The green deal – just transition and sustainable development goals Nexus.

Endeavouring to promote sustainability and citizens' well-being, and attempting to avoid or at least mitigate catastrophic climate change; the European Union adopted in 2019 the "Green Deal" as a new growth strategy, to thus become the first climate-neutral continent by 2050. As an intermediate 2030 target, it set the goals of at least 40% net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, an increase to 32% share for renewable energy, and 32.5% increase in energy efficiency. Reaching these targets was estimated to require investments of €260 billion/year till 2030, which is 1.94% of EU's annual gross domestic product in 2020. The aim of this paper is to introduce a perspective that attempts to analyse relationships between two exceptionally important and ambitious simultaneous goals of the Green Deal: to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, as well as the Sustainable Developments Goals, all based on the sustainability environmental, economic and social pillars. The study shows that the link between these two goals, including the cost-benefit effects for all citizens, should be made clearer. Without adequate understanding and monitoring of the consequences of each action, and quantitative indicators for the environmental, economic and social sustainability pillars, the attainment of the goals would be subject to high uncertainty. With ongoing global changes and problems within and surrounding the European Union, implementation of the Green Deal without the noted adjustments poses a potential risk to sustainable development and to the European Union unity. Transition to climate neutrality can be sustainable only if supported by conviction and accord. • The carbon neutrality - sustainable development link must be evidence-based. • The Green Deal focuses inadequately on social dimensions of SD. • Its high cost should be born without major risk to the SDGs. • Need for quantitative socio-economic targets, continuous monitoring and evaluation. • The proposed support mechanisms is unlikely to reach all vulnerable groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]