDGs to existing or future international and national legal frameworks.

This study dwells on xenophobia and the realities of actualizing the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) eight in South Africa. It argues that since the emergence of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2000, which transited to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, there has been a proliferation of literature from scholars of diverse disciplinary orientations. However, none of these studies deal with the phenomenon of xenophobia as a milestone for the attainment of the SDGs in South Africa. This paper, therefore, serves as an intervention to discuss how xenophobia affects the realization/ actualization of the UN’s SDG eight in the area under consideration. Using extant literature and the rational choice theory, it affirms that without peace and partnership with other countries, it would be very difficult for South Africa to attain the UN SDGs it envisages to achieve. To be focused and in-depth in the analysis of the phenomena under consideration the study centers exclusively on the UN SDG eight (even though there are seventeen SDGs of the UN) which hinges on decent work and economic growth. The evidence thrown up led to the major conclusion that the persistent xenophobic attacks and the resultant massive destruction of lives and businesses of foreigners, South Africa’s quest for the full-fledged realization of United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goal eight would remain mere paperwork. Given the increasing prevalence of xenophobic attacks in the study area, the paper suggests, among others, the building of meaningful, lasting, and effective partnerships. This entails that xenophobia in the country will be nipped in the bud.

Digital social innovation: An overview and research framework

Research background: The realization of United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 8 hinges on the sustained growth of both the economy and the global employment outlook. In order to ensure progress in fostering inclusive and equitable growth and employment opportunities, it is essential to undertake a comprehensive analysis of the SDG findings across all relevant subtargets. Purpose of the article: This study provides an in-depth analysis of the research surrounding SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), emphasizing its pivotal role in sustainable development. Methods: Utilizing the PRISMA framework and BERTopic method, it explores the intricate interconnections between SDG 8 and other goals, such as reducing inequalities (SDG 10), clean energy (SDG 7), climate action (SDG 13), poverty alleviation (SDG 1), and innovation and infrastructure (SDG 9). Findings & value added: The findings emphasize the importance of subtarget 8.1 (sustained per capita growth) and subtarget 8.5 (full employment and decent work for all). Additionally, the study underscores the need for policies supporting resource efficiency and sustainable consumption (subtarget 8.4), while green innovation and the digital economy are strongly linked to subtarget 8.2 (enhanced productivity through technological upgrading). Ensuring that economic growth is inclusive and equitable, as outlined in subtarget 8.3, is crucial for reducing inequalities. Policymakers must balance economic growth with environmental sustainability, promoting decent work conditions (subtarget 8.8) and adopting green technologies. These findings offer valuable insights for advancing SDG 8, ensuring that economic progress benefits all segments of society while safeguarding natural resources and fostering long-term prosperity.

Digital finance platforms - BigFintechs (BFTs) - have significant impacts, both positive and negative, on the path towards achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). At present, however, there is no systematic or holistic international governance framework that manages potential negative impacts or effectively encourages positive impacts. As such, this Technical Paper of the UN Taskforce on Global Digital Finance Governance provides an overview of the ways in which a select set of SDGs are reflected in international governance and their potential lessons and implications for the governance of BFTs. The paper begins by discussing the international human rights system — a well-established ‘hard law’ framework — as it touches on almost the full range of the SDGs. From this, we turn to several other SDGs where there has been significant focus and where well-developed international approaches have emerged. In particular, we consider the international frameworks addressing, in turn: decent work and economic growth (SDG 8); gender equality (SDG 5); climate change (SDGs 12, 13, 14 and 15); and peace, justice and strong institutions (SDG 16). We begin with the international human rights law (IHRL) framework because of its unique complementarity to the SDGs. Analysis shows that more than 90 per cent of the SDG targets are intrinsically linked to specific provisions of international and regional human rights instruments and labour standards. However, while IHRL is typically associated with state-based actors, we discuss the important shift that is currently taking place as IHRL broadens its applicability to private actors as well, thus including BFTs. The growing movement and imminent applicability of mandatory corporate human rights due diligence is a significant shift for which many companies are unprepared, and few understand. At present, most companies do not appreciate the true nature and extent of their human rights impacts. We discuss some of the implications that transplanting or subsuming notions of state obligation may have on current notions of corporate (social) responsibility and what this could mean for BFT corporate strategy in relation SDG impacts. On the matter of decent work and economic growth (SDG 8), we discuss recent developments and issues of concern that are both internal and external to BFT operations. As BFTs hail from a wide expanse of sectors such as e-commerce, social media and ride hailing services, the challenges to labor and their working conditions are equally as complex and varied. Internally, pertinent labor issues can include the hazardous nature of workplace environments, such as warehouses and call centers; the contestation over the right to be considered a ‘worker’ rather than an independent contractor (in the ‘gig economy’), and the ensuing labor protections that are associated with the former; and the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to supervise labor in sometimes discriminatory ways. To highlight, we discuss the UK Supreme Court’s recent decision on Uber’s driver policies and the labor union decision at Amazon. With regards to external challenges, we discuss the issues of modern slavery and supply chain due diligence, and how they arise in the context of BFTs. In all cases, we highlight the need for BFTs and regulators to strike a balance between protecting vulnerable workers while developing appropriate governance frameworks that can fulfil the tremendous potential of platform-based business models. Our coverage of climate change (SDGs 12, 13, 14 and 15) complements Technical Paper 3.1. Whereas Technical Paper 3.1 presented some of the initiatives being pursued by prominent regulators, such as the European Commission, in this paper we broaden that scope to consider governance initiatives by the private sector as well. We situate BFTs within the sustainable finance context as either financiers or issuers and present relevant frameworks such as the Equator Principles (EPs) and the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI). In so doing, we highlight how we are currently in a relatively nascent stage in the development of international governance ‘green’ and sustainable capital markets. This development will require considerable effort and alignment of purpose and initiative across both the public and private sectors. Finally, we provide an overview of governance initiatives pertaining to SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions). The primary international governance frameworks in this domain are those for anti-money-laundering (AML), countering the financing of terrorism (CFT) and anti-corruption/anti-bribery. This discussion of how a range of existing approaches and their relationship to the SDGs are reflected in the international governance of BFTs demonstrates the significant impact that BFTs have in our drive towards achieving the SDGs. However, the discussion equally highlights that much work is still required if we are to effectively manage that impact. Given the potential of BFTs’ platform-based model to offer catalytic opportunities for economic development, particularly in developing countries, it is important for policymakers and regulators to develop appropriate governance frameworks that are infused with the right principles and values.

Cereal brans: Transforming upcycled ingredients for sustainable food solutions aligned with SDGs

How much is global business sectors contributing to sustainable development goals?