CAPÍTULO I 1.1 PLANTEAMIENTO DEL PROBLEMA
MARCO REFERENCIAL TEÓRICO 2.1 ANTECEDENTES.
2.7. ACTIVIDADES SENSORIOMOTORAS (ASM)
2.7.3. ACTIVIDADES SENSORIOMOTORAS COMO PARTE DEL TIEMPO LIBRE
As earlier argued, the need to manage and operationalize the concept of sustainable
development to expedite its implementation at international law and national levels remains crucial for achieving the SDGs. The UN’s designation of sustainable development into goals,
targets and indicators has served to broaden the ambit of the concept whilst retaining its integral
elements denoted in the three-pillar paradigm. These are evident in the Millennium
135 The Convention on Biological Diversity. (CBD) 1992.
136 See, Öneryildiz v. Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99, 62, ECHR 2004-XII. Also, 8 Claude Reyes v. Chile Case, 2006 Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 151 (Sept. 19, 2006),
137 See, Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, (Arhus Convention) June 25, 1998, 2161 U.N.T.S. 447
23
Development Goals (MDGs)138 and subsequent adoption of the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs).139 The MDGs comprised a framework of 8 goals, 18 targets and 48 indicators
to measure progress towards the Millennium Development goals. These Goals include: 1.
Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, 2. Achieve universal primary education, 3. Promote
gender equality and empower women, 4. Reduce child mortality, 5. Improve maternal health,
6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases, 7. Ensure environmental sustainability and
8. Develop a global partnership for development.
Notwithstanding that each goal of the MDGs had stated targets and stipulated dates for their
achievements, the MDGs were however criticized for an alleged lack of analysis or failure to
validate the criteria for selected objectives.140 More so, the heavy reliance on states for their
achievement, the difficulty or lack of measurements for some goals and uneven progress
amongst other goals were considered detracting factors.141 For instance, Goal 7 relating to
ensuring environmental sustainability, comprised of 4 targets and 8 indicators. These targets
ranged from integrating the principles of sustainable development into country policies and
programs, its indicators denoted as 7A (1-3) include: reverse loss of environmental resources,
reduce biodiversity loss, achieving, by 2010, a significant reduction in the rate of loss
proportion of land area covered by forest, tackling CO2 emissions, Consumption of ozone-
depleting substances etc.
138See, United Nations Millennium Development Goals, (2000) Available at:http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ accessed at, 18 January 2018.
139 See, Goals 1-17 Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda For Sustainable Development
sustainabledevelopment.un.org A/RES/70/1. See also, Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2017/2) Available at:
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld/publication Accessed at 15 March 2018. 140 J. Vandemoortele, "The Mdg Conundrum: Meeting the Targets Without Missing The Point." Development Policy Review27, No. 4 (2009): 355-371.
141 A. Attaran, "An immeasurable crisis? A criticism of the Millennium Development Goals and why they cannot be measured." PLoS medicine 2, no. 10 (2005): 318.
24
In as much as the MDG’s environmental sustainability targets and indicators were useful in
defining or assessing how readily or effectively states were progressing towards achieving the
environmental goals of the MDGs, they were however criticized as porous, inadequate markers,
difficult to measure and lacking country specific contexts.142 Moreover, goal 7 of the MDGs
crucially fails to mention agriculture which has inter-linkages with environmental sustainability, social development and also has implications for a majority of the world’s poor
who are farmers. The MDGs thus failed in this instance at reconciling key aspects of the
sustainable development agenda, relating to the environment and social pillars. These amongst
other factors, like failure to generate consensus, inadequate consultations with relevant
stakeholders especially the poor,143 ultimately resulted in the MDGs replacement in 2016 by
the sustainable development goals (SDGs). The SDGs, certainly embodied a more expansive
and quantitative framework of goals, targets and indicators, albeit with some goals considered
by some as tenuous and capable of triggering tensions or complications that undermine
environmental sustainability.144
Consequently, the SDGs which are designed to build on the MDGs and “complete what they
did not achieve”145 were adopted by 193 states of the UN in 2015 as a means of articulating a
global consensus spanning 15 years, to advance the aims of sustainable development. The UN
essentially targets pervasive, global, environmental, economic and social challenges by these
SDGs to dissociate growth and development aspirations of states and private actors from
deleterious environmental and social impacts. These 17 goals and accompanying 169 targets
and 230 indicators serve to incorporate the substantive and procedural elements of sustainable
142 A. Attaran, "An immeasurable crisis? A criticism of the Millennium Development Goals and why they cannot be measured." PLoS medicine 2, no. 10 (2005): 318.
