This page contains information about the Individual Literature Review (ILR) component of the project. You will find information about completing and submitting your writing. Below this information you will find the texts and PowerPoints from the lecture.
Prompts
SUBMISSION DATES
Outline: Thursday 22nd October. Send a digital copy to your teacher.
Draft 1: Monday 2nd November by 9am. Upload a copy to Turnitin on SUCoursePlus.
Draft 2: Monday 16th November. Upload a copy to Turnitin on SUCoursePlus.
Outline: Thursday 22nd October. Send a digital copy to your teacher.
Draft 1: Monday 2nd November by 9am. Upload a copy to Turnitin on SUCoursePlus.
Draft 2: Monday 16th November. Upload a copy to Turnitin on SUCoursePlus.
THE STEPS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL LITERATURE REVIEW (ILR) ASSIGNMENT
1. Read the question carefully. Make sure you understand the question.
2. Read the texts in the Route 4 Individual Literature Review Assignment Text Pack.
3. Select and make notes on information from the assigned texts and the lecture to help you answer the question.
4. Use your notes to plan which ideas you will use to answer the question.
5. Use information and ideas only from the assigned texts (at least two) and the lecture as support.
6. Type your assignment using font size 12 with double spacing.
7. Keep your answer within the word limit (400 words +/- 15%).
8. Put citations in the text to indicate the sources of the material you have used.
9. Include a reference section of text sources at the end of your work.
10. Put your name and ID number at the top and include the word count at the end.
11. Please ensure this is your own work. You are required to upload/submit this piece of work
onto Turn-It-In on SUCoursePlus. Your teacher will explain to you how to do this. This plagiarism
detection software may be used as an aid to check whether your paper is your own work.
13. Upload your first Draft to SUCoursePlus by 9am Monday 2nd November (or the deadline your teacher gives you).
14. Upload your second Draft to SUCoursePlus by 9am Monday 16th November (or the deadline your teacher gives you).
15. Type the final version of your assignment after getting feedback from your tutor.
THE STEPS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL LITERATURE REVIEW (ILR) ASSIGNMENT
1. Read the question carefully. Make sure you understand the question.
2. Read the texts in the Route 4 Individual Literature Review Assignment Text Pack.
3. Select and make notes on information from the assigned texts and the lecture to help you answer the question.
4. Use your notes to plan which ideas you will use to answer the question.
5. Use information and ideas only from the assigned texts (at least two) and the lecture as support.
6. Type your assignment using font size 12 with double spacing.
7. Keep your answer within the word limit (400 words +/- 15%).
8. Put citations in the text to indicate the sources of the material you have used.
9. Include a reference section of text sources at the end of your work.
10. Put your name and ID number at the top and include the word count at the end.
11. Please ensure this is your own work. You are required to upload/submit this piece of work
onto Turn-It-In on SUCoursePlus. Your teacher will explain to you how to do this. This plagiarism
detection software may be used as an aid to check whether your paper is your own work.
13. Upload your first Draft to SUCoursePlus by 9am Monday 2nd November (or the deadline your teacher gives you).
14. Upload your second Draft to SUCoursePlus by 9am Monday 16th November (or the deadline your teacher gives you).
15. Type the final version of your assignment after getting feedback from your tutor.
Referencing & Citation from this page
Lecture - What is sustainable development? Oct. 14 |
Individual Literature Review Text Pack
ilr-text_pack._fall_2020docx.pdf | |
File Size: | 1275 kb |
File Type: |
Text A - Sustainable development goals: All you need to know
What are the sustainable development goals?
The sustainable development goals (SDGs) are a new, universal set of goals, targets and indicators that UN member states will be expected to use to frame their agendas and political policies over the next 15 years.
The SDGs follow and expand on the millennium development goals (MDGs), which were agreed by governments in 2001 and are due to expire at the end of this year.
Why do we need another set of goals?
There is broad agreement that, while the MDGs provided a focal point for governments – a framework around which they could develop policies and overseas aid programmes designed to end poverty and improve the lives of poor people – as well as a rallying point for NGOs to hold them to account, they were too narrow.
