TOOLS FOR IDENTIFYING SDGS INTERACTIONS FOR DOMESTIC POLICY INTEGRATION

InternationalJournalofHumanities andSocialSciences(IJHSS)

ISSN(P):2319–393X;ISSN(E):2319–3948

Vol.11,Issue2,Jul–Dec2022;85–100 ©IASET

TOOLSFORIDENTIFYINGSDGSINTERACTIONSFORDOMESTICPOLICY INTEGRATION

AlizanMahadi

ResearchScholarInstituteofStrategicandInternationalStudies(ISIS)MalaysiaandGraduateSchoolofMediaand Governance,KeioUniversity,Tokyo,Japan

ABSTRACT

Theconceptofsustainabledevelopmentischaracterisedbyintegratingthesocial,economicandenvironmental dimensions.Inaddressingitsimplementation,literatureongoverningforsustainabledevelopmenthavedemonstrated littlesuccessinpolicyintegration.TheadventoftheSustainableDevelopmentGoals(SDGs)washailedastheturning pointtowardsbetterintegrationwiththeoutcomedocumentemphasisingthatitmustbeseenasanintegratedpackage withthegoalsandtargetsindivisiblefromeachother.Nonetheless,asanoutcomeofapoliticalprocess,ithasbeen criticisedfromascientificperspectiveofachievingalowlevelofintegration.Thispaperattemptstoassessthepromise ofSDGsofmovingtowardsintegrationbyassessingtwolevelsoflinkages.Firstly,toolsforidentifyingfunctional linkagesacrossSDGtargetsareassessed.Secondly,thepoliticallinkages,andmorespecifically,theinstitutional arrangementsoftheidentifiedissuelinkagesarethenidentifiedtodeterminewhetherthereisacorrelationormismatch betweenthetwotypesoflinkages.Acasestudytoidentifyandimplementtheissuelinkagesofthedriversandbenefitof forestcover(SDG15.1)inMalaysiawasundertakenforthispurpose.Theresultsdemonstratedthatbyusinga combinationofexistingapproachessuchasscoringofinteractionoftheSDGsandissuemappingthroughnetwork analysisclustersofstronglyinter-linkedissuessuchastheForest-Climate-Resiliencenexuscanbeidentified.The causalitiesbetweentheissuelinkagesare,however,difficulttoinferduetounreliabledata,resultinginhigher uncertaintiesinmorecomplexsystemsandrequiringtoolssuchasintegratedmodelling.Inconclusion,thefindings suggestthattheSDGs,supplementedwithexistingtools,canbeastartingpointtoidentifyissuelinkagesofstrongly linkedclusters.Thislendsitselftoapiece-mealapproachofaddressingissuelinkagesratherthanintegrationasa whole,whichmayprovetobemorepragmaticintheshorterterm.

KEYWORDS:SDGs,Interlinkages,PolicyIntegration,Biodiversity,SustainableDevelopment

ArticleHistory

Received:20Jul2022|Revised:04Aug2022|Accepted:08Aug2022

1.INTRODUCTION

TheSustainableDevelopmentGoals(SDGs)implementationisrequiredtobetakenasanintegratedpackagewiththe goalsandtargetsindivisiblefromeachother(UnitedNations,2015).Thisrequirestheunderstandingofscientific synergiesandtrade-offsalongwiththesocialissuelinkagesbetweenthem.Themulti-levelandmulti-scale complexity(Cashetal.,2003)hasseenvariousapproachesfrommultipledisciplines,includinginterdisciplinaryand trans-disciplinaryapproachesthatareholistic,multi-sectoralandmultidimensional,toidentifysynergisticlinkages

www.iaset.us

editor@iaset.us

betweeninstitutions,issue-areas,resources,policydomains,stakeholdersandsoon.However,thefactthattheSDGs constituteofindividual17goalsand169targets,howtoachieveintegrationisunclear.

Addressinginterlinkagesisalsomiredinconfusion.

Inunderstandingapproachestodefine,identifyandimplementkeysynergisticissuelinkages,thispaper undertookabriefreviewofthecurrentstudiesrelatedtoaddressinginteractionsinthecontextoftheSDGs.Asthenext sectionswilldemonstrate,issuelinkages,byitsnatureinaddressingacomplexlandscape,canbeapproachedinmultiple waysfromvariousdisciplinesaswellasviewpoints.Thispaperisnotanexhaustivereviewofissuelinkagesbutfocused onlyonthoseinrelationtoSDGs.Inorganizingthepaper,thefirstsectionreviewsthecurrentapproachestoaddressor identifythenaturalissuelinkagesfromascientificperspective.Thesearestudiestoidentifythelinkagesinbiophysicalor socioeconomictermsorwhatOranYoungcalls‘functionallinkages’(Young,2002).Thesecondsectionlooksatthe institutionaldimensions,alsoknownasthepoliticallinkageswhereactorsdeliberatelyseeklinkagestowardsachievinga certaingoal.Thethirdsectionprovidesacasestudyofpolicycoherenceeffortsinmainstreamingtheconservationof biodiversityinMalaysia.Thiswouldprovidepracticallessonsforeffortsinimplementationofpolicyintegration.