143 J. Vandemoortele, "The MDG Conundrum: Meeting the Targets Without Missing The Point." Development Policy
Review27, No. 4 (2009): 355-371.
144 See, Louis J. Kotze, “The Sustainable Development Goals: An Existential Critique Alongside Three New-Millennial Analytical Paradigms” in Sustainable Development Goals: Law, Theory and Implementation, edited by Duncan French, and Louis J. Kotzé, Edward Elgar, (2018).
25
development articulated in the Rio declaration and Agenda 21, albeit with modifications, by
expanding the concept to accommodate the dynamics of change in environmental protection or
economic and social considerations over time. Arguably, the SDGs more or less strive to
articulate greater detail without obfuscating the purpose of sustainable development ingrained
in Agenda 21, the Rio declaration and accompanying principles.
A summation of the Sustainable Development Goals include: 1. Ending poverty in all its forms
everywhere, 2. Ending hunger, achieving food security, improved nutrition and sustainable
agriculture, 3. Ensuring healthy lives and well-being, 4. Inclusive, equitable, quality education
and lifelong learning opportunities, 5. Gender equality and women empowerment,
6.Sustainable management of water and sanitation, 7. Affordable, reliable, sustainable and
modern energy, 8. Sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, Productive
employment and decent work, 9. Building resilient infrastructure, sustainable industrialization
and fostering innovation, 10. Reducing inequality within and among countries, 11. Sustainable
cities and human settlements, 12. Sustainable consumption and production patterns, 13.
Combating climate change and its impacts, 14. Sustainable use of the oceans, seas and marine
resources for sustainable development, 15. Sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, forests
management, halt biodiversity loss, 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for
sustainable development, access to justice, effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at
all levels, 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for
sustainable development.146 Thus, UN member states are prompted to collaborate in applying
the 2030 Agenda, to development plans to achieve holistic sustainable development.
See also, SDG Indicators Global indicator framework for the Sustainable Development Goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2017/2).
26
As evident from the preceding stated goals and targets, the 17 SDGs thus mirror the core
principles of sustainable development encompassing: The Integration principle,
preventive/precautionary principle, sustainable use and consumption of resources, the polluter
pays principle as well as equity.147 These SDGs are closely interconnected with the intent that
they potentially impact on each other. Thus, positive contributions and progress in a sphere or
set of goals improves on other goals. Hence, efforts to achieve goals 1-6, comprising: poverty
eradication, sustainable agriculture, food security, sanitation, sustainable cities, including
sustainable industrialization and energy are those that ultimately trigger sustainable economic
growth.148 Moreover, whilst the MDGs thrived on average percentiles, for instance most of its
goals included the catch phrase …”to reduce by half or by two-thirds” as evident across targets
1A-1C on the poverty eradication goal, including health and environmental goals. The SDGs
clearly targets all people, with the maxim, “leave no one behind”.149
Nevertheless, these preceding glowing attributes of the SDGs raise presumptions or obvious
questions. Are the SDGs so all-encompassing, or so formidable and full-proof that they are
effectively capable of obliterating contemporary global problems affecting the environment,
people and business, especially oil and gas business or its peculiar challenges? In as much as
these questions may yield positive or negative answers as indeed sustainable development is
an all-embracing concept represented in the SDGs, with probable keys or submissions towards
tackling virtually all spheres of global endeavor. However, as innovative as this vehicle of
engendering global sustainable development is, it is regrettably, not flawless. The SDGs have
147 See, P.W. Birnie, A.E. Boyle and C. Redgwell, International law and the environment (3rd ed. edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2009). Ulrich. Beyerlin and T. Marauhn, International environmental law, Oxford: Hart. (2011). 148 Sustainable Economic Growth is covered by Goal 8 of the SDGs.