The eight MDGs – reduce poverty and hunger; achieve universal education; promote gender equality; reduce child and maternal deaths; combat HIV, malaria and other diseases; ensure environmental sustainability; develop global partnerships – failed to consider the root causes of poverty and overlooked gender inequality as well as the holistic nature of development. The goals made no mention of human rights and did not specifically address economic development. While the MDGs, in theory, applied to all countries, in reality they were considered targets for poor countries to achieve, with finance from wealthy states. Conversely, every country will be expected to work towards achieving the SDGs.
As the MDG deadline approaches, about 1 billion people still live on less than $1.25 a day – the World Bank measure on poverty – and more than 800 million people do not have enough food to eat. Women are still fighting hard for their rights, and millions of women still die in childbirth.
What are the proposed 17 goals?
1) End poverty in all its forms everywhere
2) End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture
3) Ensure healthy lives and promote wellbeing for all at all ages
4) Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
5) Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
6) Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
7) Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
8) Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all
9) Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation, and foster innovation
10) Reduce inequality within and among countries
11) Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
12) Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
13) Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts (taking note of agreements made by the UNFCCC forum)
14) Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
15) Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification and halt and reverse land degradation, and halt biodiversity loss
16) Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
17) Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development
Within the goals are 169 targets, to put a bit of meat on the bones. Targets under goal one, for example, include reducing by at least half the number of people living in poverty by 2030, and eradicating extreme poverty (people living on less than $1.25 a day). Under goal five, there’s a target on eliminating violence against women, while goal 16 has a target to promote the rule of law and equal access to justice.
How were the goals chosen?
Unlike the MDGs, which were drawn up by a group of men in the basement of UN headquarters (or so the legend goes), the UN has conducted the largest consultation programme in its history to gauge opinion on what the SDGs should include.
Establishing post-2015 goals was an outcome of the Rio+20 summit in 2012, which mandated the creation of an open working group to come up with a draft agenda.
The open working group, with representatives from 70 countries, had its first meeting in March 2013 and published its final draft, with its 17 suggestions, in July 2014. The draft was presented to the UN general assembly in September last year. Member state negotiations followed, and the final wording of the goals and targets, and the preamble and declaration that comes with them, were agreed in August 2015.
Alongside the open working group discussions, the UN conducted a series of “global conversations”. These included 11 thematic and 83 national consultations, and door-to-door surveys. The UN also launched an online My World survey asking people to prioritise the areas they’d like to see addressed in the goals. The results of the consultations were fed into the working group’s discussions.
Are governments happy about the proposed 17 goals?
The majority seem to be, but a handful of member states, including the UK and Japan, aren’t so keen. Some countries feel that an agenda consisting of 17 goals is too unwieldy to implement or sell to the public, and would prefer a narrower brief. Or so they say. Some believe the underlying reason is to get rid of some of the more uncomfortable goals, such as those relating to the environment. Britain’s prime minister, David Cameron, has publicly said he wants 12 goals at the most, preferably 10. It’s not clear, though, which goals the UK government would like taken out if they had the choice.
Amina Mohammed, the UN secretary general’s special adviser on post-2015 development planning, said it had been a hard fight to get the number of goals down to 17, so there would be strong resistance to reducing them further.
Some NGOs also believe there are too many goals, but there is a general consensus that it is better to have 17 goals that include targets on women’s empowerment, good governance, and peace and security, for example, than fewer goals that don’t address these issues.
How will the goals be measured?
The indicators are still being thrashed out by an expert group. Each indicator is being assessed for its feasibility, suitability and relevance, and roughly two for each target are expected. The indicators are due to be finalised in March 2016.
How will the goals be funded?
That’s the trillion-dollar question. Rough calculations from the intergovernmental committee of experts on sustainable development financing have put the cost of providing a social safety net to eradicate extreme poverty at about $66bn (£43bn) a year, while annual investments in improving infrastructure (water, agriculture, transport, power) could be up to a total of $7tn globally.