1.ToolsforsynergisticNaturalIssuelinkagesacrossSDGs

Naturalissuelinkages,orfunctionallinkagesarethelinkagesacrossissuesinbiophysicalorsocioeconomicterms(Young, 2002).Science,byitsnature,oftenderivescausallinkagesandcorrelationsbetweendifferentsetsofvariables.TheSDGs beingapoliticalprocess,itwascriticisedforhavingalackofscientificbasisinaddressinginterlinkagesacrossbythe InternationalCouncilofScience(ICSU)andInternationalSocialScienceCouncil(ISSC).Initsreviewofthegoalsand ICSU&ISSCraisedconcernsthatthegoalsarepresentedinasiloapproach(ICSU&ISSC,2015).Itisalsomadeclearin thereportthatthereneedstobecautioninassessingtheinteractionsbetweengoalsandtargetsastheinteractionsaremore densewhenassessedscientificallycomparedtowhenanalysingitsemanticallyorthroughlanguage.

Approachestoidentifyissuelinkageshaveemergedinmanyformsincludingnexusbetweenresourcesaswellas policydomains,identificationofthresholds(i.e.planetaryboundaries),cross-sectoralimpacts,valuationstudies,integrated assessmentsandsoon.Whatisclearisthattheseapproachesvarywidelyfromeachother.Furthermore,thereisoften confusiononwhatexactlyisthepurposeoftheresearchoninterlinkages,whetheritisproblemidentification,orproblemsolving.Literaturefromsustainabilitysciencehighlightsthedifferencebetweendescriptive-analyticalwith transformationalmodeofscience(Langetal.,2012;Wiek,Ness,Schweizer-Ries,Brand,&Farioli,2012)

Threecategoriestoorganisetoolstoaddressinterlinkageswereidentifiedbasedonresearchontrans-disciplinary science(Hadorn,Bradley,Pohl,Rist,&Wiesmann,2006).Thesearesystemsknowledge,targetknowledgeand transformationknowledge.ThesearereviewedfurtherbelowinthecontextoftheSDGstobothfurtherunderstandingin thedefinitionofinterlinkagesastoidentifythetools.

1.1SystemsKnowledge

Systemsknowledgeputsimply,isunderstandinghowthesystemworks.Itislargelybasedonempiricalprocessesand evidence.Inunderstandinginterlinkagesacrossissue-areas,itreliesonsystemsthinkingtounderstandinteractionsacross multiplevariables.Systemsthinkingischaracterisedbyafewshiftsinthinkingfrommoreconventionaltomodern, sometimesreferredtoCartesian,science.Thesearefromreductionisttoholistic;fromanalysistosynthesisandfromself assertivetointegrative(Capra2012).Theemphasisisinfocusingonthewholeratherthanitspartsandonthepatternsand

relationshipsratherthanonobjects.Furthercontributionfromcomplexitytheoryhasallowedittoflourishwithfurther shiftingfromfocusingoncertaintytoapproximateknowledgeandfromlineartonon-linearincludingfeedbackloops.

InthecontextofSDGs,systemknowledgewouldhelpproblematizetheinteractionsacrosscertaingoalsandtargetsin highlightingthetrade-offsandsynergiesacrosscertaingoalsandtargets.SomeofthetoolsemployedinrelationtoSDGs arehighlightedbelow.

1.1.1NexusApproach

Recently,anexusapproachhasgainedcurrency,suchasthewater-energy-foodnexusinlinkingdifferentissueareasorpolicy domains,andinparticularaddressingnexusbetweenresources(Andrews-Speedetal.,2012;Bazilianetal.,2011;UNESCAP, 2013).EventheWorldEconomicForumadoptedthenexusapproachinidentifyingthewater-energy-foodnexusasoneofthe globalrisksin2011(WorldEconomicForum,2011).Establishinginterconnectionbetweendifferentresourcesorissues,it identifiestherequirementofoneresourceasaninputtoproduceanotherorfromthesubstitutabilityoftwoormoreresources acrossspaceandtime(Andres-Speedetal.,2012).Italsoidentifiesactions(i.e.governmentpolicy)thathaveconsequences forotherresources.Inliterature,thenexusapproachoftenaddressesinterconnectionsacrossmorethantworesources(i.e. minimumthree)andinvestigatestheirinterconnectionsinbothdirections,includingitsfeedbacks.