149The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2016,Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2017/2). Available at: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2016/leaving-no-one-behind Accessed 10 May 2018.
27
indeed been criticized as merely aspirational goals like its predecessors,150 articulating
excessively broad expanse of goals,151 a voluntary agreement rather than a binding treaty and
ultimately, states might fail to perform or achieve all of the goals expectations.152
In all probability, this flexibility of the SDGs could prove to be an attenuating factor as much
of the responsibility for securing the SDGs is reliant on political actors, institutions or civil
society. Nonetheless, the SDG framework creates opportunities for states in adopting more
ambitious plans or targets due to their non-binding nature. However, a truly challenging area, remains that same “integrative” component inalienable to the concept of sustainable
development, upholding the unification of divergent goals. This integration often poses
practical application or implementation challenges. For instance, positive efforts to achieve
goals 1, 2 and 8, relating to poverty eradication, food security, improved nutrition, sustainable
agriculture and sustainable economic growth, may impose challenging demands on Goals 6
and 15, relating to the sustainable use of water, including management of terrestrial spaces.
Moreover, other potentially contradictory or criticized areas include: Goal 12 which advocates
sustainable consumption, though laudable, is yet discordant with Goal 8, which targets
increased inclusive and sustained economic growth, GDP growth and increased economic
productivity everywhere else.153 Arguably, this demand for increased or sustained economic
growth everywhere, comprising developing and least developed states without a corresponding
articulation of how developed countries may rein-in development ambitions or over-
consumption appears counter-productive in optimizing climate action targets articulated in
150 J.H. Spangenberg, ‘Hot Air or Comprehensive Progress? A Critical Assessment of the SDGs’ (2016) Sustainable Development 25(4), 311–321.
151 Sam Adelman, “The Sustainable Development Goals, Anthropocentrism and Neoliberalism” in Sustainable Development
Goals: Law, Theory and Implementation, edited by Duncan French, and Louis J. Kotzé, Edward Elgar Publishing, Incorporated, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com
152 Ibid.
153 See, Louis J. Kotze, “The Sustainable Development Goals: An Existential Critique Alongside Three New-Millennial Analytical Paradigms” in Sustainable Development Goals: Law, Theory and Implementation, edited by Duncan French, and Louis J. Kotzé, Edward Elgar, (2018).
28
Goal 13. Apparently, such an omission to differentiate apposite growth objectives between
developing and developed states smacks of incoherence or discordance with scientific realities
and could be detrimental to the actualization of the SDGs climate action and environmental
protection goals.154
The challenges of integrating the SDGs notwithstanding, the 17 goals and 169 targets remain
so closely interlinked that it is inconceivable in practical terms to accomplish them on a stand-
alone basis. Presumably, the SDGs seek to circumvent its implementation challenges via
anchoring heavily on a broad-based participation, in co-opting local and international
partnerships for sustainable development articulated by goals 16-17.155 Nonetheless, this
possible reliance on international partnerships articulated by Goal 17 is equally controversial.
