You and the Global Goals

Dominic Billings

In 2015, world leaders agreed to 17 Global Goals. This podcast, based on the book, shows how you can apply the Global Goals to your life, as an individual. 7 years on, 600 million people live on less than $2 per day, in starvation, without healthcare, education, clean water, toilets or electricity. Catastrophic climate change lingers over us, as does massive species extinction, while we pollute the planet. Chasms of inequality exist between males and females, rich and poor. We want peace and prosperity. We want a healthy planet for the next generation. We want dignity for all - to leave no one behind. This is our vision for 2030. We have the know-how - all we need is you.

  1. 12/03/2024

    You and the Global Goals: Introduction

    On 25 September 2015, all 193 Member States of the United Nations adopted the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), aka the Global Goals. This book articulates a path to make these Goals appear manageable, to implement in your life, adapting the 120 indicators used by the SDG Index to the individual level. The scope of the Goals is gargantuan, ill-fitted for individual countries, let alone individual people, implying their international nature. What follows is a loose method to apply to your life, to keep yourself accountable to your responsibility toward the Goals as a global citizen. What is sustainable development?Sustainable development is a way of thinking about and uniting all the complicated, yet intersecting issues we’ll come to explore ahead, centred on three pillars: Economic growth Social inclusion Environmental sustainability Three pillars of sustainable development  The genesis of the concept of sustainable development at a UN level is 1972 in Stockholm, where a UN conference linked human development with the environment. 20 years later, in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, the UN held the Earth Summit, the biggest summit of world leaders at the time, putting environmental sustainability at the forefront. From this summit came three important treaties: UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Convention on Biological Diversity United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) 20 years hence from the Rio Summit, the UN held another conference in Rio in 2012, the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. Upon reflection and assessment of the above three treaties ahead of Rio+20, the scorecard of their progress was scathing. It was at this conference the impetus solidified to form what would become the SDGs. The UN’s primary agenda from 2000 to 2015 was the era of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The concept central to the MDGs was international development, as sustainable development is to the SDGs. In 2000, a summit of world leaders at the UN Headquarters, known as the Millennium Summit, adopted the MDGs. The MDGs were eight goals, on the topics of: extreme poverty and hunger universal primary education gender equality and women’s empowerment child mortality maternal mortality and health HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases environmental sustainability global partnership The Millenium Development Goals  In 2000, a count of those living within the definition of extreme poverty (which we’ll define in the next chapter) was 1.7 billion. At the end of the MDG period in 2015, this was down by a billion, to 750 million people. China bears most credit for this, from a worldwide height of 2 billion people in extreme poverty in 1990, when two-thirds of the Chinese population lived within the definition of extreme poverty. The period from 1990 to 2015 accounts for approximately 750 million Chinese coming out of extreme poverty to less than 1% of its population. Though the principles of international development guided the span of the MDGs between 2000 and 2015, a sentiment grew that the MDGs needed to emphasise some key issues. Inequality within countries had become a prevailing concern, as well as strengthening the environmental component of MDG #7. Humans had been making as much money as we could, much of it at the expense of the Earth’s ability to heal itself along the way. Environmental advocates had been crying out about the human effects on nature and ecosystems for decades, but by the 2010s, it was evident the effects were catastrophic. Humanity was edging toward a cataclysm imperilling our species, as well as courting a mass extinction of other species. In the twilight of the MDG period, the UN was considering what would follow to guide its agenda after 2015, the due date of the MDGs. The conception of sustainable development as the guiding principle for this post-2015 UN agenda took shape. In September each year, a new session of the UN General Assembly opens to address the forthcoming agenda. The opening session of the UN General Assembly on 25 September 2015 passed a UN Resolution titled Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The 2030 Agenda, including the 17 Goals, now guides the UN and its member states between 2015 to 2030. SDG IndexTo better break down how to act on the 17 SDGs, the UN divides the Goals into 169 targets, and below these targets, 236 measurable official indicators. Within this book, we’ll instead use the indicators used by the SDG Index, produced by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). The SDSN is the greatest source of this book, a knowledge network of universities and research institutes around the world, under UN auspices, chartered by former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon. Much of this book is a distillation of the SDSN’s SDG Index, to which the world’s foremost academics in their respective fields have lent their knowledge and research efforts toward. The lead authors for the 2022 SDG Index are Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Guillaume Lafortune, Professor Christian Kroll. Grayson Fuller and Finn Woelm. Also integral to the SDG Index and SDSN legacy is Guido Schmidt-Traub, former SDSN Executive Director, and co-author of the SDG Index reports from its first iteration in 2016 to 2020. Professor Christian Kroll authored a report alongside the SDSN before the adoption of the SDGs in 2015. With a foreword by Kofi Annan, the format of the report acted as a progenitor and template of the SDG Index. Kroll’s report selected indicators well ahead of the UN, as even the Goals were yet to become official, displaying an index for scores in SDG preparedness for the rich countries. The 2022 SDG Index consists of 120 indicators corresponding to the 17 Goals, with each country’s indicator scores combined into a composite index score and ranking. The Index score reflects a percentage of progress toward full achievement of all Goals i.e., 100. Therefore Finland, top of the rankings for the 2022 Index with a score of 86.51, is 86.51% of the way toward achieving all 17 SDGs. By contrast, bottom-ranked South Sudan scores 39.05, meaning it has a great distance to get from 39.05% progress toward achieving all the SDGs by 2030. To illustrate, the SDG Index uses a traffic light system, with green indicating an achievement of the respective Goal, or otherwise being on track to achieve it by 2030. Red is the opposite, being far off course, with major challenges remaining. In between, yellow and orange are gradations of the middle light, orange suggesting further off course than yellow. Using the example of the first indicator we’ll explore in SDG #1 (% of population living on less than $1.90/day), the bounds for each colour in the SDG Index for this indicator correspond to the below. Paramount to the SDG Index is priority. This colour coding serves to illustrate chromatically where we’re at in our progress, to guide our prioritisation. The importance placed on countries scoring red or orange per indicator or Goal will be an overriding refrain throughout the book. If your country scored green on an indicator, you can put your feet up for that issue, and instead turn to those Goals or indicators for which your country has scored red. The Global Goals are ambitious in breadth, intimidating at times to what we’re to do in what seems like a tiny frame of less than eight years at the time of writing. The purpose of the SDG Index is to show us which Goals and indicators need our immediate attention and energies, because the gap between where we need to be by 2030 and our present state is too far off course. I’ll use my two countries of citizenship as an illustration. In the 2022 SDG Index, Australia scored red for: SDG #2 (Zero Hunger) SDG #12 (Responsible Consumption & Production) SDG #13 (Climate Action) SDG #15 (Life on Land) Therefore, I focus on these Goals as a matter of prioritisation. I hold dual citizenship with Malta, so incorporate it into my prioritised, red Goals. In the 2022 Index, Malta scored red for Goals #2, 6, 12 & 14, s