DirectlyrelatedtotheSDGs,theGlobalSustainableDevelopmentReport(GSDR),establishedasthesciencepolicyinterfaceonsustainabledevelopment,emphasizedstronglyoninterlinkagesandutilisedanexusapproachinits prototypereport(UnitedNations,2016).Itutilisesanintegratedapproachthatlooksatclustersofstronglyinterlinked issuesratherthanintegratedassessmentsasawhole.Thiscreatesanassessmentofassessmentsmodelthatisadoptedin thesubsequentGSDRiterations.Itidentifiedanumberofnexusessuchasclimate-land-energyandwater;oceansand livelihoods;industrializationandsustainableconsumptionandproduction;andinfrastructure,inequalityandresilience; thatarerelevanttotheimplementationoftheSDGs.Thepurposeistoidentifyinterlinkedemergingchallengesforpolicyrelevantresearch.

1.1.2ScoringofInteractionAcrossSDGs

ToguideunderstandingoftheinteractionbetweenSDGs,ICSUproducedanassessmentframeworkthatidentifies“the causalandfunctionalrelationsunderlyingprogressorachievementofthesustainabledevelopmentgoalsortargets”(ICSU, 2017:pg9).Itemploysascoringframeworkwithseventypesofinteractionswiththemostpositiveratedscoringof+3 andthemostnegative-3.Thisallowsfornotonlyhighlightingthesynergiesandtrade-offsbutalsothedegreeandstrength ofitsinteractions.Inlinewiththeideaofsystemsknowledge,theframeworkisnotmeantforprioritysettingbutratheras atooltoinformpotentialinteractions.

1.1.3LinkagesthroughGoalSettingLanguage

TheinteractionbetweenSDGscanbeassessednotonlyfromanaturalscienceperspectivebutalsofromthewordingused asagoalsettingstrategy.Recentexampleshavedemonstratedanapproachwhichadoptedanalysedthewordingused towardsunderstandinghowthegoalsandtargetsarelinked(Kanieetal.,2015;LeBlanc,2015).Theseareoftenmapped outthroughnetworkanalysisorothertoolstodemonstratetherelationshipbetweenthedifferentgoalsandtargets.

1.2TargetKnowledge

Wheresystemsknowledgedemonstrateswhattheproblemis,targetknowledgehelpsyouunderstandwhereyouwantto go.Itfocusesonthepurposiveaspectofmovingtowardbetterpractices.Beyondunderstandingthenatureoftheproblem, therationaleistheneedtounderstandthepracticesofactorsinunderstandinghowtogetthere.Whilethisimpliesafocus oninstitutionaldimensions(ofwhichwillbecoveredinthenextsection),italsofocusesontheprocessofresearchand knowledgegenerationthroughparticipatoryapproaches(Hadornetal.,2006;Langetal.,2012).Theneedfordialogue beyondonlyresearchersisarguedtobenecessarywhendealingwithcomplexinteractionsduetothehighuncertainty. Thispost-normalmodeofscience(Funtowicz&Ravetz,1993)requiresprocessestoestablishacommonunderstandingon problemexistence.

1.1.4ExpertJudgement

Duetotheuncertaintiesdescribedabove,expertjudgementisrequiredtowardsachievingahighdegreeofconsensuson problemexistence.Althoughthismaynotnecessarilyincludeexpertsfrombeyondtheresearcharea,itmayalsoinclude otherknowledgesystemsincludingthoseworkinginpracticeaswellasindigenousandlocalknowledge.Forexample,the ICSUscoringframeworkreliesonbothexistingliteratureandexpertjudgementinitsframework.Toachieveahighdegree ofconsensusaprocesstointerfacedifferentsetsofactorssuchasascience-policyinterface(Koetz,Farrell,& Bridgewater,2012;vandenHove,2007;Watson,Soc,&Watson,2005)platform.TheGSDRistheplatformthataimsto interfacescientistanddecision-makersandreceivesinputfromexpertsinpreparationforitsreport.

1.1.5Co-ProductionofKnowledge

Thetermco-productionofknowledgeisbothusedinananalyticalandpracticalsense.ScienceandTechnologyStudies (STS)analysestherelationshipbetweenscienceandsocietywhileasatool,platforms,networksandbodiesareapplying theterminamorepracticalsense(vanderHel,2016).FutureEarth,inparticular,institutionalizesco-productionasacore principleinitsfunction.Thisconsistsofco-designoftheresearchagendathroughsectoralintegrationwithstakeholders anddecision-makers,co-productionofknowledgethroughscientificintegrationandfinallyco-disseminationofresults amongdifferentsocietalgroups(Mauseretal.,2013).

1.3TransformationKnowledge

Transformativeknowledgeallowsustounderstandhowyouaregoingwhereyouwanttogo.Takingaccountbothtarget andsystemsknowledge,ithighlightsthepossibletransformativepathways.

