Inclusive Narrative of Development: The SDGs as a Post-Foundational Framework for Global Governance

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 43, 50 - 64, 30.01.2025

Cemile Rüveyda Özmen , Ravza Altuntas

Öz

This study critically examines the role of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in global development, focusing on their introduction of a post-foundational framework that rethinks traditional development paradigms. The SDGs represent a transformative shift from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which were largely shaped by neoliberal economic principles and felt short in addressing structural inequalities and environmental degradation. The 2008 global financial crisis exposed the limitations of rigid, economic growth-centered frameworks, amplifying calls for inclusive, flexible, and sustainable approaches. Developed through an extensive participatory process, the SDGs prioritize the integration of environmental, social, and economic dimensions of sustainability while simultaneously allowing for adaptation to diverse national contexts. At their core, the SDGs reject fixed ideological foundations, instead they embrace a governance model based on negotiation, dialogue, and inclusivity. This post-foundationalist approach positions development as a dynamic and context-sensitive process, enabling responses tailored to the unique values and conditions of individual countries. By emphasizing equitable collaboration across global and local levels, the SDGs promote shared responsibility while addressing the root causes of inequality and exclusion. Ultimately, the SDGs redefine development as a multidimensional, participatory endeavor that prioritizes human dignity, social justice, and ecological balance over standardized and universalizing solutions, which marks a significant evolution in global governance.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sustainable Development Goals, Neoliberalism, Post-foundationalist approach

Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Amaçları (SKA'lar) ve Kapsayıcı Kalkınma: Temelcilik Sonrası Küresel Yönetişim Perspektifi

Öz

Bu çalışma, Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Hedefleri’nin (SKH’ler) küresel kalkınmadaki rolünü, geleneksel kalkınma paradigmalarını yeniden şekillendiren post-temelci bir çerçeve bağlamında ele almaktadır. Neoliberal ekonomik ilkelerle şekillenen Binyıl Kalkınma Hedefleri (BKH’ler), yapısal eşitsizlikleri ve çevresel bozulmayı ele almakta yetersiz kalmış, 2008 küresel mali krizi ise bu katı, büyüme odaklı yaklaşımların sınırlamalarını açığa çıkarmıştır. Katılımcı bir süreçle geliştirilen SKH’ler, sosyal ve ekonomik sürdürülebilirliği bir araya getirerek farklı ulusal bağlamlara uyarlanabilir esnek bir model sunmaktadır. SKH’lerin temelinde, sabit ideolojik temellere dayanmayan, müzakereye, diyaloğa ve kapsayıcılığa dayalı bir yönetişim modeli bulunmaktadır. Bu post-temelci yaklaşım, kalkınmayı dinamik ve bağlama duyarlı bir süreç olarak yeniden tanımlamakta ve farklı ülkelerin kendine özgü değerlerine ve koşullarına uygun yanıtlar geliştirilmesine olanak tanımaktadır. Küresel ve yerel düzeylerde eşitlikçi iş birliğini teşvik eden SKH’ler, eşitsizliklerin ve dışlanmanın kökenlerini ele alırken, paylaşılan sorumluluk ilkesiyle hareket etmektedir. Sonuç olarak, SKH’ler, kalkınmayı insan onurunu, sosyal adaleti ve ekolojik dengeyi önceliklendiren çok boyutlu ve katılımcı bir girişim olarak yeniden tanımlayarak küresel yönetişimde önemli bir dönüşümü temsil etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Hedefleri, Neoliberalizm, Post-temelci yaklaşım