  2. 09/03/2024

    You and the Global Goals: SDG #1 - No Poverty

    Dashboard map for 2022 SDG Index Goal #1 ratings. Data source: sdgindex.org Poverty headcount ratio at $1.90/day (%)The definition of extreme poverty is an international poverty line, as deemed by the World Bank. The World Bank is an international financial institution within the UN System, with the task to provide loans to developing countries with the goal of poverty eradication. The World Bank measures the international poverty line as living on $US1.90 a day or less, which is less than enough to meet the basic needs of safe drinking water, food at or below subsistence, and access to health and education. Approximately 740 million people met the definition of living in extreme poverty upon the adoption of the SDGs in 2015, the overwhelming majority living in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Before the industrial era, beginning in the middle of the 19th century, close to all the human population lived in a state of extreme poverty. Since the turn of the millennium, there has been a steady decrease in the number of people living in extreme poverty, as well as a decrease in the percentage of extreme poverty for the global population. One of the key reasons for this encouraging drop in extreme poverty rates was the power of the Millennium Development Goals. The sister goal of SDG #1 was MDG #1, to halve extreme poverty levels by 2015, again using the international poverty line measure. The world met MDG #1 five years before its due date in 2010, due to the astounding growth rates of China in the period of the MDGs between 2000 and 2015. This meant MDG #1 saw a billion people lifted from extreme poverty compared to 1990, when almost half the population of developing countries lived under the international poverty line. Yet the three-quarters of a billion still left behind at the end of the MDG period in 2015 is an enormous number of people continuing to live in destitution and penury. How to measure this Goal’s target to eradicate extreme poverty - those living under $1.90 a day - by 2030? The first indicator in use by the SDG Index is the poverty headcount ratio at $1.90/day. As of June 2022, 682,614,000 people lived in extreme poverty, with a rate of one person per second escaping extreme poverty, an estimated metric you can view in real-time at the World Poverty Clock website. Yet the target rate to be met for those escaping poverty to eradicate extreme poverty by 2030 is 2.5 people per second. In total, this means the world is off-track by 254,758,130 people. Yet, as some escape poverty, others enter it, with the COVID-19 pandemic impacting progress on this target - though there were signs of slowing progress even before, compounded by conflict and climate change. In 2015, the world’s extreme poverty rate was 10%, dropping to a low of 8.3% in 2019, then back up to 9.2% in 2020, equated with throwing up to 93 million people back into extreme poverty. This means the global extreme poverty rate rose in 2020 for the first time in over 20 years. The above trend projects 262 million people would still be living in extreme poverty in 2030, missing the extreme poverty eradication target - unless we instead accelerate our efforts between now and 2030. It’s difficult, verging on impossible, to lift oneself from such an extreme poverty trap. Professor Jeffrey Sachs, co-author of the SDG Index, explains why in his magisterial book, The End of Poverty, using the analogy of the ladder of development. The End of Poverty outlines how we can end extreme poverty as though it were procedural, illuminating how achievable and within reach it is. Those living in extreme poverty live hand-to-mouth, day-to-day. As such, they fail to produce a surplus e.g., from a crop’s harvest for smallholder farmers, thus without anything to sell to the market for a profit. Due to a high proportion of citizens living by such means in a country, a tax base to draw revenues from is missing. Thus, the government is missing the means to provide healthcare, education, or for any services to increase well-being and relieve extreme poverty. The least developed countries need aid to allow them to get their hand on the bottom rung of the development ladder. Then they have the means to lift themselves out of poverty. Without aid, this cycle will proceed mercilessly, compounded by climate change, disease, famine, demography, etc. The aim of development aid is to improve the economic and social development of humans living in countries which have yet to industrialise and are considered ‘developing’ in the parlance of the field of international development. Aid has been chronically below the amount promised by developed countries to their developing counterparts for a half-century. Thus, the first task of the reader in high-income countries is to act on behalf of the 682 million living in extreme poverty. The measure of aid used by the high-income OECD countries is known as ‘official development assistance’ (ODA), a concept defined in 1969 by the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the OECD. The DAC consists of 30 OECD members, making up the largest aid donors, as a forum to discuss aid and poverty reduction efforts. Map of OECD DAC members The predominant means of measuring donor amounts is as a percentage of the donor country's gross national income (GNI), a concept like GDP (gross domestic product). Whereas GDP is the value of all goods and services produced in a period, by contrast GNI includes the economic output of foreign residents of the country. The OECD DAC has an official List of ODA Recipients, all the developing countries and territories eligible to receive ODA. Included are dollar flows made via so-called ‘multilateral institutions’ e.g., the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and UN agencies like UNICEF and the WHO. To count as ODA, donor flows must come from government agencies, and the aim of the flows must be economic development and the welfare of developing countries. They must either be free of the obligation to be repaid, or otherwise loans with much more generous repayment terms than available in the commercial market. The spending counted toward poverty reduction for ODA includes food aid; basic health; education; water and sanitation; population programmes and reproductive health. Separate, though entwined, to development aid, is humanitarian aid - synonymous with logistical help in the face of disaster or conflict. The 30 high-income country donors of the DAC spend 0.33% of their collective GNI on ODA - far below the 0.7% of GNI committed by these countries across decades, though reneged upon. The only 2021 exceptions among the DAC members to meet or exceed the 0.7% commitment were Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Luxembourg, and Germany. The international agreement whereby high-income OECD countries were supposed to give 0.7% of GNI as ODA goes back to 1970, affirmed in repeated agreements since. This means for every $10 made in high-income countries, for around 50 years now, they’ve committed, yet failed to produce, 7 cents of every $10 for the world's destitute. 7 cents which would otherwise solve extreme poverty by 2030. Instead, like my country Australia, our government, out of our tax revenue, for every $10 of GNI, produces 2 cents for ODA - a 5-cent differential from its pledge. Yet my country, and all other developed countries except five, withhold upon the opportunity to end extreme poverty in a decade. Why dither over 7¢ on every $10? According to the principles of the poverty trap, 700 million are unable to escape from extreme poverty without this ODA. Their only lifeline from being an orphan of famine or infectious disease is foreign aid. For indicators related to living under the poverty line, it would be insensitive to set the task to readers to try to live above the poverty line. Who is the responsibility falling to? This book, rather than being about the government’s responsibility, is about your responsibility. There’s a solution to this, which is where OECD/DAC country readers come in. The affirmed commitment of 0.7% of GNI represents what the government is to offer in ODA. Whatever the gap between 0.7% and what your country’s government is providing in ODA, your opportunity is to step in to bridge the gap. Of course, as with every action in this book, it requires a scale of near ubiquity to have the desired impact, but the behaviours and attitudes of several million of your compatriots are outside your immediate control. Again, the focus of this book is you, and what change you can affect. This is to achieve the Goals globally - in a sense, on behalf of the low-income countries, which barring a m

