Search

Sustainable development is often represented as contributing to desirable outcomes across economic, environmental, and social goals, yet policies and interventions attempting to deliver sustainable development often disagree on the order in which these categories of goals should be addressed. In this Essay, we identify and review 5 approaches (called logic models) for sustainable development in ocean systems based on existing policies and interventions and consider the evidence for their contributions to equity—the ultimate goal of sustainable development according to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Two of the 5 logic models prioritize economic growth and lead to social and environmental benefits, 2 prioritize environmental health as a prerequisite for sustainable economic and social benefits, and the final logic model is community driven and prioritizes social dimensions. Looking towards the 2030 maturation of the SDGs, we will need to understand what models are best suited to deliver on equity gains and prevent future inequities in development and how best to operationalize them.

Promoting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) must contend with the often siloed nature of governance institutions, making the identification of cooperative institutional networks that promote SDG targets a priority. We develop and apply a method that combines SDG interaction analysis, which helps determine prerequisites for SDG attainment, with the transition management framework, which helps align policy goals with institutional designs. Using Aruba as a case study, we show that prioritizing increased economic benefits from sustainable marine development, including those of tourism, provides the greatest amount of direct co-benefits to other SDGs. When considering indirect co-benefits, reducing marine pollution emerged as a key supporting target to achieve SDGs. The results also show that, as in many other small island states, sustainable ocean development in Aruba depends on international partnerships to address global issues—including climate change mitigation—over which it has little control. Using SDG relationships as a guide for institutional cooperation, we find that the institutions with the most potential to coordinate action for sustainable ocean development are those that address economic, social and international policy, rather than institutions specifically focused on environmental policy. Our results provide key methodologies and insights for sustainable marine development that require coordinated actions across institutions. Cooperative institutional networks are essential to achieve SDG targets. Combining SDG interaction analysis with a transition management framework, this study finds that in Aruba prioritizing benefits from sustainable marine development leads to the greatest amount of direct co-benefits to other SDGs.

The future of the global ocean economy is currently envisioned as advancing towards a ‘blue economy’—socially equitable, environmentally sustainable and economically viable ocean industries1,2. However, tensions exist within sustainable development approaches, arising from differing perspectives framed around natural capital or social equity. Here we show that there are stark differences in outlook on the capacity for establishing a blue economy, and on its potential outcomes, when social conditions and governance capacity—not just resource availability—are considered, and we highlight limits to establishing multiple overlapping industries. This is reflected by an analysis using a fuzzy logic model to integrate indicators from multiple disciplines and to evaluate their current capacity to contribute to establishing equitable, sustainable and viable ocean sectors consistent with a blue economy approach. We find that the key differences in the capacity of regions to achieve a blue economy are not due to available natural resources, but include factors such as national stability, corruption and infrastructure, which can be improved through targeted investments and cross-scale cooperation. Knowledge gaps can be addressed by integrating historical natural and social science information on the drivers and outcomes of resource use and management, thus identifying equitable pathways to establishing or transforming ocean sectors1,3,4. Our results suggest that policymakers must engage researchers and stakeholders to promote evidence-based, collaborative planning that ensures that sectors are chosen carefully, that local benefits are prioritized, and that the blue economy delivers on its social, environmental and economic goals. The capacity to create an equitable and sustainable ‘blue economy’ from ocean resources will be determined by addressing social conditions, governance and infrastructure, not just resource availability, as shown by a fuzzy logic model incorporating multidisciplinary criteria.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a major accomplishment of international diplomacy and vision. Beyond this, the SDGs represent a globally agreed on definition of sustainable development that has eluded researchers of sustainability, containing an expansive set of specific targets across social, economic, and environmental dimensions. However, the SDGs can be considered a “destination without a path”, because the SDGs are a set of integrated goals without a plan. Much research being conducted on the SDGs is focused on evaluating our status relative to the SDGs or determining how the SDGs are interrelated, however this research is rarely conducted within a larger theory of change and consequently may provide limited guidance on policy and decisions. Simultaneously there exist strategic frameworks to plan for sustainability transitions, namely the strategic sustainable development framework and the transition management framework, that can be thought of as “planning a path without a destination” because they have not been used for globally-agreed on definitions of sustainable development. I propose that researchers and policymakers “determine a path to a destination” by studying the SDGs in the context of these strategic frameworks. Doing so will allow for researchers to address complex social–ecological questions on how humans and the natural world interact and will also allow policymakers to establish strategic and evidence-based ways forward. I discuss two examples of this kind of research: one where understanding SDG achievement in the context of global change allows for the identification of strategic policy directions (using the strategic sustainable development framework), and another one where understanding policy priorities and SDG interlinkages can help determine how to structure institutions to manage and regulate activities to achieve the SDGs (transition management). Achieving the SDGs must be done while uncertainty is high and decisions urgent, requiring us to determine a path towards our desired destination.

