I had one of my increasingly infrequent visits to Brussels today to participate in a very diverse group that is trying to help the European Union (of which the UK remains a member for at least another six months) get to grips with the seventeen UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that were agreed in 2015.
During the meeting, we were shown research that suggested that not a single country has achieved a high level of well-being in an ecologically sustainable way. The slide presented (and shown below) implies that developed countries have prospered at the expense of the environment while others are failing to deal with social challenges. The implication is that we all need to find ways of growing prosperity without causing environmental harm.
This is not new.
Integration or mainstreaming environment into decision-making has been the subject of heated policy debates since the Brundtland Report in 1987 which gave birth to the idea of sustainable development: meeting the needs of the current generation without compromising those of future generations.
Yet, governments are still struggling to find ways to integrate economic-social-environmental objectives which means there are, inevitably, trade-offs. We see this in debates about how to meet human needs for energy (support for renewable technologies irrespective of environmental impacts) or food (production at the expense of skylarks, turtle doves, carbon storage or flood protection) and even housing (think Lodge Hill).
The focus of today’s meeting was the publication of a new report, which I signed up to on behalf of BirdLife International. This offers some options for how the European Union might embrace the SDGs (pictured below demonstrating how a healthy natural environment underpins socio-economic interests) and move beyond siloed thinking towards a new approach which delivers a fair and just society that lives within environmental limits.
The report represents consensus struck between organisations representing European business, farmers, trade unions, youth group, human rights and environmental groups. It was warmly welcomed by the European Commission Vice-President Frans Timmermans who promised that he would respond with what is called a Reflection Paper – which I think is a bit like a musing, so nothing concrete yet.
However, since the Eurozone crisis and Brexit, the European Union is a seeking a process of renewal and it would seem an excellent time for the European Union to propose a different future.
What better way to demonstrate its relevance to the people of Europe than for the European Union to say that it wants to grow our prosperity and provide a healthy environment (clean air, clean water, abundant wildlife) to all Europeans.
And, if/when the UK does leave the European Union, then all the arguments outlined above continue to apply to the governments across the UK.