Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs, Brazil, Argentina, political alternation, populist governments, public policies, sustainable development, United Nations
Reader
Abstract
Extract
of 7
Abstract
This study examines the impact of political alternation on the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Brazil and Argentina, highlighting the role of government priorities and commitments.
Extract
[...] Do you think the SDGs represent a relevant evaluation criterion for a public policy? Why? Yes I think so because they provide a universal framework for evaluating progress in sustainable development and clearly show a populist or non-populist positioning. 2. What lessons have you drawn from this study? I have noted that political alternation can lead to structural changes for a country in its search for development. 3. What examples of success or failure in achieving the SDGs in these countries could you cite? [...]
[...] Do you think the SDGs can influence public policies implemented at the national level? Yes clearly, the SDGs can influence public policies by providing a reference framework and mobilizing international resources and support, especially for developing countries. 4. To what extent do certain theories consider that political alternation can be an obstacle in the respect of the UN's objectives? Certain theories highlight that instability and changes in priorities related to political alternation can compromise the necessary continuity to achieve the SDGs, particularly in the respect of women's rights, education, or the respect of the environment as we have seen in Brazil. [...]
[...] I think the SDGs offer a universal framework that allows me to compare Brazil and Argentina in a context of political alternation. 4. Why did you choose to work on the SDGs? The SDGs are key performance indicators in the evaluation of public policies, and their analysis can reveal the priorities and commitments of governments towards sustainable development and therefore see if there is a change following a political alternation. 5. Why did you choose to conduct this research method? [...]
[...] Is it the same thing outside of Brazil and Argentina? Political alternation can lead to changes in priorities and commitments to the SDGs. In fact, I also note that it is similar in other countries where government changes influence sustainable development policies (for example, the United States under Donald Trump) 5. What are the political implications of your study on the SDGs in the Brazilian and Argentine contexts? The study shows that consistent and sustainable political commitment is crucial for the effective implementation of the SDGs, and that political changes can hinder progress. [...]
[...] For example, against poverty or for the integration of women in education. This can, for example, apply in Afghanistan. 6. What concrete measures should governments take to better integrate the SDGs? It is necessary to strengthen the monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, sensitize and engage local actors, and ensure the coherence of policies with the SDG objectives. Avoid that political alternations lead to questioning of these SDGs. 7. How do you evaluate the impact of the SDGs on civil society in these two countries? [...]