Coastal regions are essential to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) given their importance for human habitation, resource provisioning, employment, and cultural practice. They are also regions where different ecological, disciplinary, and jurisdictional boundaries both overlap and are obscured. We thus propose the land-sea interface as areas where governance systems are most in need of frameworks for systems analysis to meet the SDGs—which are inherently interconnected— and integrate complex interdependencies between human livelihoods, energy, transport, food production, and nutrient flows (among others). We propose a strategic land-sea governance framework built on the sustainable transitions literature to plan for governance to achieve sustainable development across the land-sea interface. To illustrate our proposal, we compare governance planning processes across four case-based scenarios: an industrialized coastal country, a least developed coastal country, a developing coastal country with local dependencies on ocean resources, and a small island developing state primarily dependent on tourism. Through the lens of aligning governance actors and actions vertically (subnational to national), horizontally (across sectors), and programmatically (from goals to implementation), we propose scales at which governance systems may be misaligned, such as where different agencies that affect marine systems have conflicting visions and goals, leading to stalled progress or counterproductive actions. Where possible, we also highlight strategies to align across scales of high level strategic policy, tactical scale institutional mandates and cooperation, and on the ground activities and operations, such as aligning actors based on an analysis of interdependencies of goals.

The United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021–2030, henceforth the Ocean Decade) aims to galvanize the international community to acquire and apply scientific knowledge of the ocean. The Ocean Decade is specifically intended to help achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including its promise to “leave no one behind,” which includes coastal Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, and will undoubtedly influence research agendas and financing well beyond 2030. This focus is captured in the phrase “the science we need for the ocean we want” (1). This first-of-its-kind UN Decade will require ambition and commitment, especially during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis. Researchers hoping to help deliver the “ocean we want” as a society-first principle need to understand how science can benefit ocean-dependent people. This requires a science model that co-designs and co-delivers solutions in collaboration with people whose livelihood depends on the ocean, such as the Madagascar fishers pictured here. Image credit: ©artush/123RF.com. The current draft of the Ocean Decade Implementation Plan establishes a framework of outcomes, actions, and objectives, acknowledging the need for interdisciplinary approaches to design and deliver solution-oriented research alongside ocean-dependent people (1). Recent proposals from the academic literature for the Ocean Decade emphasize increasing our global biophysical understanding through exploration and observation of, and experimentation on, the ocean (2⇓⇓–5). But will understanding the ocean lead to “the ocean we want”? We argue that proposals for the UN Decade should consider a crucial point: To achieve the ocean we want, we must better understand the needs and priorities of ocean-dependent peoples and evaluate potential solutions for them. Advancements in marine scientific knowledge and technological innovation have brought myriad benefits to people and the planet. They include: understanding global environmental change; assessing effects of anthropogenic … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: geralds{at}mun.ca. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1

Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will require coordinated policymaking for achievement. Aruba is a Small Island State (SIDS) with 90% of its jobs and GDP dependent on the oceans has prioritized SDG 14 – life below water, or the SDG Ocean goal – for achievement. We have developed a planning process, building off of the the literature on SDG interactions and stratetic policy planning literatures, to guide SDG policy development and implemented it in Aruba. We used a structured expert elicitation process to carry out the analysis for this process. The process involves first identifying priority areas based on determining which SDG Ocean target provides the most co-benefit across other SDGs. Next we determine the SDG areas that most contribute to key SDG Ocean targets. Using this information we determine the key policy areas important for promoting sustainable oceans. Finally, we determine the Aruban ministries and institutions responsible for the various SDG areas and based on which SDG areas are most important for SDG Ocean achievement we visualize a new institutional network to support the achievement of SDG Oceans. First, we determined that while increasing economic benfits for SIDS (SDG 14.7) was the most important SDG Ocean target when considering direct impacts, reducing marine pollution (SDG 14.1), restoring marine habitats (SDG 14.2), and marine protection (SDG 14.5) were the most important SDG Ocean targets when considering indirect impacts. SDG areas with the most beneficial consequences for the SDG Ocean targets were mitigating climate impacts (SDG 13), international partnerships (SDG 17), jobs and economy (SDG 8), conserving terrestrial area (SDG 15), strengthening institutions (SDG 16), and promoting sustainable consumption and production practices (SDG 12). When links between SDGs are not considered, the institutional network supporting sustainable oceans is relatively simple, with the Department of Nature and the Environment most central: it coordinates across the largest number of relevant institutions supporting the SDG Oceans goal. However, when SDG relationships are considered, the institutional network is relatively complex, and the Social and Economic Council is determined to be the most central and important in coordinating activities across the largest number of Aruban instutions that support the SDG Ocean goal. Transitioning to a sustainable future requires policymaking that works across social-ecological dimensions, and need to design coherent and integrative institutional structures with which to do this.

