288
L. Diaz and A. Potvin
2.3 Social Floor
Adding a “social floor” to Rockstrom’s “environmental ceiling”, Kate Raworth, relied
on the planetary boundaries approach to build her “donut” theory (Raworth 2012).
She then delimited more precisely the safe and just space for humanity prosperity,
representing the inalienable social gains to be guaranteed for equitable development.
As reminded before, human needs are one of the two central elements of the
concept of sustainable development. Indeed, the WCED definition of sustainable
development imposes the responsibility towards future generations as a condition to
meet the needs of the present. This position echoes a consensus already present in
the Stockholm Declaration (1972) which stated that concern for future generations
should be an objective of humanity. In order to clarify the purpose of this responsibility, the WCED report drew on notions of needs and limits, which were at the heart
of the polemics between the South and the North in the 80s. Indeed, to reconcile the
concerns of inequality, both within and between countries, the WCED retained the
principle of “inner limits” to sustainable development, which means to ensure the
satisfaction of basic needs of all. Therefore, when it comes to reconcile development
and environment, criteria that should guide the choice are the meeting of the needs
of the poorest without exceeding the limits of resources and ecosystems (Anctil and
Diaz 2016, p. 35).
Raworths’s approach thus completes and updates the notion of sustainable development by identifying eleven essential needs to be guaranteed for all. Inspired by
existing declarations and conventions on human rights, and based on global socioeconomic statistics, she affirms that basic needs are income, food, education, health,
gender equality, water, energy, jobs, social equity, resilience and voice. These needs
are, for the most part, covered by several of the Sustainable Development Goals.
2.4 Sustainable Development Goals
Both Rockström and Raworth’s approaches influenced the debates of the United
Nations conference on sustainable development, Rio + 20 in 2012. These discussions
led to the adoption in 2015 of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by
the United Nations General Assembly as part of its 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development.
3 Building on the lessons learned from the Millennium Development
Goals, this new framework must apply, if it wants to have the desired impact, to all
countries, to all scales of intervention and by all actors and stakeholders.
Despite the broad consensus and the robustness of the scientific knowledge leading
to SDGs adoption, they are still not sufficiently known beyond the domain of multilateral agencies, development cooperation and environmental sciences, and even
less in francophone circles.
3 https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/.
L. Diaz and A. Potvin
2.3 Social Floor
Adding a “social floor” to Rockstrom’s “environmental ceiling”, Kate Raworth, relied
on the planetary boundaries approach to build her “donut” theory (Raworth 2012).
She then delimited more precisely the safe and just space for humanity prosperity,
representing the inalienable social gains to be guaranteed for equitable development.
As reminded before, human needs are one of the two central elements of the
concept of sustainable development. Indeed, the WCED definition of sustainable
development imposes the responsibility towards future generations as a condition to
meet the needs of the present. This position echoes a consensus already present in
the Stockholm Declaration (1972) which stated that concern for future generations
should be an objective of humanity. In order to clarify the purpose of this responsibility, the WCED report drew on notions of needs and limits, which were at the heart
of the polemics between the South and the North in the 80s. Indeed, to reconcile the
concerns of inequality, both within and between countries, the WCED retained the
principle of “inner limits” to sustainable development, which means to ensure the
satisfaction of basic needs of all. Therefore, when it comes to reconcile development
and environment, criteria that should guide the choice are the meeting of the needs
of the poorest without exceeding the limits of resources and ecosystems (Anctil and
Diaz 2016, p. 35).
Raworths’s approach thus completes and updates the notion of sustainable development by identifying eleven essential needs to be guaranteed for all. Inspired by
existing declarations and conventions on human rights, and based on global socioeconomic statistics, she affirms that basic needs are income, food, education, health,
gender equality, water, energy, jobs, social equity, resilience and voice. These needs
are, for the most part, covered by several of the Sustainable Development Goals.
2.4 Sustainable Development Goals
Both Rockström and Raworth’s approaches influenced the debates of the United
Nations conference on sustainable development, Rio + 20 in 2012. These discussions
led to the adoption in 2015 of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by
the United Nations General Assembly as part of its 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development.
3 Building on the lessons learned from the Millennium Development
Goals, this new framework must apply, if it wants to have the desired impact, to all
countries, to all scales of intervention and by all actors and stakeholders.
Despite the broad consensus and the robustness of the scientific knowledge leading
to SDGs adoption, they are still not sufficiently known beyond the domain of multilateral agencies, development cooperation and environmental sciences, and even
less in francophone circles.
3 https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/.