  3. 06/03/2024

    You and the Global Goals: SDG #2 - Zero Hunger

    Dashboard map for 2022 SDG Index Goal #2 ratings. Data source: sdgindex.org Prevalence of undernourishment (%)The aim by 2030 is to achieve zero hunger as part of SDG #2. As of 2020, a tenth of the global population, equal to 811 million, experienced hunger and undernourishment. Due to the effects of COVID-19, the number of people suffering acute hunger may have doubled by the end of 2020, and may also have pushed up to 132 million into chronic hunger. The global proportion of those living in hunger has been decreasing, though the total number of those living in a state of hunger has risen - the main causes due to climate, conflict and recessions. This indicator’s definition is the portion of the populace unable to meet dietary energy requirements for a year or more, defining energy requirements as maintaining body functions, health and normal activity. As with ending extreme poverty, this indicator aims for a 2030 goal of eliminating undernourishment, aligned with Goal #2 (Zero Hunger). SDG #2 flows on from SDG #1, implying the interrelationship between poverty and hunger. One of the reasons for this is the poor are among the most sensitive to fluctuations in food prices. Undernourishment is often due to geographical isolation. Hunger affects the most vulnerable regions of the world, represented by the LDCs, landlocked developing countries, and small island developing states. Hunger, in the context of sustainable development, is different from the sensation of being less than satiated. In the context we’re looking at, it’s the global leading cause of death, to be unable to meet the essential nutrients humans need to sustain healthful lives over a long period. The global areas most vulnerable to acute hunger are those experiencing wars, pandemics and extreme weather. Undernourishment is a diet with insufficient nutrients, meaning calories providing us with energy. The right biochemical combination allows for proper metabolism in the form of proteins, carbohydrates, fat, vitamins and minerals. At the extreme of undernourishment is starvation, as well as micronutrient deficiency, when an individual is experiencing the undernourishment of a particular vitamin or mineral. Many of us are familiar with the heart-rending images of starving children. The medical term, marasmus, is often characterised by the wasted mass of emaciation from energy deficiency, occurring from a diet of starchy carbohydrates offering little nutritional value. We recognise the symptom of distended abdomens, caused by a swelling of fluid retention, and a liver overwhelmed with fatty deposits. Sufficient calories, but protein deficiency, causes this condition, termed kwashiorkor. A clear remedy to preventing and reducing undernourishment is food aid in the form of dietary supplements to fortify food with micronutrients. Aid can assist the development of sanitation systems to ensure drinking water and sewage remain separate, which can otherwise lead to infectious diseases causing undernourishment. This can also lead to dehydration, further exacerbated if the drinking water is contaminated by infectious pathogens. For readers from high-income countries, your commitment is to give 0.7% of your gross income as foreign aid. This captures the necessary expenditure to help low-income countries scoring red for this indicator. The remedy once again lies in the wealth transfer from those with means to those without. Foreign aid satisfies this, with food aid a component of ODA. Ensure whichever charity you’ve donated the 0.7% of your gross income to also includes a food aid component, whether famine relief, or more long-term remedies ensuring food security. This could even mean sharing technologies with communities for more productive food yields. What about readers from middle-income countries which scored red or orange? Is it too much to ask of the nourished citizenry of these countries to make up the shortfall? If this is you, ask yourself if this is workable or realistic. Cash amounts might seem burdensome, but food aid to a food bank - even giving first-hand - may feel less of a big ask. In any regard, to remedy this, the ultimate responsibility should live with the DAC countries. The priority of their aid dollars will be the LDCs, but will touch any developing country experiencing the serious malady of undernourishment. Summary: For OECD country readers, annually give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming to end undernourishment by 2030. Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%)This indicator, like the one before, considers the effects of undernourishment manifesting in the form of stunting for children under 5. Again, the 2030 goal is 0%, ending stunting for kids under 5. Stunting is the prevention of the development of height in a child due to malnutrition, often caused by diarrhoea or infection by parasitic worms. Open defecation in the absence of toilets and sewage systems creates such conditions. 149.2 million children under 5, or 22% of all children, suffer from stunting, down a quarter from 2015. Stunting occurs for two-fold reasons. One is due to lack of food, overlapping with the undernourishment indicator. Another reason is enough food, but the inability of a child under 5 to absorb the nutrients due to ongoing infections drains the body of more nutrients than it absorbs. Such infections are common in environments with poor sanitation, explored in SDG #6 (Clean water and sanitation). The promotion of breastfeeding in these early years from infancy is especially important, though there may be misconceptions in some developing countries about the importance of breastfeeding. Mothers may substitute baby formulas, mixed with contaminated water. Furthermore, if the mother’s undernourished, it makes sense her ability to breastfeed is also affected. If you’re a mother in a country off-track to achieve this indicator, the WHO encourages breastfeeding instead of formulas for the best nutrition in infants. If a medical professional has indicated to you to use formula rather than breastfeed, then observe this expert medical advice. Note, the above only applies to countries experiencing a high proportion of stunting, indicating unsanitary water sources are being mixed with formula. Otherwise, it’s between you and your doctor or maternal nurse whether you choose to breastfeed. As much as possible in your circumstances, assure your own nutrition during pregnancy and breastfeeding years. Even if you’re considering planning for a family, this pre-natal period will affect the stunting potential of the child. Further yet, responsibility for the encouragement of breastfeeding extends to employers, as well as societal and cultural attitudes in public and private toward breastfeeding. Also of immense importance is the period when a mother weans a child from breastfeeding. Whether this is due to the birth of another child, the mother must ensure the weaned child transfers to a balanced diet i.e., enough vitamins, minerals, proteins, and fats. This is of emphasis as children may be weaned onto African staples such as cassava, yams, and plantains - all starchy carbohydrates missing critical nutrients. For parents of children in these countries scoring red for this indicator, be mindful of risks for children around the water they drink or play nearby, which may be subject to contamination of infectious diseases. This may be a particular challenge for slum dwellers. Also, if you live in a malarial zone, use bed nets and other means of prevention where available. Another factor in stunting is the age of marriage and childbirth for girls. Cultural attitudes surrounding this may often be strong and difficult to break down. But looking at it from the perspective of the child's health, the younger a bride and mother, the less chance the mother has to develop her healthfulness and ability to sustain a dependent infant. Summary: For OECD country readers, annually give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming to end stunting worldwide by 2030. For developing country readers off-track for the Goal/indicator: Delay marriage and childbirth to adulthood. For prenatal, pregnant, and breastfeeding mothers: ensure infants are breastfed ensure weaned children transition to a balanced, nutritious diet ensure your own health and nutrition For parents and carers of children under 5, monitor children near unsanitary points. Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%)This measure is like the previous, substituting stunting for wasting, whereby muscle and fat waste away from the body. The long-term global goal is to eliminate wasting for kids under 5, down from current levels of 7%, or 45.4 million children, though it’s anticipated 15% more children will experience wasting due to the current pandemic. Famine is an obvious cause of wasting in children. The arid band of the African Sahel and Arabian Peninsula has been at significant risk of acute famine, and will continue to be because of climate change. As with stunting, infections can hinder the intake of essential nutrients in children, lost to diarrhoea or other symptoms of diseases such