1.1.6ScenarioAnalysis

Integratedscenariosare“coherentandplausiblestories,toldinwordsandnumbers,aboutthepossibleco-evolutionary pathwaysofcombinedhumanandenvironmentalsystems”(Swart,etal.,2004:pg139).Theobjectiveisnottopredictthe future,butratherhelpunderstanduncertaintiesinarangeofpossiblealternativefutures(Mossetal.,2010).Previously, systemsmodellingusingmathematicalsimulationshavebeenappliedtoforecastthefuture(i.e.limitstogrowth).Perhaps morerelevanttotheSDGsduetoitsgoalsettingstrategy,abackcastingapproachbyenvisioningdesirablefutureshave beenundertakentostimulatebothsimulationsanddiscussionsonhowtogetthere(Swartetal.,2004)

Inthecontextofsustainabledevelopment,earthsystemssciencehasmadetremendousprogressinunderstanding howtheearthsystemworks.Thisisinpartduetothecollaborativeinternationalresearchonglobalenvironmentalchange

programmessuchastheInternationalBiosphereGeosphereProgramme(IGBP)(Sunietal.,2015).Inclimatescience,the useofscenariosanalysesintheIntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange(IPCC)hasbeenacentralcomponentofits work(Mossetal.,2010).DirectlyrelatedtotheSDGsandinattempttoevenbroadertheintegrationofscenariosbeyond thenaturalsciences,theInternationalInstituteforAppliedSystemsAnalysis(IIASA)isundertakinganambitious scientificinitiativecalledtheTheWorldin2050toaddressthefullspectrumoftransformationalchallenges(IIASA, 2017).Anotherinitiativeasapolicycoherencetool,theSDGmodelprovidesanintegratedanalysisthroughsimulatingthe fundamentaltrendsforSDGsuntil2030andbeyond(MillenniumInstitute,2016).

Theapproachesabovedemonstratedarangeoftoolstoaddressinterlinkages.Afewcharacteristicsof interlinkagescanbefoundinalltheapproaches.Adoptingasystemsthinkingapproach,itoftengoesbeyondlinkingtwo issue-areastogetherandintegratesmultipleinterconnectedissues.Withthefocusoninter,itconsidersbothdirectionsof interactionsaswellasincorporatefeedbackloops.WecanbegintodefineinterlinkagesinthecontextofSDGs,then,asa clusterofstronglyinterlinkedgoalsortargetsthatinteractsbeyondalinearprocess.Theimplicationsarethatinterlinkages (asopposedtolinkages)applytothosebetweentwogoalsortargetsonlyiftheinteractionsareinbothdirections.Inother cases,itisappliedtointeractionbetweenthreeormoregoalsandtargets.

2.THEINSTITUTIONALDIMENSIONOFISSUELINKAGES

Articulationoftheinterlinkagesacrossgoalsandtargetsenablesustounderstandwhyweshouldaddresstheminan integratedmanner.Understandinghowweaddressthemrequiresinquiryintotheinstitutionaldimensions.Institutional analysiscanbeapproachedinmultipleways.WhiletheSDGsisarguedtobea‘governance-through-goals’model(Kanie andBiermann2017),andintheabsenceofrules,notstrictlyspeakinganinternationalregime,thereismuchtobegained fromliteratureonregimeanalysis.Inparticular,regimeeffectiveness(Krasneretal.,1982),andinthiscase,itsabilityto influenceoutcomesoninterlinkedareasisonepossibleareaforfurtherresearch.Literatureoninstitutionalinterplay,in particular,hasprovidedboththeoreticalandempiricalunderstandingoninstitutionalinteractions(Gehring&Oberthür, 2004;Oberthür&Gehring,2006;Young,2002)

Architecture,whichlooksattheoverarchingsystemofinstitutionsasproposedbyBiermannandothersinthe EarthSystemsGovernanceprogramme,couldalsoprovidekeyinsightsintoissuesofstructure,designandeffectiveness. It’sfocusonaddressingthe“interlockingwebofprinciples,institutionsandpracticesthatshapedecisionsbystakeholders atalllevels”(Biermann,2007:pg7)ratherthananalysisonsingleinstitutionslendsitselfasausefulframeworkto addressinstitutionalinterlinkages.Researchhasrecentlybeenmorefocusedonthegloballevel,andinparticular, strengtheningtheUNsystem(Biermannetal.,2012).Movingbeyondconventionalmodesofgovernance,intermediaries alsoplayacrucialroleinimplementationintheoverallarchitecture.Researchontheroleoforchestration,whichfocuses oninternationalorganisationsthatenlistsandsupportsintermediaryactorsasanindirectmodeofgovernance(Abbottet al.,2015;Abbottetal.,2012)providesapromisingapproachindealingwiththecomplexlandscapeingoverning interlinkedclustersofareasandinstitutions.