Kaynakça

• Andersen, M. E., & Lindsnaes, B. (2007). Towards new global strategies: Public goods and human rights. Martinus Nijhoff.
• Bello, W. (2013). Capitalism’s last stand? Deglobalization in the age of austerity. Zed Books.
• Biermann, F., Kanie, N., Kim, R. E. (2017). Global governance by goal-setting: The novel approach of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26–27, 26-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.01.010
• Bush, R. E., Bale, C. S. E., Powell, M., Gouldson, A., Taylor, P. G., Gale, W. F. (2017). The role of intermediaries in low carbon transitions – Empowering innovations to unlock district heating in the UK. Journal of Cleaner Production, 148, 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.129
• Clarke, G. (2008). Religion and international development. In J. Haynes (Ed.), Routledge handbook of religion and politics (pp. 385-402). Routledge.
• Ciambra, A. (2020). Guidelines for voluntary local reviews. A Comparative Analysis of Existing VLRs, 1, 7–48.
• Coate, R. A. (2014). Sustainable development. In T. G. Weiss & R. Wilkinson (Eds.), International organization and global governance. Routledge.
• Dryzek, J., & Pickering, J. (2019). The politics of the Anthropocene. Oxford University Press.
• Fomerand, J. (2020). Historical dictionary of the United Nations (3rd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
• Fukuda-Parr, S. (2009). Human rights and politics in development. In M. Goodhart (Ed.), Human rights: Politics and practice (pp. 161-178). Oxford University Press.
• Fukuda-Parr, S. (2016). From the Millennium Development Goals to the Sustainable Development Goals: Shifts in purpose, concept, and politics of global goal setting for development. Gender & Development, 24(1), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552074.2016.1145895
• Getachew, A. (2019). Worldmaking after empire: The rise and fall of self-determination. Princeton University Press.
• Guha, J., & Chakrabarti, B. (2019). Achieving the sustainable development goals (SDGs) through decentralisation and the role of local governments: A systematic review. Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance, 2019(22), 1–21.
• Griggs, D., Stafford-Smith, M., Gaffney, O., et al. (2013). Sustainable development goals for people and planet. Nature, 495, 305–307. https://doi.org/10.1038/495305a
• Harcourt, W. (2005). The Millennium Development Goals: A missed opportunity for gender equity? Development, 48(1), 95–102. doi:10.1057/palgrave.development.1100117
• Harrod, R. (1972). Economic essays (2nd ed.). Macmillan.
• Helleiner, E. (2023). The contested world economy: The deep and global roots of international political economy. Cambridge University Press.
• Hickel, J. (2017). The divide: A brief guide to global inequality and its solutions. Penguin.
• Kanie, N., & Biermann, F. (Eds.). (2017). Governing through goals: Sustainable Development Goals as governance innovation. MIT Press.
• Klein, N. (2015). This changes everything: Capitalism vs. the climate. Simon & Schuster.
• Kroll, C., Warchold, A., Pradhan, P. (2019). Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Are we successful in turning trade-offs into synergies? Palgrave Communications, 5, 140. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0335-5
• Le Blanc, D. (2015). Towards integration at last? The Sustainable Development Goals as a network of targets. Sustainable Development, 23(3), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1582
• Masuda, H., Kawakubo, S., Okitasari, M., & Morita, K. (2022). Exploring the role of local governments as intermediaries to facilitate partnerships for the sustainable development goals. Sustainable Cities and Society, 82, 103883.
• McCloskey, S. (2015). From MDGs to SDGs: We need a critical awakening to succeed. Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review, 186-194.
• McKeon, N. (2017). Are Equity and Sustainability a Likely Outcome When Foxes and Chickens Share the Same Coop? Critiquing the Concept of Multistakeholder Governance of Food Security. Globalizations, 14(3), 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2017.1286168
• Monkelbaan, J. (2019). Governance for the Sustainable Development Goals: Exploring an integrative framework of theories, tools, and competencies. Springer.
• Morgan, K. (2010). The green state: Sustainability and the power of purchase. In A. Pike, A. Rodríguez-Pose, & J. Tomaney (Eds.), Handbook of local and regional development (pp. 87-97). Routledge.
• Ningrum, D., Raven, R., Malekpour, S., Moallemi, E. A., Bryan, B. A. (2023). Transformative potential in sustainable development goals engagement: Experience from local governance in Australia. Global Environmental Change, 80, 102670.
• Ningrum, D., Malekpour, S., Raven, R., Moallemi, E. A., Bonar, G. (2024). Three perspectives on enabling local actions for the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Global Sustainability, 7, e22. doi:10.1017/sus.2024.20
• Pettit, P. (2012). On the people’s terms: A republican theory and model of democracy. Cambridge University Press.
• Pogge, T., & Sengupta, M. (2016). Assessing the Sustainable Development Goals from a human rights perspective. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 32(2), 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/21699763.2016.1198268
• United Nations. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Note by the Secretary-General (A/42/427). United Nations Digital Library. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/139811?v=pdf
• United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
• United Nations. (2023). Global Sustainable Development Report 2023. UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs. https://sdgs.un.org/gsdr/gsdr2023
• United Nations. (2024). ‘Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024’, 28 June 2024. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2024/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2024.pdf
• Weiss, T. G., Forsythe, D. P., Coate, R. A., Pease, K.-K. (2018). The United Nations and changing world politics (8th ed.). Routledge.