  4. 05/03/2024

    SDG #3 - Good Health and Well-being

    Dashboard map for 2022 SDG Index Goal #3 ratings. Data source: sdgindex.org Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births)This indicator measures the estimated number of women between the ages of 15 and 49 dying from pregnancy-related causes whilst pregnant, or within 42 days of the pregnancy’s termination. The long-term aim is 3.4 deaths from these causes per 100,000 live births. Globally, the estimated maternal mortality ratio was 211 per 100,000 live births as of 2017, well above the long-term goal. The maternal mortality rate is a proxy for the quality of a healthcare system. Complications due to pregnancy and childbirth can be common, but with proper care, healthcare professionals can handle difficulties, preventing the worst outcomes. Without proper healthcare available, it’s more difficult to prevent, diagnose and treat any complications arising due to pregnancy. The LDCs and sub-Saharan Africa and mostly off-track on this measure, with the rest of the world on track, an illustration of the link to insufficient health care. The same is true here for other indicators already mentioned which have a strong correlation between a red score and LDCs i.e., OECD countries will shoulder the responsibility on behalf of the LDCs in the form of giving 0.7% of gross income as foreign aid. This giving will afford an army of skilled birth attendants in rural areas, as well as affording medical techniques taken for granted in the developed world e.g., blood transfusions, asepsis and preventive prenatal care. A skilled health attendant can curtail these risks by caring for the mother during the pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum period, including any postpartum bleeding or obstructed labours. If aid flows to the LDCs and other aid recipient countries, the global maternal mortality rate can drop, achieving a measure which had a dedicated Millennium Development Goals (MDG #5 - Improve maternal health). Summary: For OECD country readers, annually give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming to reduce the global maternal mortality rate to 3.4 per 100,000 live births by 2030. Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births)This indicator measures the number of newborns per 1,000 live births who die within 28 days following birth, with a long-term aim of a neonatal mortality rate of 1.1 per 1,000 live births. Causes of infant mortality in the first 28 days include deprivation of oxygen; congenital birth defects; prolonged labour; infection; low birth weight and poor sanitation. The absence of healthcare raises the risk factors for neonatal mortality. As with the prior indicator, such is the priority of infant mortality, it warranted its own Millennium Development Goal (MDG #4 - Reduce child mortality). The correlation between extreme poverty and high birth rates also exacerbates neonatal mortality. As we reduce extreme poverty, birth rates will in turn reduce, as is the demographic trend observed worldwide. Therefore, we must encourage gender equality, women’s empowerment in the labour force, as well as educating girls. The 2022 SDG Index map for this indicator is uniform with the prior indicator, again highlighting the link between mortality rates for both mothers and neonates. Again, there’s a strong correlation between LDCs and those countries with red scores. Thus, the responsibility again lies with the OECD countries to finance improvements in healthcare in the LDCs. The 0.7% of gross income of OECD citizens will finance the outreach of a mass workforce of skilled community health workers, with resources on hand to meet the needs of rural areas. Summary: For OECD country readers, annually give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming to reduce the global neonatal mortality rate to less than 1.1 per 1,000 live births by 2030. Mortality rate, under 5 per 1,000 deathsThe distinction between this indicator and the previous is age - this indicator measures the number of children under 5 per 1,000 who’ll die before reaching age 5. The long-term aim for this indicator is 2.6 deaths for children under 5 per 1,000, down from the 2019 rate of 37.7. As such, this measure of children under 5 also includes neonatal and infant mortality. The leading causes are premature births and infections, especially pneumonia, diarrhoea and malaria. But the prevention measures are alike to the two prior indicators i.e., we need to finance public health needs. Most child deaths are preventable, and cheap to treat and prevent, yet the cost is irrelevant without the meagre funding forthcoming. We therefore need to fund vaccines, antibiotics, mosquito nets, fluid replacement, promotion of breastfeeding and handwashing, as well as improved sanitation and drinking water facilities. A meagre 0.7% of your income will make you a literal hero, saving lives - without a cape, cowl or superpowers - just a bank account, a charity, and a device to make the donation. Rather than treating a diarrheal infection or making the trip to Africa, you pay someone to do it on your behalf, then get to go to bed knowing you’ve saved the lives of helpless children. Summary: For OECD country readers, annually give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming to reduce the global under-5 mortality rate to less than 2.6 per 1,000 live births by 2030. Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population)This indicator estimates the number of cases per 100,000 people with either new or relapsed cases of TB, inclusive of cases for those also living with HIV. The long-term goal is 0 cases of TB per 100,000, from a current global rate of 127 per 100,000 in 2020. TB’s an infectious disease caused by a bacterium, Mycobacterium tuberculosis affecting the lungs. Symptoms include coughing bloody mucus, fever, and night sweats, though TB cases can be asymptomatic whilst contagious. The bacterium spreads by aerosol droplets micrometres wide. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, TB was the highest cause of death from an infectious disease. A quarter of the global population may carry the disease in its latent form, with an annual rate of new infections of 1%. An estimated 10 million people have active cases worldwide, resulting in 1.5 million deaths, close to half occurring in Southeast Asia, and a quarter in Africa. TB is a disease of poverty, exacerbated by slum living, as well as malnutrition and poor sanitation conditions. As suggested in the indicator’s definition, cases of TB often occur alongside HIV/AIDS. We’ll address HIV/AIDS in a later SDG #3 indicator, but taking preventive measures for HIV infection will affect the degree to which one may be at risk of TB. In many countries, the diagnosis and testing of TB can be difficult, slow, or unavailable. Many poor countries, or poor parts of middle-income countries, are without affordable x-ray facilities, or affordable and accessible testing based on sputum cultures or other means. A preventive measure is keeping from contact with known TB cases. You’ll be at greater risk if your immune system is low, a risk factor often caused by the generalities of poverty. Enter the responsibility of high-income readers to improve poverty in all its dimensions via aid. Prevention is difficult, due to the poverty conditions TB thrives in, so treatment may be our best option. The vaccine for TB is the most widely used in the world, with an estimated 88% of all children vaccinated for TB, though the vaccine has less than complete efficacy. TB can be treated with antibiotics, but resistance has become an issue with a growing prevalence of drug-resistant cases. TB carries with it many factors affecting successful prevention and treatment, sometimes with complexity on a scale addressed by public health efforts of national governments, or international agencies like the WHO. For new cases of active TB, the patient should seek medical care where available, to undergo a regimen of antibiotic medications for up to six months. For recurrent cases of TB, a medical professional will need to find out which antibiotics in a treatment regimen are proving resistant. Testing may need to investigate whether the strain of TB in one’s system is multi-drug resistant, whereby the patient may need the other antibiotics in their regimen which are yet to prove resistant for a longer course up to 1-2 years. If you’re finding it challenging to scrounge enough money to feed your family and yourself, having ready access to testing and treatment - if paid out of pocket, in contrast to government-funded - could be crippling to a household. You see how important it is for us to fund organisations like the WHO to carry out the work either households or national governments are unable to. Humanity has been battling TB since antiquity - a formidable foe. But we can manage TB at the population level if resourced and financed, as the rich countries did within their societies. The aid dollars we’ve been discussing from our rich country readers are going to go toward TB to aid public health efforts. The path to achieving the long-term aim of this indicator lies in the larger vantage of SDG #3 i.e., healthcare for all. Summary: For OECD country readers, annually give 0.7% of your