In its report last year, the committee said public finance and aid would be central to support the implementation of the SDGs. But it insisted that money generated from the private sector, through tax reforms, and through a crackdown on illicit financial flows and corruption, was also vital.
A major conference on financing for the SDGs, held in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa in July, failed to ease concerns that there will not be enough cash to meet the aspirational nature of the goals. The UN said the Addis Ababa action agenda (AAAA for short) contained “bold measures to overhaul global finance practices and generate investment” for tackling the challenges of sustainable development. It included a recommitment to the UN target on aid spending – 0.7% of GNI – set more than 40 years ago and pledges to collect more taxes and fight tax evasion. But civil society groups were less impressed, saying the summit had failed to produce new money to fund the goals, or offer ways to transform the international finance system. Calls for a new international tax body fell on deaf ears.
When will the new goals come into force?
The SDGs will be officially adopted at a UN summit in New York in September, and will become applicable from January 2016. The deadline for the SDGS is 2030.
The sustainable development goals (SDGs) are a new, universal set of goals, targets and indicators that UN member states will be expected to use to frame their agendas and political policies over the next 15 years.
The SDGs follow and expand on the millennium development goals (MDGs), which were agreed by governments in 2001 and are due to expire at the end of this year.
Why do we need another set of goals?
There is broad agreement that, while the MDGs provided a focal point for governments – a framework around which they could develop policies and overseas aid programmes designed to end poverty and improve the lives of poor people – as well as a rallying point for NGOs to hold them to account, they were too narrow.
The eight MDGs – reduce poverty and hunger; achieve universal education; promote gender equality; reduce child and maternal deaths; combat HIV, malaria and other diseases; ensure environmental sustainability; develop global partnerships – failed to consider the root causes of poverty and overlooked gender inequality as well as the holistic nature of development. The goals made no mention of human rights and did not specifically address economic development. While the MDGs, in theory, applied to all countries, in reality they were considered targets for poor countries to achieve, with finance from wealthy states. Conversely, every country will be expected to work towards achieving the SDGs.
As the MDG deadline approaches, about 1 billion people still live on less than $1.25 a day – the World Bank measure on poverty – and more than 800 million people do not have enough food to eat. Women are still fighting hard for their rights, and millions of women still die in childbirth.
What are the proposed 17 goals?
1) End poverty in all its forms everywhere
2) End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture
3) Ensure healthy lives and promote wellbeing for all at all ages
4) Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
5) Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
6) Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
7) Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
8) Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all
9) Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation, and foster innovation
10) Reduce inequality within and among countries
11) Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
12) Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
13) Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts (taking note of agreements made by the UNFCCC forum)
14) Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
15) Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification and halt and reverse land degradation, and halt biodiversity loss
16) Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
17) Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development
Within the goals are 169 targets, to put a bit of meat on the bones. Targets under goal one, for example, include reducing by at least half the number of people living in poverty by 2030, and eradicating extreme poverty (people living on less than $1.25 a day). Under goal five, there’s a target on eliminating violence against women, while goal 16 has a target to promote the rule of law and equal access to justice.
How were the goals chosen?
Unlike the MDGs, which were drawn up by a group of men in the basement of UN headquarters (or so the legend goes), the UN has conducted the largest consultation programme in its history to gauge opinion on what the SDGs should include.
Establishing post-2015 goals was an outcome of the Rio+20 summit in 2012, which mandated the creation of an open working group to come up with a draft agenda.
The open working group, with representatives from 70 countries, had its first meeting in March 2013 and published its final draft, with its 17 suggestions, in July 2014. The draft was presented to the UN general assembly in September last year. Member state negotiations followed, and the final wording of the goals and targets, and the preamble and declaration that comes with them, were agreed in August 2015.
Alongside the open working group discussions, the UN conducted a series of “global conversations”. These included 11 thematic and 83 national consultations, and door-to-door surveys. The UN also launched an online My World survey asking people to prioritise the areas they’d like to see addressed in the goals. The results of the consultations were fed into the working group’s discussions.
