5th Session - Module 1 discussion

Discussion in Integration of the SDG into national planning Start by SDG Helpdesk Team | 9 months ago

SDG Helpdesk Team
Administrator
Administrator
UN ESCAP
Thailand
#1 | 9 months ago
Welcome to the 5th facilitated session of the e-learning course on Integration of SDGs into the National Planning. The session has officially starts on 4 February 2019 and will be open for facilitated discussions until 15 March 2019.

We would like you to have the chance to get familiar with the publications available on the SDG Help Desk under the thematic area of Integration of the SDGs into National Planning [ https://sdghelpdesk.unescap.org/knowledge-hub/thematic-area/Integration-of-the-sdgs-into-national-planning ].

We encourage you to actively engage in the forum. You can also take this opportunity to ask any questions or clarifications on the areas covered by the three modules of the course. For additional collaboration opportunities, we also have the SDG Help Desk Community of Practice [ https://sdg-help-desk-community-of-practice.mn.co/ ].
SDG Helpdesk Team
Administrator
Administrator
UN ESCAP
Thailand
#2 | 04/02/2019 07:08:37
Hello all! Today is the first day for this e-learning course and over the next six weeks we hope to have a lively and engaging discussion about and around the topics of the course. For each module, a discussion question will be posted related to that material. Discussions for each module will remain open and facilitated for the duration of the course.

How have you personally been affected by trade-offs in your own life, personal or professional, through an SDG-related experience? Which type of capital(s) were involved and what kind of gap(s) developed? At what level do these trade-offs occur? Describe the greater context of your experience and provide your second-hand insights to the experiences of others.
Steven Mac Andrew
Director
VSB
Suriname
#3 | 10/02/2019 23:40:37
Greetings from Suriname ! I have not been affected by trade-offs directly, but in Suriname the use of mercury to mine gold in the interior by informal and illegal small scale gold miners is widespread, which has a negative impact on the environment. The biodiversity and the health of villagers, who live in the neighborhood of mining activities, are negatively impacted. Hair samples of villagers have revealed high concentrations of mercury. The policy of the government seems to be to allow these miners to search for gold and to use of mercury, because of the fact that economic activities are scarce, which results in the lack of employment opportunities.
Luke Kapchanga
Director
Emonyo Yefwe International
Kenya
#4 | 11/02/2019 11:38:31
Hello everyone. Greetings from Kenya. This is very important, after going through some of the readings, I am basically discovering wonders as the detailed way issues are put are not the reality on the ground of my home country. Hoping that I will be sharing a lot on this forum as the course progresses.
SDG Helpdesk Team
Administrator
Administrator
UN ESCAP
Thailand
#5 | 13/02/2019 10:53:33
Thanks for your contributions!

Steven - this is a very complex situation that sounds to me like the trade-offs are happening between financial capital (gold), natural capital (environmental conditions), human capital (health), and social capital (government policy). What types of trade-offs do you see happening between these factors?

Luke - thanks for your enthusiasm and looking forward to hearing more from you!
Steven Mac Andrew
Director
VSB
Suriname
#6 | 16/02/2019 22:55:01
This is indeed a very complex situation. For me the key trade off is between social capital and natural capital. Persons are allowed to mine and use mercury in order to improve their livelihood due to the lack of employment opportunities, but this has severe consequences for the environment. There are areas, which are heavily polluted and in some instances mining took place in nature reserves. When the ratification of the Minamata Convention was discussed in Parliament, many parliamentarians indicated that persons did not have other sources of income, so the use of mercury must be phased out, instead of an immediate stop.

Post new reply