  5. 04/03/2024

    SDG #4 - Quality Education

    Dashboard map for 2022 SDG Index Goal #4 ratings. Data source: sdgindex.org Participation rate in pre-primary organized learning (% of children aged 4 to 6)This indicator defines pre-primary as one year before primary school entry. Over the past decade, based on research, the recognition has grown as to the importance of early childhood education as among the most important for a child's development to help them thrive later in life. Many of the countries off-track for the indicator are LDCs - the same countries off-track for the following indicators for primary and secondary schooling. More striking however are the middle-income countries off-track, in the Middle East and North Africa, as well as several post-Soviet states. Summary: For OECD country readers, annually give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming for all children aged 4-6 to participate in pre-primary organised learning by 2030. For developing country readers off-track with children aged 4 to 6, enter your child in early childhood education, where available and affordable. Net primary enrollment rate (%)This indicator measures the percentage of school-age kids enrolled in primary school, consistent with the singular target of MDG #2, aiming for 100% enrollment by 2030. For MDG #2, the aim from the previous 15-year period preceding the SDGs focused upon universal primary education, which reached a primary school net enrolment rate in the developing regions of 91% by 2015. This was an increase of 8% from the beginning of the millennium, with a 20% rise in sub-Saharan Africa during the same period, but still leaving 57 million primary school aged children out of school worldwide in 2015. As we saw above, the gap to 100% primary enrolment is small, though still in the tens of millions in total numbers. The countries facing major challenges on this indicator are consistent with the Sahel, as well as Syria and neighbouring Jordan, the latter in likelihood due to the presence of Syrian refugees. Will aid alone make for a 100% net primary enrolment? If we regard the countries with major challenges for this indicator, there are other factors at play, complicating the path to universal primary enrolment e.g., disease, cultural attitudes toward girls’ education, and effects of climate change. As with all issues we’re looking at, each application in a different culture and environment entails trial and error, with the MDG period displaying the challenges facing development in sub-Saharan Africa. Summary: For OECD country readers, affirm your annual commitment to give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming for 100% net primary enrolment rate by 2030. For developing country readers with school age children, enrol your child in primary education, where affordable and available. Lower secondary completion rate (%)Here, the distinction is made between enrolment to completion, in this case lower secondary, rather than primary, again aiming for 100% by 2030. The 2020 world total shows a rate of 77% lower secondary school completion. Lower secondary is the seventh to ninth years of education, with completion of the ninth year classified as ‘basic education’. Upper secondary education begins in the tenth year of education, before any tertiary education. Lower secondary education is a human right, enshrined in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by every UN member state except the USA. You know by now what you must do if you’re a reader from a DAC member on behalf of the LDC countries with major challenges remaining on this indicator. But what of the middle-income countries? Many of the middle-income countries scoring red for this indicator are on the DAC’s List of ODA Recipients, and there are segments of the population in these countries affected by extreme poverty. What if you’re a reader from a middle-income country, and your national government fails to ensure your right to accessible and available education, per the Convention on the Rights of the Child? We all must observe this treaty on behalf of children, obliged to act in their best interests. This means to attempt to provide for your child’s basic needs, to ensure a life of opportunity and social mobility. Anything short of the completion of a basic education (primary and lower secondary education) risks dislocating your child from society. Summary: For OECD country readers, affirm your annual commitment to give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming for a 100% lower secondary completion rate. For developing country readers: For parents with children enrolled in lower secondary education, ensure your child completes lower secondary. For adults yet to complete basic education, complete lower secondary education. Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24)The definition of literacy for ages 15 to 24 is the ability to read and write a short, simple statement on everyday life, with an understanding of this statement, aiming for 100% literacy by 2030. We know from our Goal #4 results that LDCs have major challenges remaining, and we know the remedy for the LDCs on this indicator. Pakistan, a middle-income country, should have a literacy rate above LDC countries. Pakistan’s Constitution codifies the obligation for the state to provide free and compulsory education for all. Yet 22.8 million children, or 44% of the population of school age, are out of school. How do the Pakistani government expect to see any economic growth with such a dismal literacy rate? Regional differences are one reason, as is gender, a phenomenon popularised by Malala Yousafzai. Pakistan’s north-western border region with Afghanistan offered refuge to the Taliban insurgency, along with their accompanying attitudes toward female education. Further, literacy in the tribal areas of this region is low compared to the country’s metropolises, and national government spending on education is a disappointing 2.9%. In a country with widespread illiteracy, can prosperity be around the corner, or ever be in reach? Pakistan is an Islamic republic (which differs from a theocracy), combined with a patriarchal societal structure. Pakistan thus leaves half of society on the sideline, when it could be participating in the economy, and educated to a tertiary level, beyond mere literacy. Addressing any Pakistani readers, I acknowledge 5% of Pakistanis live below the international poverty line of $1.90 a day. This country, with a population nearing a quarter of a trillion, is wanting. Yet the escalator to even a modicum of meeting basic needs, as well as climate change resilience, is education. Without advancing on Goal #4, Pakistan holds the potential to find itself in a similar standard of living in decades to come. The nature of the country’s values places Islamic principles central, as the state religion, per the Constitution. Pakistani laws must be in harmony with the Quran, and the traditions and practices of Muhammad via constitutional bodies. Yet the government of Pakistan must weigh the advice of these, whilst considering its obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The same applies to Pakistani citizens. Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines freedom of religion. Two other UN member states are Islamic republics, and a little under 30 UN member states explicate Islam as the state religion within their respective constitutions. Each UN member state must balance their respective state religion with being a party to international treaties. If you’re a Pakistani parent of a child, there is a need to compromise. This may mean acknowledging the limitations of your own education. Enquire within yourself whether those who’ve passed their wisdom on to you could be of a limited education themselves. Humans are fallible, even well-intentioned pious people. If you find yourself in this scenario, you have a choice to make, which might place you between your religion and the importance of literacy and education. You may perceive the two as incompatible. If you were God, setting the precepts for the humans you created, would you inscribe into the programming of life to keep half of your creations in depravity of knowledge? I expect you’d have the sense to blanch at any belief suggesting as much. You believe in a God who wants the best for everyone. Any suggestion otherwise is due to the interpretation passed down by fallible humans. Summary: For OECD country readers, affirm your annual commitment to give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming for a 100% literacy rate of the global population aged 15-24 by 2030. Tertiary educational attainment (% of population aged 25-34) *Most OECD countries are close to on track for this indicator, aiming for 52.2% of the population aged between 25 and 34 to complete some tertiary education i.e., universities and vocational schools, resulting in an academic certificate, diploma or degree. If you’re in a country with challenges remaining for this indicator, and between the ages of 25 and 34, consider applying for and completing some tertiary education. Even a certificate at a vocational school ought to provide valuable skills to boost