Are governments happy about the proposed 17 goals?
The majority seem to be, but a handful of member states, including the UK and Japan, aren’t so keen. Some countries feel that an agenda consisting of 17 goals is too unwieldy to implement or sell to the public, and would prefer a narrower brief. Or so they say. Some believe the underlying reason is to get rid of some of the more uncomfortable goals, such as those relating to the environment. Britain’s prime minister, David Cameron, has publicly said he wants 12 goals at the most, preferably 10. It’s not clear, though, which goals the UK government would like taken out if they had the choice.
Amina Mohammed, the UN secretary general’s special adviser on post-2015 development planning, said it had been a hard fight to get the number of goals down to 17, so there would be strong resistance to reducing them further.
Some NGOs also believe there are too many goals, but there is a general consensus that it is better to have 17 goals that include targets on women’s empowerment, good governance, and peace and security, for example, than fewer goals that don’t address these issues.
How will the goals be measured?
The indicators are still being thrashed out by an expert group. Each indicator is being assessed for its feasibility, suitability and relevance, and roughly two for each target are expected. The indicators are due to be finalised in March 2016.
How will the goals be funded?
That’s the trillion-dollar question. Rough calculations from the intergovernmental committee of experts on sustainable development financing have put the cost of providing a social safety net to eradicate extreme poverty at about $66bn (£43bn) a year, while annual investments in improving infrastructure (water, agriculture, transport, power) could be up to a total of $7tn globally.
In its report last year, the committee said public finance and aid would be central to support the implementation of the SDGs. But it insisted that money generated from the private sector, through tax reforms, and through a crackdown on illicit financial flows and corruption, was also vital.
A major conference on financing for the SDGs, held in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa in July, failed to ease concerns that there will not be enough cash to meet the aspirational nature of the goals. The UN said the Addis Ababa action agenda (AAAA for short) contained “bold measures to overhaul global finance practices and generate investment” for tackling the challenges of sustainable development. It included a recommitment to the UN target on aid spending – 0.7% of GNI – set more than 40 years ago and pledges to collect more taxes and fight tax evasion. But civil society groups were less impressed, saying the summit had failed to produce new money to fund the goals, or offer ways to transform the international finance system. Calls for a new international tax body fell on deaf ears.
When will the new goals come into force?
The SDGs will be officially adopted at a UN summit in New York in September, and will become applicable from January 2016. The deadline for the SDGS is 2030.
Text B – With COVID-19, the SDGs are even more important
This year, the first of the new decade, was meant to be the start of something big. As 2020 started, we tipped into the ‘decade of delivery’ to eliminate extreme poverty and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. It also marked an unexpected era as COVID-19 hit – Australia and the world have been grappling with the pandemic and its devastating aftershocks ever since. But instead of sidelining the Goals, COVID-19 has made the SDGs even more relevant.
The SDGs offer us an integrated perspective to combat this crisis. In the 2030 Agenda we have a holistic framework that brings the global economic, environmental and development agendas together for the first time. Because they are so broad and complex – the very thing they are often criticised for – the SDGs can help us understand and respond to the wide-ranging impacts of COVID-19.
So COVID-19 should not be an excuse to delay action, but rather reason to accelerate action on the SDGs.
SDGs as a framework for understanding COVID-19 impacts
COVID-19 started as a health crisis, but quickly snowballed into an economic crisis and is now a burgeoning humanitarian crisis as well. We are only just starting to truly understand the scale and scope of its impact.
By early June, a Reuters tally showed more than 400,000 people had died worldwide from COVID-19, with the spread far from contained in many parts of the world. Other regions are already experiencing a second wave of infections. The International Labour Organization estimates nearly half of the world’s workforce – 1.6 billion people – risk losing their livelihoods due to the ‘great lockdown’. According to the IMF’s latest World Economic Outlook, the cumulative loss to global GDP over 2020 and 2021 could be about US$9 trillion, greater than the combined economies of Japan and Germany. In the Asia-Pacific alone, the drop in global demand is estimated to slash US$172 billion from trade. The economic impacts of the virus are projected to force an additional 40 million to 500 million people into poverty. World Vision estimates that the lives of 30 million children are at risk from COVID-19 health aftershocks, as malaria and malnutrition go untreated due to overstretched health systems. In April, school closures in more than 190 countries forced at least 1.57 billion students from classrooms. There are fears many of these students may be lost to the education system entirely, becoming more vulnerable to child labour, trafficking and child marriage. The flow-on effects are so extensive that they are difficult to comprehend.