Yetanotherapproachisanalysingthedesignofprocessesthatencouragetheunderstandinginrelationtothe policyobjectivesanditseffectivenessandoutcomes.Thecomplexityinherentinresearchoninterlinkageswouldnaturally requirerelationsbetweenscienceandpolicy,knownasthescience-policyinterface.Assessinginteractionsbetween scienceanddecision-making,atthegloballevelinparticular,hasseenalargeinterestinrecenttimeswithglobalsciencepolicypanelssuchastheIntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange(IPCC)andtheIntergovernmentalPlatformon

BiodiversityandEcosystemServices(IPBES).Whileconfigurationsordesignforbetterscience-policyinterfacesarealso proposed(Koetzetal.,2012),muchoftheresearchiscentredonthedesignofprocessesofinteractionsbetweenscience andpolicy(vandenHove,2007).Beyondthescience-policyinterface,thefieldsofknowledgegovernancefocusesonthe processoflinkagesbetweenresearch-basedknowledgeandaction(vanKerkhoff,2013;vanKerkhoff&Lebel,2006)as wellasprocessesofsociallearningincludingco-productionofknowledge(Clarketal.,2016)

Thefinalapproachreviewedisanempiricalapproachthatlooksintothedynamicsofactorconfiguration.Methodologies suchassocialnetworkanalysis(SNA)hasbeenadoptedtostudythesocialrelationshipsandsocialstructuresof individuals,groupsandorganisationsofwhichinteractandformstablesocialstructuresornetworks(Marín&Berkes, 2010).Researchquestionsincludenetworkcentrality,densityalongwithmoresubjectivetraitssuchastrustandlearning. Thisactorbasedfocusresearchapproachhasdemonstratedthatnosingleactorexercisesinfluenceindependentofothers anduntanglingtheactorconfigurationcouldprovideimportantoutcomestowardsbestgovernancepractices(Kanieetal., 2013).Inthecontextofassessingissuelinkages,identifyingthesynergisticactorrelationsofdifferencefieldsaswellas acrossscienceandpolicyanddifferentsetsofactorsisanimportanttask.

3.APPLYINGTOOLSFORPOLICYINTEGRATIONOFBIODIVERSITYCONSERVATIONIN MALAYSIA

TounderstandtheutilityoftheSDGs,aselectionoftheavailabletoolsareadoptedinanattempttounderstandhowthe SDGscanbeutilisedforaddressinginterlinkagesatthepolicymakinglevel.Forthepurposeofthispaper,onlytoolsthat canbedirectlyappliedwithoutrequiringastakeholderorexpertprocessengagementareconsideredasthestartingpointis theSDGsitself,ratherthanahypotheticalinstitutionalsetupthatwascreatedduetotheSDGs.Withthisinmind,ICSU’s guidetoSDGsinteractionisselectedasitprovidesasimpleguidelinethataimstoprovideastartingpointfor policymakers(ICSU,2017)

3.1NaturalIssueLinkagesofBiodiversityinMalaysia

1.1.7LinkagesofBiodiversityConservationthroughtheICSU’sSDGsGuideforInteractions

Thescoringframeworkisappliedtotarget15.1(biodiversityconservation)1inMalaysia.Selectionofacountryasacase studyprovidescontexttotheanalysis.Tofurtherestablishacausalrelationshipbetweenthetargets,theindicator,(15.1.1) forestareaasaproportionoftotallandarea,isusedasastartingpoint.Assuch,alltargetsoftheSDGsareanalysedin bothdirectionsofinteractions,includingwhethertheyaredriversorbenefitsofforestcover.Intheabsenceofanexpert judgementprocess,theidentificationandstrengthoftheinteractionisbasedonliteraturereview()2.Thescoring frameworkallowedfortheunderstandingofthelinkagesbetweenonetarget(inthiscaseforestcover)withothertargetsof theSDGs.Itallowsforidentifyingbothsynergisticlinkagesaswellastrade-offsbutmoresignificantly,istheabilityto identifythestrengthofthoseinteractions.Theresultsshowthattargetsonagriculture,waterandclimatechange,in

1By2020,ensuretheconservation,restorationandsustainableuseofterrestrialandinlandfreshwaterecosystemsandtheir services,inparticularforests,wetlands,mountainsanddrylands,inlinewithobligationsunderinternational agreements(UnitedNations,2015)

2Neutralinteractionsarenotincludedinthetable.

particular,isinextricablylinkedwithahighscoreinputted.Thesedemonstratethatthestrengthsoftheinterlinkagesare mainlythosethatarewithinthepolicyfieldsorexistinglinkagesacrossissue-areas(i.e.foodandforest).Additionally,the strengthoftrade-offsarealsoidentifiedwhicharemainlycontextual.Forexample,increasingtheshareofrenewable energymaypossiblyexacerbatebiodiversitylosswhereashifttowardsbiofuelsbasedonoilpalmwillresultin deforestationloss.Basedonliteraturereview,amajorlimitationisthelackofscientificevidenceanddatainestablishinga highlevelofconfidenceinthescoringofthestrengthofinteraction.Thelegitimacyoftheresultswillimprovethroughan expertjudgementprocess.

