Search

Abstract Non-Technical Summary Enabling local adoption of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) is important to accelerate global efforts to achieve sustainable development. However, local governments have plural perspectives on how to engage with the SDGs. In this paper, we identify three perspectives on how to enable local SDGs based on cases of nine local governments in Australia. We emphasize the need for seeing local SDG adoption as contextualized and actor-driven processes. Technical Summary Local governments worldwide are taking the initiative to engage with sustainable development goals (SDGs) despite the absence of a globally coordinated guideline on local SDGs actions. With less than a decade until its 2030 deadline, a more targeted and nuanced approach to enabling local SDG actions is needed. In this paper, we argue that there is a need to look at local SDG actions as an actor-driven process where agency, contexts, purpose, and dynamics co-evolve and shape the outcome of the process. Using Q-methodology, we explore different perspectives on what enables local SDGs actions in nine local governments in Australia. Three perspectives in enabling local SDG actions emerged from the study: (1) ‘Enablers should support institutional embeddedness of the SDGs’, (2) ‘Enablers should support stakeholder coordination for the SDGs’, and (3) ‘Enablers should support community engagement for the SDGs’. Each perspective has preferred enablers, contextualized within certain ways of engaging with the SDGs, certain views of the SDGs, and specific local contexts and capacities. This study provides insights to contextualize knowledge in current literature to enable local SDG actions. Social media summary Many understand that the local adoption of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) is not a one-shoe-fits-all process, but what are some of the plurality in local SDG adoptions? In this paper, we identify three perspectives on enabling the SDGs based on nine local governments in Australia.

Abstract Non-Technical Summary This article takes stock of the 2030 Agenda and focuses on five governance areas. In a nutshell, we see a quite patchy and often primarily symbolic uptake of the global goals. Although some studies highlight individual success stories of actors and institutions to implement the goals, it remains unclear how such cases can be upscaled and develop a broader political impact to accelerate the global endeavor to achieve sustainable development. We hence raise concerns about the overall effectiveness of governance by goal-setting and raise the question of how we can make this mode of governance more effective. Technical Summary A recent meta-analysis on the political impact of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has shown that these global goals are moving political processes forward only incrementally, with much variation across countries, sectors, and governance levels. Consequently, the realization of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development remains uncertain. Against this backdrop, this article explores where and how incremental political changes are taking place due to the SDGs, and under what conditions these developments can bolster sustainability transformations up to 2030 and beyond. Our scoping review builds upon an online expert survey directed at the scholarly community of the ‘Earth System Governance Project’ and structured dialogues within the ‘Taskforce on the SDGs’ under this project. We identified five governance areas where some effects of the SDGs have been observable: (1) global governance, (2) national policy integration, (3) subnational initiatives, (4) private governance, and (5) education and learning for sustainable development. This article delves deeper into these governance areas and draws lessons to guide empirical research on the promises and pitfalls of accelerating SDG implementation. Social Media Summary As SDG implementation lags behind, this article explores 5 governance areas asking how to strengthen the global goals.

Universities are increasingly engaging with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Appeal for the SDGs is partly based on their double transformation framing: they are seen as enablers of societal transformations and transformations within universities. This article aims to understand how the SDGs influence university transformations. We analyse how four universities have integrated the SDGs through a comparative case study. We propose a framework to determine the impact of the SDGs in universities by identifying their scope of change (i.e. discursive, institutional, relational, and resource effects) and depth of change (i.e. accommodative, reformative or transformative). This study shows that discursive effects are the most prominent hinting toward transformative change. To lesser extents, primarily accommodative, the SDGs have influenced institutional, relational, and resource changes. Overall, findings show that for the SDGs to fulfil their transformative potential in universities, they should be used as more than communications and legitimizing tools.

This article explores the COVID-19 pandemic as an external “shock” that changed household-consumption practices in Melbourne, Australia. We assess national consumption data and retail data for the state of Victoria to show how dramatically consumption patterns shifted during 2020. We then discuss three specific examples of changed consumption practices during the pandemic drawn from an analysis of media reports: bread baking, food growing, and bicycle riding. These activities illustrate how the pandemic and resultant lockdowns enabled innovation in domestic consumption, enhanced food security and resilience, and created space for the experience of a slower way of life. We argue that the pandemic provided impetus to experiment and innovate in ways that are relevant to sustainability but not necessarily motivated by it. Further, there is limited evidence that sustainable consumption practices will live on at an integrated mass scale, given a lack of wider institutional effects, such as changes in policy, business strategy, or mass social movements to support them. Instead, we hypothesize that these new consumption experiences “discovered” during the lockdown will live on as practice memories that might be mobilized when the next shock comes.

Non-technical summary Accelerated decarbonization of academic conferences is necessary and urgent. Despite the window of opportunity that COVID-19 created for rethinking conferences, there is a risk of slipping back into old habits now that restrictions are lifted. This commentary reports on recent experiences with a unique, sustainable approach to academic conferencing involving an international partnership and hub model across three continents. There is a need to continue to experiment with and implement new modes of sustainable academic conferencing. Technical summary In response to increasing demands to move away from carbon-intensive academic conferences, and a need to address social justice issues, the author-team designed, implemented, and experimented with a new conference model. Three key-design choices informed the model. First, instead of the common single-host-single-location approach, we established a partnership between three universities across three continents. Second, we adopted a hub model of three online conference days, followed by three non-hybrid, in-person only conference days. Third, we sought to accommodate global participation by organizing each of the online conference days during daylight hours in the respective time zones. We find that the model promotes less air travel and improved global south participation. Our approach adds to a growing number of experiments with new modes of academic conferencing in a world that is facing climate and inequality crises. Social media summary Decarbonizing academic conferences is necessary and urgent. This commentary reveals experiences with a hub-based format.