The future of the global ocean economy is currently envisioned as advancing towards a 'blue economy'-socially equitable, environmentally sustainable and economically viable ocean industries

Achieving the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) results in many ecological, social, and economic consequences that are inter-related. Understanding relationships between sustainability goals and determining their interactions can help prioritize effective and efficient policy options. This paper presents a framework that integrates existing knowledge from literature and expert opinions to rapidly assess the relationships between one SDG goal and another. Specifically, given the important role of the oceans in the world's social-ecological systems, this study focuses on how SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and the targets within that goal, contributes to other SDG goals. This framework differentiates relationships based on compatibility (co-benefit, trade-off, neutral), the optional nature of achieving one goal in attaining another, and whether these relationships are context dependent. The results from applying this framework indicate that oceans SDG targets are related to all other SDG goals, with two ocean targets (of seven in total) most related across all other SDG goals. Firstly, the ocean SDG target to increase economic benefits to Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and least developed countries for sustainable marine uses has positive relationships across all SDGs. Secondly, the ocean SDG target to eliminate overfishing, illegal and destructive fishing practices is a necessary pre-condition for achieving the largest number of other SDG targets. This study highlights the importance of the oceans in achieving sustainable development. The rapid assessment framework can be applied to other SDGs to comprehensively map out the subset of targets that are also pivotal in achieving sustainable development.

Transformations towards sustainability are needed to address many of the earth’s profound environmental and social challenges. Yet, actions taken to deliberately shift social–ecological systems towards more sustainable trajectories can have substantial social impacts and exclude people from decision-making processes. The concept of just transformations makes explicit a need to consider social justice in the process of shifting towards sustainability. In this paper, we draw on the transformations, just transitions, and social justice literature to advance a pragmatic framing of just transformations that includes recognitional, procedural and distributional considerations. Decision-making processes to guide just transformations need to consider these three factors before, during and after the transformation period. We offer practical and methodological guidance to help navigate just transformations in environmental management and sustainability policies and practice. The framing of just transformations put forward here might be used to inform decision making in numerous marine and terrestrial ecosystems, in rural and urban environments, and at various scales from local to global. We argue that sustainability transformations cannot be considered a success unless social justice is a central concern.

The UN Sustainable Development Goals are aspirational goals set to achieve a future we want, with a dedicated goal for the oceans. Aspirations are helpful in guiding us but can ultimately be counterproductive. Overenthusiastic timelines, absolute targets, and unrealistic understanding of social–ecological dynamics can prevent progress toward sustainable development despite ambitions. In particular, following policy based on the naturalistic fallacy (whereby understanding how things are dictates how things should be) or the moralistic fallacy (whereby envisioning a desired future leads to assumptions about the way things are) can lead to ineffective policy. In contrast, coupling aspirations with strategic planning can promote progress on policy toward sustainable development and sustainable oceans.

Climate change is impacting marine ecosystems and their goods and services in diverse ways, which can directly hinder our ability to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), set out under the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Through expert elicitation and a literature review, we find that most climate change effects have a wide variety of negative consequences across marine ecosystem services, though most studies have highlighted impacts from warming and consequences of marine species. Climate change is expected to negatively influence marine ecosystem services through global stressors—such as ocean warming and acidification—but also by amplifying local and regional stressors such as freshwater runoff and pollution load. Experts indicated that all SDGs would be overwhelmingly negatively affected by these climate impacts on marine ecosystem services, with eliminating hunger being among the most directly negatively affected SDG. Despite these challenges, the SDGs aiming to transform our consumption and production practices and develop clean energy systems are found to be least affected by marine climate impacts. These findings represent a strategic point of entry for countries to achieve sustainable development, given that these two goals are relatively robust to climate impacts and that they are important pre‐requisite for other SDGs. Our results suggest that climate change impacts on marine ecosystems are set to make the SDGs a moving target travelling away from us. Effective and urgent action towards sustainable development, including mitigating and adapting to climate impacts on marine systems are important to achieve the SDGs, but the longer this action stalls the more distant these goals will become.

The term ‘Blue Economy’ is increasingly used in various marine sectors and development frameworks. For it to be a truly useful approach, however, we argue that social benefits and equity must be explicitly prioritized alongside environmental and economic concerns. This integration of social dimensions within the Blue Economy is required to ensure that marine economic sectors contribute to achieving sustainable development goals. We review what an equity-focused ‘Blue Economy’ might mean for some established and emergent marine sectors and note existing guidelines that may be used for incorporating these aspects into planning. Moving towards a Blue Economy does not only imply developing emerging sectors in undeveloped areas; larger challenges will be found in transforming industries that already have significant economic and livelihood contributions despite concurrent social and environmental concerns. A ‘marine industrial revolution’—as the Blue Economy has sometimes been understood—cannot achieve sustainable development and well-being if it does not avoid the widespread negative social and ecological impacts of historical development pathways. A concerted effort is therefore necessary to design and implement inclusive and equitable policies as an integral part of a Blue Economy that is transformative and not only expansive.