  6. 04/03/2024

    SDG #5 - Gender Equality

    Dashboard map for 2022 SDG Index Goal #5 ratings. Data source: sdgindex.org Demand for family planning is satisfied by modern methods (% of females aged 15 to 49)This indicator measures women of reproductive age (15 to 49) whose demand for family planning is being met using modern methods of contraception, aiming to meet 100% of demand by 2030. Sub-Saharan Africa has major challenges remaining, according to the 2022 SDG Index. As do most of the Islamic republics, most of the countries in the Middle East, as well as the Balkans, and a couple of Latin American and Southeast Asian countries. The lack of availability in sub-Saharan Africa ought to be clear by the implications of extreme poverty, disallowing the affordability of modern contraceptives unless state-supplied. Projections show a population boom anticipated for the rest of this century to occur in the region, due to the demographics of extreme poverty and its correlation with population growth. The use of condoms serves double duty as a form of contraception, in addition to protecting against the transmission of HIV and other infections. Other barriers include difficulty in access for young and unmarried people; uncertainty around side effects; the assent of a male partner; religious belief; cultural attitudes, and healthcare providers posing a barrier for the above reasons. Though cultural attitudes, even if rooted in religious belief, as well as governmental policy efforts, need to propel the shift. If you live in a country where your contraception needs are unmet, religion may well be the culprit. Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines freedom of religion. But how we reconcile the human right of freedom of religion with reproductive rights is a bit of a minefield. Even the branches of each religion differ, an example being Catholicism’s prohibition against condoms in contrast to Protestantism. The Quran appears quiet on the topic, yet a stigma surrounds the use of condoms in Islamic countries, synonymous with illicit sex. The low rates of contraception seem more related to the cultural ethos in the Islamic states, with a tenuous invocation of Islam to condemn contraception by leaders in the region. Malaysia and Pakistan are lagging. India has a Hindu population of 80%, but its government has played an active role in family planning for its country of 1.35 billion. The Philippines, with an 80% Catholic population, has also scored red. Ireland, also close to 80% Catholic, has scored green for the indicator, though contraception was illegal there until 1980. If you’re a reader in a country off-track, you’ll need to consult your conscience as it relates to your relationship with religion. Complicating this will be the availability of family planning methods in religious cultures, even via a physician. What can you do as an individual in a country which hinders sourcing contraception? If you live in a country where the stigma is so high you face ostracism, this is a big problem. If you’re observant of a faith preaching the profanity of contraception, we’re also at an impasse. How deep to dig in our heels in such instances? Is a how-to book about the Global Goals the forum to persuade you away from the doctrines of your faith? With good fortune, according to the indicators we’re drawing from, we’re only looking to meet the demand for contraceptives i.e., if you are without demand due to your beliefs, then this is to be respected. Serbia offers an example of impeding the issue of family planning in a middle-income country on the European continent. Serbian gynaecologists still appear to struggle to have moved away from a culture whereby they have undergone abortions themselves at a rate of 61%. 37% of Serbian gynaecologists practise coitus interruptus as a contraception method, or no method at all. 51% were unwilling to prescribe the combined oral contraceptive pill to girls under 18. 76% advised women against using the pill for more than two years. If this reflects the personal practices of a decent portion of Serbian professionals, experts in their field, unable to draw upon modern knowledge, what hope can there be for the general population? The African continent, the poorest on the planet, is facing a demographic explosion. It is imperative women have the opportunity they desire for birth spacing. This dynamic highlights how entwined the matter of family planning is with poverty reduction. The UN treats the individual's right to decisions on fertility with care. Both people and the planet will benefit if we’re able, across generations, to shift the total fertility rate below replacement levels. A demographic transition to the lower-end scenarios of population growth gives the greatest chances to the benefits of sustainable development. If you have demand, make your first port of call a physician, should you have access to one. It may even be worth seeking counsel before conception - either with your physician or a midwife - in relation to your thoughts and intentions around attempting to become pregnant. Sex education is also important, so you can weigh attitudes held around contraception according to the correct information. The form of birth control, rather than condoms, could be a method drawing on fertility awareness to the menstrual cycle, though different methods have varied levels of efficacy. Males in partnerships or marriages, when planning to have a family or not, may also play a forceful position, which a reader may feel at the mercy of, complicating matters further. This is where the importance of Goal #5 comes to the fore. This indicator requires an overarching achievement of Goal #5, such as we engender (so to speak) gender equality in the country’s mores and healthcare system. The decision of the woman in a partnership or marriage ought to be of equal grounding respective to the male partner or husband. Summary: For OECD country readers, affirm your annual commitment to give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming for 100% demand for family planning satisfied by methods for females aged 15-49 by 2030. For readers in countries off-track, reduce any barriers preventing women from accessing family planning. Ratio of female-to-male mean years of education received (%)This indicator compares the average years of education for women over 25-years-old compared to their male counterparts. The aim is by 2030 for the ratio of years of education to be on equal footing for both sexes. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights - the definitive distillation of morals for the world's populace to live up to - enshrines the right to education. Upholding a basic human right alone ought to be reason enough to educate girls. In girls' education, we hold among the greatest drivers of actualising the SDGs. Many societies have marginalised the value of women in their societies, whether due to tradition or religion. If the choice between educating a boy or a girl is a decision a household faces in low-income countries, the choice often falls toward the boy, hindering the girl's prospects of income generation later in life. Many of these same societies marry off girls at an early age, instead of allowing them to work, or giving them the gift of education. After marriage comes babies, some of which will die, hence more babies follow to hedge this tragic bet. Affecting their ability to build upon and invest in the livelihoods of vulnerable mothers is the short cycle between high fertility rates, coupled with high infant mortality rates and high maternal mortality rates. If we educate girls rather than marry them off young, the primary and secondary schooling gender gap would narrow in the developing world. After a girl graduates high school, they have the prospect of tertiary education, and increased power to seek employment and earn a living wage in the labour market. She'll delay marriage and childbirth, have more power in the household, as well as more power in society due to her earning potential. This couples with what is understood to be a woman's sounder managing of household finances in the developing world. The fertility rate drops. The infant mortality rate drops. The pace of population growth decreases. The rate of personal savings rises, allowing for greater personal investment, and investment in a woman's enterprise, which she now has the confidence to conduct. It may even be possible for the taxable income of the population to rise enough for the government to use any tax revenues received to invest further, creating more opportunities to lift others out of extreme poverty. Imagine half a society's labour market left unused - one entire gender marginalised for either traditional, religious, or societal reasons. How could such a society expect to prosper? Since the 1980s, China has pulled an overwhelming proportion of its enormous populace from extreme poverty. One of the key drivers was the empowerment of women, educating and entrusting them as valuable members of the workforce driving an economy. Educating a girl is the clearest path to lift 700 million from extreme poverty by 2030. Take it from former UN Secreta