One framework that brings these diverse aspects together – from poverty rates, to economic growth, to education, to health – is the Sustainable Development Goals. The 17 Goals, and their 169 targets and 232 indicators, are a unique tool to help governments, businesses and NGOs understand the full scope of complex policy challenges like COVID-19. The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs has conceptually mapped how COVID-19 affects each of the SDGs, from disruption to food supplies (SDG 2) to increased levels of violence against women (SDG 5). This conceptual mapping, while simple, shows the value of the SDGs as a framework for understanding the intersecting flow-on effects of COVID-19.
Figure 1: COVID-19 impacts and the SDGs - only available in the PDF document
SDGs as a roadmap to recovery from COVID-19
The SDGs are not only useful for understanding COVID-19, they are also a valuable tool to guide the national and international recovery effort. In the SDGs we have a blueprint to not only address health security, but to address food, economic and climate security as well. This is important because we don’t want to step from one crisis straight into another.
The pandemic has exposed weaknesses in the international system that need to be addressed as part of the ‘build back better’ agenda. The past couple of months have shown how poverty (SDG 1), weak health systems (SDG 3), inadequate water and sanitation (SDG 6), and substandard international cooperation (SDG 17) have exacerbated the COVID-19 crisis. In the SDGs we have a comprehensive framework to address these risk factors holistically to build resilience to current and future shocks, whether they be health, economic or environmental shocks. That is why, for example, World Vision’s global response to COVID-19 is not only limiting the spread of the virus, but supporting food security, education, and livelihoods as well.
Importantly, we now have an opportunity to fast-track sustainable development by ensuring recovery plans are aligned with the SDGs. The massive fiscal stimulus that is being deployed around the world can be used to both address COVID-19 impacts and accelerate the SDGs. The development trajectory that will be forged in the coming months will have significant implications for generations to come.
The underlying principle of the SDGs is to leave no one behind. This should be a hallmark of the national and global recovery effort. According to the UN, the cost of protecting the most vulnerable 10% of people from the worst impacts of COVID-19 is about US$90 billion – or 1% of the combined stimulus packages of OECD and G20 countries (estimated at about $9 trillion).
SDGs as a vision for a post-COVID world
The SDGs paint the picture of a world free from poverty by 2030, where there is universal access to healthcare, education, water and sanitation. It is a resilient world which would be in a much stronger position to withstand shocks like COVID-19. Had the international community invested more in the SDGs earlier, we may have been in a better position to manage the current crisis.
The vision for 2030 outlined in the SDGs may seem unreachable, but the political will and amount of stimulus being mobilised to combat COVID-19 demonstrate that, when push comes to shove, humanity can step up to deal with complex global challenges. The SDGs must be pursued with the same decisiveness, solidarity, urgency and commitment that we are seeing in the fight against COVID-19. Only then can the vision for a world free from poverty be realised.
This post is part of the #COVID-19 and international development series.
The SDGs offer us an integrated perspective to combat this crisis. In the 2030 Agenda we have a holistic framework that brings the global economic, environmental and development agendas together for the first time. Because they are so broad and complex – the very thing they are often criticised for – the SDGs can help us understand and respond to the wide-ranging impacts of COVID-19.
So COVID-19 should not be an excuse to delay action, but rather reason to accelerate action on the SDGs.
SDGs as a framework for understanding COVID-19 impacts
COVID-19 started as a health crisis, but quickly snowballed into an economic crisis and is now a burgeoning humanitarian crisis as well. We are only just starting to truly understand the scale and scope of its impact.