1.1.8InterlinkagesofForestCoverthroughNetworkAnalysis

WhileoperationalizingtheICSUframeworkoninteractionsallowedtheidentificationofthestrengthoflinkages,itdoesn't allowunderstandingthecentralityofthelinkages,orinotherwords,theclustersofstronglyinterlinkedtargets.By applyinganotherlayerofinteractionstoexpandthelinkagesnotonlywithtarget15.1,butalsothelinkagesbetweeneach other,webegintoidentifytheclustersofstronglyinterlinkedareasthroughanetworkanalysismethodology().Utilisinga graphtheorymethodology(Barnes&Harary,1983),thecentralityofvarioustargetscanbecomputed.Inparticular,three typesofinterlinkagescanbevisualizedandcalculatedbasedontheircentrality.Firstly,betweennesscentrality,calculates theshortestpathoflinkingonenodetoanother(Berkowitz,1982).Inthecontexthere,itrepresentsthemoststrongly interlinked(basedonweightedstrengthofinteraction)targets.Thebiodiversity-climate-resiliencenexusisidentified, primarilyduetothehighstrengthoflinkageswithgoalsonclimatechangeandadaptivecapacity.Secondly,isthedegree centrality,orputsimply,thenumberoflinks(oredges)connectedtoanode,regardlessofitsweightage.Thegovernance targetsrelatedtogoal16arethehighestfollowedbyeducationforsustainabledevelopment(target4.7).Thisdemonstrates aconsistencywiththenotionthateducationandgovernancearetheindirectandunderlyingdriversofbiodiversityloss (Díaz,Fargione,Chapin,&Tilman,2006).Thirdly,istheabilitytohighlightthenegativeinteractionsandtheir interlinkageswithothertargetsalongwiththepossibilitytotraceitsnegativeimpactstoothertargets.

Similartotheprevioussection,theveracityandlegitimacyfromascientificperspectiveisnotguaranteedanda processofexpertjudgmentwouldstrengthentheabilitytoidentifytheseinterlinkages.However,asapolicycoherence tool,itprovidesausefulapproachtovisualiseandcomputetheclustersofstronglyinterlinkedissuesasanentrypointfor policydiscourse.

3.2InstitutionalDimensionsofBiodiversityinMalaysia

Followingtheidentificationofthebiodiversity-climate-resiliencenexusasacentralconcern,theinstitutionaldimensions oftheselinkagesareinvestigated.TheinstitutionalarrangementinMalaysiaaddressingtheareasconsistofvarious councils,ministriesandagenciesaddressingspecificissuesrelatedtothenexus.

Atthecoordinatinglevel,biodiversityandclimatechangeareplacedunderdifferentministries.Biodiversityisunder theMinistryofEnergyandNaturalResourcesandclimatechangeisundertheMinistryofEnvironmentandWater.The NationalBiodiversityCouncilandtheMalaysiaClimateActionCouncil(MyCAC)coordinatestheirspecificissue-areas whiletheNationalSecurityCouncilunderthePrimeMinister’sDepartmentaddressesnaturalhazards(i.e.floods).Disaster managementontheotherhand,isatthePrimeMinister’sDepartment.Attheagencylevel,variousdepartmentsandinstitutes address,oftenspecificissue-areas.Theinstitutionalarrangementofthebiodiversity-climate-resiliencenexusinMalaysia demonstratesafragmentedlandscape.Whilecoordinationplatformsexist,theyalsoresidewithindifferentministries.

Asmentionedpreviously,astheSDGsisinitsearlyphasesofimplementation,institutionalanalysisoncertain aspectsofSDGsrequirefurtherconceptualrefininganddeservesapaperonitsown.Inparticular,movingawayfrom negativeframingtowardsunderstandinginteractionmanagementcanprovideinsightsintohowtoincreaseinteractions amongstinstitutions(Stokke,2008).Understandingtherelationshippatternsandtheregimecomplex(Raustiala&Victor, 2004)acrosscertaingoalsandtargetwillalsobebeneficialtomapouttheexistinginstitutionallinkagesacrossthegoals andtargets.

3.3TowardsatoolboxapproachforaddressingSDGInterlinkages

InorderfortheapproachestobeusedeffectivelyfortheSDGs,theknowledgegeneratedmustbeusable(W.C.Clarket al.,2016).Thismeansthatitmustbeaccurateandpoliticallytractable(Haas,2004).Toattainusableknowledgeby addressinginterlinkagesacrossSDGs,amatrixisdevelopedtounderstandthedifferenttypesofapproachesandbeginto developatoolboxtoaddressthem.

