Alberto Andreu Pinillos (Ph.D.), Senior Advisor at ATREVIA and economics professor at the University of Navarra, has recently published a reflection in Diario Responsable, a media company specializing in Corporate Social Responsibility, entitled “Let’s Stop Fiddling Around With SDGs!”
“I’m sorry to say it this way, but I’m sick and tired of seeing the SDGs PIN and logo everywhere as if it were a pretty poster sold at flea markets for decoration. It’s not that I’m a “denier” of the 2030 Agenda. No; it’s just that I’m fed up with the SDG-Washing and with the companies fiddling around with the 17 goals to show a hypothetical “commitment” to sustainable development that, in most cases, does not go beyond using a logo to jump on the bandwagon.
The worst thing is that this “manipulation” occurs in all areas, both on the companies and the public authorities’ side. I will try to explain why.
As far as the corporate level is concerned, and if we are honest, today, many companies use the SDGs as mere “Communication Packaging” and a framework to tell what they have been doing for years. On the contrary, it is not a screening technique to make crucial decisions (i.e., changing the way of doing things or, above all, putting an end to programs that go against sustainability). Taking this argument a bit further, we could very well take any report before 2015, the SDG launch date, and “package” the actions taken under the umbrella of the 2030 Agenda… and nothing would happen.
The data is quite conclusive. In a survey conducted by Fundación Seres and ATREVIA from January 19 to February 19, 2021, 88% of the companies surveyed used the SDGs as a framework for communicating the actions they were already developing in terms of CSR/Sustainability. Still, only 18% took them into account as a screening filter in the decision-making process. Two other figures complement this data: 85% of the companies surveyed had never ended a project in progress or stopped a project in the launch phase due to the SDGs influence. Only 7% stated that they had stopped a project because it violated the 2030 Agenda.
In my opinion, the SDGs “fly too high” for companies. Of the 169 targets that make up the 17 Goals, it is difficult to find one that can go without being translated into manageable and actionable indicators for companies. Likewise, it is not easy to find a company that positively impacts more than five goals. However, a report by BlackRock entitled “Sustainable Investing: Integrating the UN SDGs in Investments” states “our mapping of the 980 financially material sustainability indicators identified by Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) to the 242 UN SDG country indicators has unveiled a match as high as 70%.”
Even so, I consider it rather difficult for the SDGs to translate directly into day-to-day business, contrary to the EU regulatory processes for sustainable finance (taxonomy), sustainability reporting, sustainable corporate governance, or due diligence, to give just a few examples. In other words: the regulatory tsunami coming from Europe does have a direct impact on the day-to-day management of companies, while the SDGs remain somewhat as a mere inspiration”.
