The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) call for collaboration amongst countries to address the three dimensions of sustainable development - economic growth, environmental sustainability, and social inclusion.¹ In considering the major influencers of our international attention, the question becomes, in addition to collaboration amongst countries, how do we nurture collaboration across disciplines of education, science, technology, media, sports, entertainment, and local knowledge experts to drive equitable progress in the SDGs?

This blog posits that through 1.) establishing a transdisciplinary approach and 2.) mapping a network of information sharing, we can accelerate our progress towards the SDGs. Mixed discipline approaches are becoming more popular in our dynamic and ever-evolving global community. The concepts of transdisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity are defined as “a process of collaboration between scholars and non-scholars on a specific real-world problem” and “the integration of perspectives, information, data, techniques, tools, concepts, and/or theories from two or more disciplines,” respectively.²

Scientists and government officials must continue to recognize that a transdisciplinary approach is necessary to accelerate progress towards the SDGs. A more integrated approach between scientists and international educators could maximize knowledge production efforts, making use of the system of development dollars committed to SDGs. The World Bank, the biggest financier of education in developing countries, has invested US$45 billion since 2000.³ While there remains unending debate about what education should be provided where, there is a clear argument for the bridging of science and international education to deliver the highest quality content to address the SDGs.

Changing existing behaviors within social-ecological systems (adaptation) and creating more fundamental changes that define new systems (transformation)^{4 5} will require more collaboration between science and education. However, a closer partnership between science and education disciplines is not enough. There are mega-social-influencers available to accelerate progress. Consider that, in the United States, 13 percent of society follows science while 71 percent follows sports.⁶ Athletes, musicians, and entertainers have powerful platforms of influence. For example, Cristiano Ronaldo, the Portuguese soccer star, maintains 517 million social media followers, and Justin Bieber, the Canadian pop singer, maintains 455 million.⁷

A collaborative approach will take some work to establish. Once the collaborators are identified and the commitments secured, network mappers can identify the contributors’ spheres of influence and action items, and start plotting the anticipated flow of information and knowledge sharing. A network approach can identify spheres of influence, map the communication of information, diversify engagement of different sectors, and drive more accountability.^{8 9 10} Analysis of social networks can forecast the transfer of information, and assessment of implementation can detect and address areas of concern.

Equity is central to the success of the SDGs.¹¹ Local knowledge experts must be a part of the creation of the collaboration, and must play significant roles in implementation to 1.) ensure equitable flows of information and resources and 2.) ensure equity in the knowledge being produced. Increasing the local and/or traditional ecological knowledge will lessen the disconnect between people and nature.^{12 13 14 15}

The SDGs help us prioritize what knowledge needs to be received by as many global citizens as possible. By taking a siloed approach to this work, we are doing a disservice to our global society. Yet, if we can build a collaboration across disciplines and systematize the effort, we strengthen our chances of nurturing our Earth system and building towards an ecological civilization.

References

1. Mishra, P. K. (2018). Environmental education as a driver for sustainable development goals. University of Delhi Shivaji College. ResearchGate: 322835204.
2. Haider, L.J., Hentati-Sundberg, J., Giusti, M. et al. The undisciplinary journey: early-career perspectives in sustainability science. Sustain Sci 13, 191–204 (2018).
3. The World Bank. (n.d.) Global Partnership for Education and the World Bank Group: The Facts.https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/brief/the-global-partnership-for-education-and-the-world-bank-group-the-facts.
4. Barnes, Michele & Wang, Peng & Cinner, Joshua & Graham, Nicholas & Guerrero, Angela &Jasny, Lorien & Lau, Jacqueline & Sutcliffe, Sarah & Zamborain-Mason, Jessica. (2020). Social determinants of adaptive and transformative responses to climate change. Nature Climate Change. 10. 1-6. 10.1038/s41558-020-0871-4.
5. Folke, C., Polasky, S., Rockström, J. et al. Our future in the Anthropocenebiosphere. Ambio 50, 834–869 (2021). doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01544-8.
6. Walsh, R. (2020, August 14). The green sports movement finally hits mainstream. Greenbiz. https://www.greenbiz.com/article/green-sports-movement-finally-hits-mainstream.
7. Wallach, O. (2021, May 14). The world’s top 50 influencers across social media platforms. The Visual Capitalist. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/worlds-top-50-influencers-across-social-media-platforms/
8. Crona, B., Ö. Bodin. (2006). What you know is who you know? Communication patterns among resource users as a prerequisite for co-management. Ecology and Society 11(2): 7.
9. Janssen, M. A., Ö. Bodin, J. M. Anderies, T. Elmqvist, H. Ernstson, R. R. J. McAllister, P. Olsson, and P. Ryan. 2006. Toward a network perspective on the resilience of social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 11(1): 15.
10. Jedd, T., and Bixler, P. (2015). Accountability in Networked Governance: Learning from a case of landscape-scale forest conservation. Environmental Policy and Governance. doi.org/10.1002/eet.1670.
11. Pradhan, P. et al (2017). A Systematic Study of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Interactions. Earth’s Future. doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000632.
12. Anderson, E. (1996). Ecologies of the Heart: Emotion, Belief, and the Environment. Oxford University Press.
13. Berkes, F. (1996). Sacred Ecology: Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management. Taylor & Francis.
14. Kopelent Rehak (2020). Eco-healing: Curative Agency and the Blue Space. The Journal of Culture 9(2).
15. Trisos, C. & Auerbach, J. & Katti, M. (2021). Decoloniality and anti-oppressive practices for a more ethical ecology. Nature Ecology & Evolution. 1-8.10.1038/s41559-021-01460-w.