Lessonsfromliteratureonscience-policyinterfacedemonstratethatforknowledgetoresonatewithpolicymakers, itmustcredible,relevant(salient)andlegitimate(Cashetal.,2006;Koetzetal.,2012;vandenHove,2007).Credibilityis assumedtobelargelyachievedinthescientificprocess.Relevance,referringtotheabilitytoprovideconsensual,objective andvalidrationalesdirectlyrelatedtopolicyaction,isalsoassumedtobeaddressedbyundertakingtheoverallexercisean attempttoachievepolicyrelevance.Legitimacy,ontheotherhand,dependsonthelinksbetweenscientificandpolicy makingcommunities(Koetzetal.,2012).Achievingahighdegreeoflegitimacywouldthenrequirefocusoninclusionof cross-disciplinaryandextra-scientificactorsinknowledgeproduction(vanderHel,2016).Theapproachesreviewedin thispaperdemonstratedthatitslegitimacymayvarysignificantlydependingontheprocessundertakeninaddressingthe interlinkages.Tocategorisethisfurther,aspectrumofhighparticipationandlowparticipationcanbedistinguished.

Secondly,variousapproachescanbedistinguishedbasedontheirlevelofcomplexity.Ahighlycomplexsystemis characterisedbyinvolvingavarietyofinterconnectedactivitieswithoftenprofounduncertainty,resultinginapproximate knowledge(Underdal,2010)

Amatrixofthetwospectrumsallowsustoidentifyspecificapproachesaccordingtheirlevelofcomplexityand participation.Mostimportantly,participationrelatestoahigherdegreeoflegitimacyandhencewebegintoseethe possibilitiesinprovidingusableknowledgeforthecomplexinterlinkagesoftheSDGs.Organisingtheinformationinthis waydemonstratesthatfewprocessesofhighlycomplexsystemresearchhavingahighdegreeoflegitimacy.TheIPCCis anexceptionduetoanestablishedscience-policyinterfacethoughitsinstrumentalitystillsuffers,asitslegitimacyatthe decision-makinglevels(i.e.nationalandsub-nationals)islow.Intheshortterm,thereareproponentsthatarguefora piece-mealapproach(Haas,2014)duetothefeasibilityofitsimplementation.Particularly,alowercomplexitywithahigh degreeparticipationcanprovidealegitimateprocesstoatleastcatalysepolicydiscourseoninterlinkages.Thecasestudies aswellastheexamplesprovidedbyICSUdemonstratetheimportanceofanexpertjudgementprocesstolendcredibility andlegitimacytotheresults(ICSU,2017).Thechallengeremainsthatmanyhighlycomplexinterlinkagesandapproaches, suchasthevariousexercisesundertakenbyearthsystemsciencescholarsmayfinddifficultyintranslatingtowardsusable knowledge,andultimately,itspolicyuseifnoparticipatoryprocessesareconducted.

CONCLUSION

ThepapersetouttoinvestigatethetoolsavailabletoaddressinterlinkagesacrossgoalsandtargetsoftheSDGs.Bytesting thetoolsatthenationallevel,weseethatcontextisextremelyimportant,whereresultsmaydifferthangloballevel interactions.Althoughalternativepathwaysexistandmaybeimplemented,thetoolsavailableallowustohighlightthe potentialtrade-offsrelatedtoaspecificsituation.Aparticipatoryapproachisalsofoundtobeessential.Notonlywillit provideamodelforaco-productionofknowledgeingeneratingknowledgeacrossscales,itwillprovidelegitimacyto articulatingcomplexinterlinkagesinthepolicyprocess,whichwilllikelyrequirealongtermanditerativeprocessof policylearning.Inthiscontext,atoolboxofapproachesisproposedwheretoolsdealingwithlesscomplexinteractionscan belegitimateifcoupledwithparticipationofextrascientificactors.

REFERENCES

1.Abbott,K.W.,Bernstein,S.,Abbott,K.W.,&Bernstein,S.(2015).TheHigh-LevelPoliticalForumon SustainableDevelopment:OrchestrationbyDefaultandDesign.https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12199

2.Abbott,K.W.,Zangl,B.,&München,L.(2012).Orchestration:GlobalGovernancethroughIntermediaries,133.

3.Andrews-Speed,P.,Bleischwitz,R.,Boersma,T.,Johnson,C.,Kemp,G.,&VanDeveer,S.D.(2012).TheGlobal ResourceNexus:ThestruggleforLane,Energy,Food,Water,andMinerals.Washington:Transatlantic Academy.

