the well-being of people on a planet with healthy ecosystems. Not prosperous on the basis of a lyxperspektiv without that you have what you need in order to live a good life.
Sustainability consists of four pillars: human rights, anti-corruption, environment and climate and workers ' rights. Common for the pillars is that all people should have a dignified life.
We should be clear with the work in march. Agenda 2030-the work spans over just about everything and it is difficult to draw a limit. We need to find a system that makes a difference in many places at the same time. It is also a challenge to formulate proposals so that both are ambitious and at the same time feasible.
An interesting thing is that it to simmer a lot about Agenda 2030 - the work out in the municipalities. We focuses on national policy, but it happens very much at the local level. Even schools and high schools are very much on the sustainability objectives, which makes it important for us to be out there and interact with young leaders and give a lecture.
in Order to do this we need a huge conversion. In the environmental field, we will not reach 14 of the 16 targets with the current policy, according to the environmental protection agency estimates. Much of Agenda 2030 is adopted by the parliament, but we are lacking in many cases, action to achieve objectives.
I feel that we need more knowledge about sustainability in the society at large. Local and regional actors would love to act but lack of concrete strategies.
the Target 12, to ensure sustainable consumption and production. Sweden has the environment and the climate, hjärtebarn but we weigh up rarely in our emissions in the rest of the world. 67 million tonnes of carbon dioxide released in Sweden outside the country last year in terms of manufacturing and travel. In addition, is often manufacturing abroad is not sustainable from a social perspective. We know little about how it looks with the workers ' rights in those countries.
I agree. Almost all of the goal is linked to target 12, in terms of both environmental and social sustainability.
Absolutely. A hugely important thing is to pay attention to such trade-offs are. There is a tendency to turn a blind eye to the conflicts, for example, by only focusing on the climate change issue and build a pond to have fossil-free electricity, without regard to the negative side-effects on the local communities and the local environment. Instead, we should highlight the conflict of objectives in order to be able to think a little to reach a better solution. Perhaps there is another way to produce electricity, which is not harmful for either the climate or the local environment?
Our political leaders, the biggest challenge is to recognize that trade-offs exist. To acknowledge that we are not them, we find never alternative ways of thinking.
For example, many developing countries, a developed electricity infrastructure. A classic way to solve the issue would be to bet on large dams and nuclear power plants. But today there are smart renewable solutions off the grid as solar panels, which can be both cheaper, easier, and provide electricity access to areas that have not previously had it.
We need to think outside of the economic system to be able to become a sustainable society. For example, is rated China and India as part of the developed countries today. They are globalized and have reached a certain standard of living. But the kids in New Delhi can't breathe because of all the air pollution. We need to redefine what we mean by development and not just see it from a growth perspective.
Sustainability is a political process, and states and governments have the primary responsibility to ensure that the global objectives are achieved. The policy is absolutely crucial. It is they who put the framework for business, for individuals and other actors. But I don't think it requires a certain political ideology in order to achieve a sustainable society.
It is very important to underline that sustainable development has no political colour. The Swedish people need to understand it. Regardless of the government in power should they serve as a guarantor of sustainable development. The whole of parliament, it must be on it. Today, many questions in the social sustainability of the volunteers, businesses, and governmental activities. There are frameworks, but not the regulatory framework. For example, there are no strict requirements on social sustainability in the law on public procurement.
the environmental field is in the front line there. There are clear regulatory environment.
Everything is connected. The whole of our prosperity based on a thriving ecosystem in which we use natural resources in a wise way.
Yes. You can't just focus on the oceans of the world and not think about the social inequality. Take corruption as an example. Often environmental work in hand-in-hand with antikorruptionsverksamhet. It required a dignified life for people to engage in sustainability. Compare with Maslovs staircase. People need to have their basic needs met.
Everything fits together. The whole of our prosperity based on a thriving ecosystem in which we use natural resources in a wise way.
Sustainable thinking is an approach. I often get asked which sustainability is the most important. And I can't answer that question. Different goals are different acute, but as humanity, we can't prioritise between them.
My parents were very involved in Amnesty International, which meant that I interested me for the peace movement. Then came the säldöden the 80's which got up my eyes for the environment. For me, the social and environmental sustainability have always gone hand-in-hand.
I also come from a family with civilengagemang. My family has roots in India and my grandparents, was included in Mahatma Gandhi's movement against the british oppression. So it has come naturally for me to work with rights issues. I can't imagine working with anything else.
Read more about sustainability.