  7. 03/03/2024

    SDG #6 - Clean Water and Sanitation

    Dashboard map for 2022 SDG Index Goal #6 ratings. Data source: sdgindex.org Population using at least basic drinking water services (%)As of 2020, 90% of the world has basic drinking water services, with a steady upward trend since the start of the MDG period. Yet the 10% left over is still too much, with the 2022 SDG Index scores showing us the LDCs scoring red for this indicator. We’re aiming for 100% of the population to use basic drinking water services, defined as an ‘improved source’, meaning due to its “design and construction it has the potential to deliver safe water”. This definition is further categorised by whether the water is accessible on the premises, available when needed, and free from contamination. Types of unimproved sources include: unprotected springs and wells surface water from sources such as rivers, dams, lakes, streams, and irrigation canals An example of an improved source is: water piped to the home protected wells and springs harvested rainwater packaged or delivered water Per the definition of this indicator, a ‘basic drinking water service’ is an ‘improved water source’, requiring a 30-minute or less round trip, including queuing. The definition of a source taking longer is ‘limited’, in contrast to ‘basic’. To make this a little easier to conceptualise, UNICEF and the WHO use a ladder of drinking water: Source: https://washdata.org/monitoring/drinking-water Consider the role drinking water has in your life, and how you depend on its quality. You rely on it for basic survival, secondary in urgency to oxygen. Our planet’s surface area is 71% water, but 96.5% of this is saline, with only 2.5% fresh water. Diarrhoea is the second leading cause of death of children under 5, killing over half a million every year. Imagine your parents conceiving you, brought to term by your mother, only losing you to diarrhoea within 5 years of birth. When I picture the children in my life below age 5, the thought of them dying is shocking. If the cause were something as feeble and preventable as diarrhoea, it’d be even more senseless. How are you going to respond to this challenge to make up the shortfall of the 10% of the global population without basic drinking water services? You’re a step ahead of me. You’ve already concluded that because the countries far off-track are LDCs, the responsibility falls upon the DAC country readers to finance what's required to provide basic drinking water services. The main point is providing quality drinking water up to the standard of the ‘basic’ rung on the above ladder, meaning free of pollution, including when the pollutants originate from the original groundwater. Summary: For OECD country readers, affirm your annual commitment to give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming for all to have at least basic drinking water services by 2030. Population using at least basic sanitation services (%)A similar worded indicator to before, albeit focused upon sanitation, in contrast to drinking water, aiming for 100% coverage of a population using basic sanitation, to bridge the gap of 78% of the world population. The definition of an improved facility is designed to separate human waste from human contact, meaning it’s: not shared with other households treats the waste and disposes of it on-site stored, then emptied, and treated off-site transported via a sewer along with wastewater, and treated off-site Examples of improved sources include: flush toilets (connected to a sewer, septic tank, or pit latrine) pit latrines, with slabs covering the pit composting toilets UNICEF and the WHO likewise has a ladder for sanitation, as it does for drinking water: Source: https://washdata.org/monitoring/sanitation The upward trend has been steady and positive from the beginning of the MDG period in 2000, when only 55% of the world population had access to a basic sanitation service. What to do? We’ll follow the same prescription as above for water, with LDC countries cared for by the foreign aid donations from our DAC readers. What about middle-income countries? As mentioned earlier, DAC aid reaches recipients beyond the LDCs prioritised as neediest, but for this indicator, we have middle-income countries with portions of the population still living in extreme poverty. South Asia has scored red in the 2022 SDG Index for this indicator, as have Mongolia, Papua New Guinea, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Guatemala. Let’s lean on the ability of foreign aid to resolve this. In the event you’re reading this perched on the stilts of a hanging latrine, then above is the standard of what’s required for a ‘basic’ sanitation service where you live to help you to meet this indicator of 100% of the population. Summary: For OECD country readers, affirm your annual commitment to give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming for all to have at least basic sanitation services by 2030. For readers in countries off-track, use a basic sanitation service from an improved sanitation facility, where available. Freshwater withdrawal (% of available freshwater resources)Water is renewable but finite, so we’re considering the measure of all available renewable resources, minus what’s required by the environment. By 2030, the aim is a withdrawal of 12.5 % of available freshwater sources or less. In an era of increasing climate change, what was already a swath of dryland (Middle East and North Africa; Central and South Asia) will face increasing pressures on freshwater withdrawal. This indicator reflects water stress, measuring the proportion of freshwater withdrawn from all freshwater sources, applied to households, but also, due to the scale of their withdrawal, from industry. So please take heed if you’re a business owner, or if your influence in your role as an employee affects the outcome of freshwater withdrawal. This takes on pertinence within the industries of agriculture, forestry and fishing, manufacturing, and the electricity sector. Some common uses for these sectors include public water supply and irrigation, industrial processes, and electric power plant cooling. Agriculture accounts for 70% of the freshwater withdrawal. Food production has doubled in the past three decades, with estimates we’ll need 60% more food by mid-century, along with the accompanying intensity of water withdrawals. In a household, most adults have a sense of how best to economise on using freshwater, so our focus turns toward agriculture. Very few readers will work in the agricultural sector. Agricultural productivity is important, though heading further into this century, we’ll be asking more of the planet to feed more human mouths. Our demand and consumption affect what is produced by the agricultural sector, thus easing production eases the demand for freshwater sources. We need to harness agricultural technology and emphasise those techniques making efficiency gains, both in water use, but also cost. We’re looking for water productivity i.e., a good crop yield compared to the ratio of water used. This is done by improving irrigation and water management, including efficiency. One of the means of this is through drip irrigation via pressurised pipes, rather than surface irrigation. Maximising outputs and minimising inputs are central, being mindful of natural resources. As a consumer or an intermediary in the supply chain, you can do your bit from contributing to food waste. Importing food may become a reality for some countries off-track for this indicator, if they continue to be unable to meet the needs of domestic irrigation, a drawback we’ll face again in the next indicator. North Africa and the Middle East may need to look past agriculture and industrial processes as a living, as it’s appearing unsustainable unless the inputs of water are more efficient, or the government or private sector remediate this. Summary: For readers in countries off-track, conserve water and use efficiently, in residential, agricultural, and commercial settings, aiming for a national withdrawal of 12.5% or less of available freshwater resources by 2030. Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatm

  8. 02/03/2024

    SDG #7 - Affordable and Clean Energy

    Dashboard map for 2022 SDG Index Goal #7 ratings Data source: sdgindex.org Population with access to electricity (%)Much of the world population is on track to meet the 2030 goal of 100% access to electricity, except for the low-income and lower-middle income countries, plus Libya. 90.5% of the world population has access to electricity, with an upward trend, though still leaving 759 million people without electricity. We can leverage so much economic growth off electricity, including access to remote health care and education via broader internet connectivity - a key driver for the poorer countries to converge in living standards with more developed countries. The key issue is rural electrification, managing to ensure remote communities have access to electricity. Spare a thought for someone living in rural Africa, without even the notion of what an air conditioner is. Blankets of sub-Saharan Africa are devoid of electricity. It takes little imagination to envisage the relative deprivation it must be to live without it. Africa holds the capacity to transform from the Dark Continent, in terms of access to electricity, to a giant of energy exporting. This is a feasibility, in contrast to foreordained, and would rely on myriad factors to actualise, such as: investments in long-distance transmission lines grids to connect the continent to supply other regions massive engineering projects, such as harnessing the hydropower of Congo’s Inga Falls, a project with potential as the world’s biggest power station We need to be able to raise the funds to pay for the electrification of those developing countries off-track to meet this indicator. Summary: For OECD country readers, affirm your annual commitment to give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming for all to have access to electricity. Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%)The other side of the coin for SDG #7 is the cleanliness of the cooking methods used. The ‘cleanliness’ of energy is a serious factor for those living in poverty. The use of certain fuels results in smoke in confined mud-brick huts, polluting the home, and damaging health to the point of fatality. Within SDG #3, we explored the topic of chronic respiratory disease, and saw how dirty cooking fuels contribute to illnesses from indoor pollution. Such dirty sources include stoves burning charcoal, coal, crop cuttings, animal manure, kerosene, and wood. We’re aiming for 100% of a population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking, from 70% of the world population with such access as of 2020. Clean cooking fuels and technology include electricity, liquefied petroleum gas, natural gas, biogas, solar, and alcohol fuels like methanol or ethanol. We’re trying to dissuade people from burning fossil fuels like LPG and natural gas, so electricity generated by renewable energy is our primary aim. High-income country readers know by now what the solution is, vis-a-vis the LDCs, to afford access to clean fuels. But for all readers living in countries off-track, where available and affordable, cook with one of the above-mentioned clean fuels. Summary: For OECD country readers, affirm your annual commitment to give 0.7% of your gross income as aid, aiming for all to have access to clean fuels and technology for cooking by 2030. For developing country readers: use clean cooking fuels, where available and affordable. CO₂ emissions from fuel combustion per total electricity output (MtCO₂/TWh)This indicator measures the intensity of carbon emissions in the production of electricity. To quantify this, we use the amount of carbon dioxide released by burning the fuel which results in electricity, divided by the amount of electricity output. At the national level for which the SDG Index deals, this measure is in megatonnes (Mt) of carbon dioxide i.e., a million tonnes. To measure electricity output, it's terawatt-hours. Watts is a measurement for units of energy - if you know where your electricity meter is on your property, you can look at the dial measuring the electricity you’re using moment to moment. The meter measures in kilowatt-hours, which is also the unit of energy displayed on your electricity bill. A kilowatt-hour is the use of a thousand watts in an hour, whereas a terawatt-hour is a trillion watts an hour. So, a terawatt-hour is the best scale of measurement for describing the annual output of electricity for a whole country for a year. The aim by 2030 is to bring the emissions of carbon dioxide (i.e., a carbon atom bonded with two oxygen atoms) released from the burning of fuel for electricity to zero. For every terawatt-hour a country uses for electricity, this power will result in no CO₂ being emitted. Power plants emit CO₂ when they burn fossil fuels to generate electricity, but there are other ways to generate electricity besides burning fossil fuels e.g., renewable energy. Therefore, electrification is one of the most important pillars of decarbonisation. We can electrify as many power sources as possible, so long as the primary source of this energy is decarbonised. So many countries are lagging, yet the solution is to decarbonise, ensuring the electricity you use is generated from renewable sources. Now, let's bring the scale used to measure this indicator down to the level of you, the individual. Here, we'll measure in kilowatt-hours and tonnes of carbon dioxide, rather than terawatt-hours and megatonnes. If the electricity you get from your electric utility is from a power plant burning fossil fuels, then it’s emitting carbon dioxide. Remember, we’re trying to decarbonise whatever number of kilowatt-hours you’re using in your home or business. So long as the electricity and heating sources we use emit carbon dioxide, the surface temperature of Earth will warm, endangering our existence. One way or another, you have nine years to figure out a solution appropriate to your circumstances, whether solar photovoltaic, geothermal, hydropower or wind. Summary: Use 100% electricity generated from either renewable or carbon neutral sources, aiming to end CO₂ emissions from electricity output by 2030. Share of renewable energy in total primary energy supply (%)If as a reader, you live in a developed country, with the option available of 100% renewable energy supply to your home or small business, get it. The price of renewable energy is now - thank goodness - at parity with fossil fuels. What’s to be overcome is the politicisation of the issue. The press of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp has a potent stranglehold on political discourse, as is true in the US and UK. In Australia, such media seems tied up in coal and other fossil fuel-producing interests, colouring the everyday discourse of average citizens. This indicator looks at the portion of renewables amongst all energy sources (e.g., oil, coal, gas, nuclear, etc.), including imports and excluding exports. As of 2019, the global share of renewables in the total primary energy supply was 14%. With renewables at price parity with fossil fuels, 29% of the share of electricity was generated from renewables as of 2020. For this indicator, we’re aiming by 2030 for a 51% share of renewable energy among primary energy sources. By this definition, renewable energy includes hydropower, geothermal energy, solar energy, wind power, tidal and wave power, biofuels, and power generated from municipal waste when renewable. Excluded is pumped-storage hydroelectricity, a type of hydroelectric power storage used in an electric power system to balance loads. We need all these primary energy sources to generate our electricity, heat our spaces and water, for air conditioning, transportation, as well as stand-alone off-the-grid power systems. The present reality is solar and wind power is cheap. Beyond 2030, we need to get to 100% renewable energy by 2050, and wind and solar are our easiest paths. Innovative technologies will play a part in our decarbonisation plans past mid-century, as well as for net negative emissions, which involves removing carbon already in the atmosphere and storing it in carbon sinks, like soil or vegetation. Part of the solution also entails ceasing fossil fuel subsidies. Below is how the above energy sources work, in a basic way: geothermal gets thermal energy from the Earth’s crust solar power converts sunlight into electricity, using photovoltaics, or concentrates sunlight using mirrors. When photovoltaic panels are exposed to light, they create an electric current. The materials used to make photovoltaics are semiconducting, meaning the electric current flows less free than along copper in electrical wire. Solar-heated water receives sunlight’s heat via the solar thermal collector sitting on roofs Wind turbines convert the kinetic power of wind for electricity generation Hydroelectricity converts the force of moving water into electricity Biofuels create electricity or heat by burning as a fuel, the same as fossil fuels, except without the greenhouse effect Note, consumption of energy is different from the supply of energy. You may supply some renewable energy if you have so

See All (19)

About

In 2015, world leaders agreed to 17 Global Goals. This podcast, based on the book, shows how you can apply the Global Goals to your life, as an individual. 7 years on, 600 million people live on less than $2 per day, in starvation, without healthcare, education, clean water, toilets or electricity. Catastrophic climate change lingers over us, as does massive species extinction, while we pollute the planet. Chasms of inequality exist between males and females, rich and poor. We want peace and prosperity. We want a healthy planet for the next generation. We want dignity for all - to leave no one behind. This is our vision for 2030. We have the know-how - all we need is you.

Information