Data governance is an emerging field of study concerned with how a range of actors can successfully manage data assets according to rules of engagement, decision rights, and accountabilities. Urban studies scholarship has continued to demonstrate and criticize lack of community engagement in smart city development and urban data governance projects, including in local sustainability initiatives. However, few move beyond critique to unpack in more detail what community engagement should look like. To overcome this gap, we develop and test a participatory methodology to identify approaches to empowering community engagement in data governance in the context of the Monash Net Zero Precinct in Melbourne, Australia. Our approach uses design for social innovation to enable a small group of “precinct citizens” to co-design prototypes and multicriteria mapping as a participatory appraisal method to open up and reveal a diversity of perspectives and uncertainties on data governance approaches. The findings reveal the importance of creating deliberative spaces for pluralising community engagement in data governance that consider the diverse values and interests of precinct citizens. This research points toward new ways to conceptualize and design enabling processes of community engagement in data governance and reflects on implementation strategies attuned to the politics of participation to support the embedding of these innovations within specific socio-institutional contexts.

The inability of global governments to meaningfully progress sustainable development over the past three decades is deeply concerning. AI is increasingly framed as a solution for achieving such outcomes, sometimes uncritically. We argue that: 1) for AI to improve public decision-making, the conditions and factors influencing public decisions must be better understood and considered; 2) to mainstream AI-enabled insights, transformations of those conditions and factors are necessary; and, 3) critical governance questions about those transformations must be addressed. To develop our arguments we draw on: original research identifying factors shaping public decision-making; ongoing interdisciplinary research exploring conditions that influence the use of AI for sustainable development policy; and, conceptual framings from literature concerned with transitions, earth system governance, leverage points and policy entrepreneurship - all sharing ambition to understand transformative change. In so doing, we seek to advance critical knowledge on the, potentially, transformative implications of AI in public decision-making.

Urban living labs have emerged as spatially embedded arenas for governing urban transformation, where heterogenous actor configurations experiment with new practices, institutions, and infrastructures. This article observes a nascent shift towards experimentation at the precinct scale and responds to a need to further investigate relevant processes in urban experimentation at this scale, and identifies particular challenges for urban planning. We tentatively conceptualise precincts as spatially bounded urban environments loosely delineated by a particular combination of social or economic activity. Our methodology involves an interpretive systematic literature review of urban experimentation and urban living labs at precinct scale, along with an empirical illustration of the Net Zero Initiative at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, which is operationalising its main campus into a living lab focussed on precinct-scale decarbonisation. We identify four processual categories relevant to precinct-scale experimentation: embedding, framing, governing, and learning. We use the empirical illustration to discuss the relevance of these processes, refine findings from the literature review and conclude with a discussion on the implications of our article for future scholarship on urban planning by experiment at precinct scale.

With this commentary, we share our reflections at the end of a five-year interdisciplinary research project (from 2016 to 2020) on cycling innovations in living labs across the Netherlands. The commentary is the product of a collective writing effort of the researchers. It combines reflections on both the content of our research project (cycling through the lens of innovations) from various disciplinary perspectives – including socio-technical transitions, mobilities, urban design, transport planning and history – and reflections on the transdisciplinary approach (living labs) underpinning our research. We hope that our reflections can benefit other researchers concerned with similar topics and approaches.Our research project, Smart Cycling Futures (SCF), began as a proposal within the Smart Urban Regions of the Future (SURF) program, funded by the Dutch Council for Academic Research (NWO). This call of €16.5 million was co-financed by the Dutch Ministries of Infrastructure & Environment and Internal Affairs. As one of the five winning consortia – the other consortia focused on self-driving cars, influencing travel behaviour, demand-oriented public transport, and small-scale experiments – our group of mobility-oriented researchers played an active role in shaping the evolving landscape of smart mobility innovation in the Netherlands.

The private sector arguably plays a critical role in addressing the challenges of the Anthropocene and providing potential solutions to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Recently, a myriad of new actors in the form of intermediaries, initiatives and organisations have started driving wider systems change by advocating and advising companies to reconsider and broaden their fundamental ‘raison d’être’. In this Perspective we argue that the emergence of this ‘purpose ecosystem’ could play an important function within earth system governance, specifically by endorsing and accelerating action aligned with achieving the UN SDGs; yet we also highlight a number of risks, barriers and critical considerations for its overall assessment and propose important questions for further research.

Purpose: This case study explores different perspectives on integrating the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in universities to achieve university transformations. This study recognises that university actors think differently about the purpose of universities, hold diverse perspectives on the SDGs, and, thus, prefer specific types of SDG integration. Design/methodology/approach: Using Q methodology, 29 participants from one university expressed their perspectives by sorting 50 statements covering different types of SDG integration. Statements were based on academic and grey literature on SDG integration in universities, and interviews with university actors from a previous study. After the sorting task, participants were interviewed to understand the reasons behind the placement of particular statements. Findings: The study identifies three perspectives held by the study participants. Perspective 1 emphasises the value of the SDGs and supports a deep integration of the Goals in their university. Perspective 1 also advocates for incorporating the SDGs into the university's identity. Perspective 2 sees the university's purpose as more comprehensive than the SDGs; thus, the university should develop knowledge regardless of its relevance to the SDGs. This perspective supports a pragmatic integration of the SDGs -- favouring actions that benefit the university without introducing significant changes. Finally, Perspective 3 argues that the university should approach the SDGs through social justice and empowerment lenses. This perspective also questions the suitability of the SDGs for universities, arguing that the SDGs fail to challenge current structures underpinning the unsustainability of the world. Originality/value: Although previous studies have analysed diverse ways of understanding the SDGs in universities, to the best of the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to treat the SDGs as a governance framework of 17 goals and adopt a whole-institution approach to study universities.