By early June, a Reuters tally showed more than 400,000 people had died worldwide from COVID-19, with the spread far from contained in many parts of the world. Other regions are already experiencing a second wave of infections. The International Labour Organization estimates nearly half of the world’s workforce – 1.6 billion people – risk losing their livelihoods due to the ‘great lockdown’. According to the IMF’s latest World Economic Outlook, the cumulative loss to global GDP over 2020 and 2021 could be about US$9 trillion, greater than the combined economies of Japan and Germany. In the Asia-Pacific alone, the drop in global demand is estimated to slash US$172 billion from trade. The economic impacts of the virus are projected to force an additional 40 million to 500 million people into poverty. World Vision estimates that the lives of 30 million children are at risk from COVID-19 health aftershocks, as malaria and malnutrition go untreated due to overstretched health systems. In April, school closures in more than 190 countries forced at least 1.57 billion students from classrooms. There are fears many of these students may be lost to the education system entirely, becoming more vulnerable to child labour, trafficking and child marriage. The flow-on effects are so extensive that they are difficult to comprehend.
One framework that brings these diverse aspects together – from poverty rates, to economic growth, to education, to health – is the Sustainable Development Goals. The 17 Goals, and their 169 targets and 232 indicators, are a unique tool to help governments, businesses and NGOs understand the full scope of complex policy challenges like COVID-19. The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs has conceptually mapped how COVID-19 affects each of the SDGs, from disruption to food supplies (SDG 2) to increased levels of violence against women (SDG 5). This conceptual mapping, while simple, shows the value of the SDGs as a framework for understanding the intersecting flow-on effects of COVID-19.
Figure 1: COVID-19 impacts and the SDGs - only available in the PDF document
SDGs as a roadmap to recovery from COVID-19
The SDGs are not only useful for understanding COVID-19, they are also a valuable tool to guide the national and international recovery effort. In the SDGs we have a blueprint to not only address health security, but to address food, economic and climate security as well. This is important because we don’t want to step from one crisis straight into another.
The pandemic has exposed weaknesses in the international system that need to be addressed as part of the ‘build back better’ agenda. The past couple of months have shown how poverty (SDG 1), weak health systems (SDG 3), inadequate water and sanitation (SDG 6), and substandard international cooperation (SDG 17) have exacerbated the COVID-19 crisis. In the SDGs we have a comprehensive framework to address these risk factors holistically to build resilience to current and future shocks, whether they be health, economic or environmental shocks. That is why, for example, World Vision’s global response to COVID-19 is not only limiting the spread of the virus, but supporting food security, education, and livelihoods as well.
Importantly, we now have an opportunity to fast-track sustainable development by ensuring recovery plans are aligned with the SDGs. The massive fiscal stimulus that is being deployed around the world can be used to both address COVID-19 impacts and accelerate the SDGs. The development trajectory that will be forged in the coming months will have significant implications for generations to come.
The underlying principle of the SDGs is to leave no one behind. This should be a hallmark of the national and global recovery effort. According to the UN, the cost of protecting the most vulnerable 10% of people from the worst impacts of COVID-19 is about US$90 billion – or 1% of the combined stimulus packages of OECD and G20 countries (estimated at about $9 trillion).
SDGs as a vision for a post-COVID world
The SDGs paint the picture of a world free from poverty by 2030, where there is universal access to healthcare, education, water and sanitation. It is a resilient world which would be in a much stronger position to withstand shocks like COVID-19. Had the international community invested more in the SDGs earlier, we may have been in a better position to manage the current crisis.
The vision for 2030 outlined in the SDGs may seem unreachable, but the political will and amount of stimulus being mobilised to combat COVID-19 demonstrate that, when push comes to shove, humanity can step up to deal with complex global challenges. The SDGs must be pursued with the same decisiveness, solidarity, urgency and commitment that we are seeing in the fight against COVID-19. Only then can the vision for a world free from poverty be realised.
This post is part of the #COVID-19 and international development series.
Lecture - What is sustainable development? İsmail Arıcı