Goal 17 which targets broad-based partnerships, international cooperation and collaboration,
more trade liberalisation, also alludes to the need to ‘enhance global macroeconomic stability’
through ‘policy coordination’.156 It is however decried for lacking specific targets towards
providing such macro-economic stability, policy coordination, including the means towards
achieving these aims.157
Moreover, the SDGs have incurred scathing criticisms on neglecting the issue of tax avoidance,
tax evasion or debt service, which as posited by the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (UNCTAD), drain developing, resource dependent countries of massive sums of
national incomes that could better optimize poverty eradication.158 Another diminishing factor
154 R. Fletcher and C. Rammelt, ‘Decoupling: A Key Fantasy of the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda’ (2016) Globalizations.
155 To be discussed in subsequent sections. 156 See, Goal 17.13 of the SDGs.
157 See, Louis J. Kotze, “The Sustainable Development Goals: An Existential Critique Alongside Three New-Millennial Analytical Paradigms” in Sustainable Development Goals: Law, Theory and Implementation, edited by Duncan French, and Louis J. Kotzé, Edward Elgar Publishing, Incorporated, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central,
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/lancaster/
158 Developing countries lose about $100 billion annually due to tax avoidance by transnational corporations: Tax Justice Network, ‘UNCTAD: multinational tax avoidance costs developing countries $100 billion+’, 26 March 2015
29
of the SDGs is that, whereas they articulate ‘debt financing, debt relief and debt restructuring,
as may be appropriate’ the SDGs are curiously silent on debt cancellation, which remains a
negating feature as it weighs heavily on developing states incomes and is thus inimical to their
sustainable development.159
However, it may also be argued that, Goal 17 and its targets as expressed in 17.4 to “assist
developing countries in attaining long-term debt sustainability through coordinated policies
aimed at fostering debt financing, debt relief and debt restructuring, as appropriate, and address the external debt of highly indebted poor countries to reduce debt distress” presents a platform
for a downwards review, re-negotiation and possible cancellation of external debts to reduce
debt distress of poor countries. Such a debt relief or restructuring feature, could also operate as
a safety catch to discourage waste or arbitrary use of development funds, as indeed
mismanagement of development funds, presents real challenges in developing countries with
weak institutions that foment corruption.
Arguably, the most criticized feature of the SDGs includes the absence of a hierarchy or goals prioritization. Kotze argues that the SDGs, “…Being fragmented, silo-ist and non-hierarchical
merely reinforces the potential of the SDGs to be used by states as a legitimating and
justificatory foundation to prioritise socio-economic growth over environmental protection”.160
Undoubtedly, the SDGs could have been more proactive or incisive if it had clarified some
hierarchical formulation for accomplishing the goals. This could better optimize its efficiency
as a targeted governance tool for actualizing eco-systems sustainability. More so, as
particularly prioritizing environmental goals over other goals ultimately engenders the over-
July 2018. See also C. Fuest and N. Riedel, ‘Tax Evasion and Tax Avoidance in Developing Countries: The Role of International Profit Shifting’ (Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation, 2010).
159The World Bank estimates that developing countries have paid more than $4.2tn in interest payments since 1980.
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ accessed 5 July 2018.
160 See, Louis J. Kotze, “The Sustainable Development Goals: An Existential Critique Alongside Three New-Millennial Analytical Paradigms” in Sustainable Development Goals: Law, Theory and Implementation, edited by Duncan French, and Louis J.- Kotzé, Edward Elgar, (2018).
30
arching aims of sustainable development. This is because, development invariably remains
sustainable when actuated within the confines of the earth’s ecological capacity.
Nevertheless, it is herein argued that, although the SDGs may not be considered as the “new
global Grundnorm for achieving global governance”,161 towards catalysing the earth’s system
integrity or ecological sustainability, the SDGs, at least from the developing country
perspective, presents a viable launch-pad, albeit rudimentary, towards accessing pathways to
sustainable development. Indeed, as argued in this research, the SDGs present a relatable
compass to navigate towards oil industry sustainability that need not result in the impairment
of both environmental and social pillars of the sustainable development paradigm during oil
and gas exploitation.
31
PART B
1.3. International Cooperation and Partnerships: Enhancing Governance for Sustainable