4.Barnes,J.A.,&Harary,F.(1983).Graphtheoryinnetworkanalysis.SocialNetworks,5(2),235244. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(83)90026-6

5.Bazilian,M.,Rogner,H.,Howells,M.,Hermann,S.,Arent,D.,Gielen,D.,Yumkella,K.K.(2011).Considering theenergy,waterandfoodnexus:Towardsanintegratedmodellingapproach.EnergyPolicy,39(12),7896 7906.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.039

6.Berkowitz,S.D.(1982).AnIntroductiontoStructuralAnalysis:TheNetworkApproachtoSocialResearch. ContemporarySociology.https://doi.org/10.2307/2068120

7. Biermann,F.(2007).Earthsystemgovernanceasacrosscuttingthemeofglobalchangeresearch.Global EnvironmentalChange,17(34),326337.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.11.010

8.Biermann,F.,Abbott,K.,&Andresen,S.(2012).NavigatingtheAnthropocene:ImprovingEarthSystem Governance.Science,335(6074),13061307.https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1217255

9. Cash,D.W.,Clark,W.C.,Alcock,F.,Dickson,N.M.,Eckley,N.,Guston,D.H., Mitchell,R.B.(2003). Knowledgesystemsforsustainabledevelopment.ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciencesoftheUnited StatesofAmerica,100(14),80868091.https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1231332100

10.Clark,W.C.,VanKerkhoff,L.,Lebel,L.,&Gallopin,G.C.(2016).Craftingusableknowledgeforsustainable development.ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences,113(17),45704578. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1601266113

11.Clark,W.,&Holliday,L.(2006).Linkingknowledgewithactionforsustainabledevelopment:Theroleof programmanagement-summaryofaworkshop.Retrievedfromhttp://books.google.com.ezpprod1.hul.harvard.edu/books?hl=en&lr=&id=1kOC8SsxP5kC&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=Linking+knowledge+wit h+action+for+sustainable+development&ots=5NteiFqKkY&sig=OuN5kQLXp9VXKvNJcN_RQbHUzwM

12.Díaz,S.,Fargione,J.,Chapin,F.S.,&Tilman,D.(2006).Biodiversitylossthreatenshumanwell-being.PLoS Biology,4(8),13001305.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040277

13.DW,C.,WN,A.,Berkes,F.,Garden,P.,Lebel,L.,Cash,D.W., Young,O.(2006).Cross-ScaleDynamics: GovernanceandInformationinaMultilevelWorld.EcologyandSociety,11(2),819.https://doi.org/8

14.Funtowicz,S.,&Ravetz,R.(1993).ScienceforthePost-NormalAge,(September).

15.Gehring,T.,&Oberthür,S.(2004).ExploringRegimeInteraction:AFrameworkofAnalysis.Regime ConsequencesMethodologicalChallengesandResearchStrategies.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2208-1

16.Griggs,D.,Stafford-Smith,M.,Gaffney,O.,Rockstrom,J.,Ohman,M.C.,Shyamsundar,P.,Noble,I.(2013). Policy:Sustainabledevelopmentgoalsforpeopleandplanet.Nature,495(7441),305307. https://doi.org/http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v495/n7441/abs/495305a.html#supplementary-information

17.Haas,P.M.(1992).InternationalOrganizationFoundationIntroduction:EpistemicCommunitiesand InternationalPolicyCoordinationAuthor(s):PeterM.HaasSource:InternationalOrganization,Vol.46,No.1, Knowledge,Power,andInternationalPolicyCoordinati,46(1),135.

18.Haas,P.M.(2004).SciencePolicyforMultilateralEnvironmentalGovernance.EmergingForcesin EnvironmentalGovernance,(March).

19.Haas,P.M.(2015).IssueLinkageandtheProspectsforSDGsContributiontoSustainability.InF.Mancebo& I.Sachs(Eds.),TransitionstoSustainability.Dordrecht:SpringerScience+BusinessMedia. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9532-6

20.Hadorn,G.H.,Bradley,D.,Pohl,C.,Rist,S.,&Wiesmann,U.(2006).Implicationsoftransdisciplinarityfor sustainableresearch.EcologicalEconomics,60,119128.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.12.002

21.IIASA(2017).TheWorldin2050.InternationalInstituteofAppliedSystemsAnalysis,Retrievedfrom: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/research/researchProjects/TWI2050.html

22.ICSU.(2017).AGuidetoSDGInteractions:FromSciencetoImplementation.https://doi.org/10.24948/2017.01

23.ICSU&ISSC.(2015).ReviewofTargetsfortheSustainableDevelopmentGoals:TheSciencePerspective.Paris. Retrievedfromhttp://www.icsu.org/publications/reports-and-reviews/review-of-targets-for-the-sustainabledevelopment-goals-the-science-perspective-2015/SDG-Report.pdf

24.Jordan,A.(2008).Thegovernanceofsustainabledevelopment:takingstockandlookingforwards,26,1734. https://doi.org/10.1068/cav6

25.Kanie,N.,Aito,A.N.,Osaka,M.K.,Otoki,Y.M.,Guchi,M.I.,&Akemoto,K.T.(2015).Evaluating InterlinkagesbetweenHumanWell-beingandPlanetaryWell-beinginProposalsfortheSustainable DevelopmentGoals,131145.

26.Kanie,N.,Haas,P.M.,Andresen,S.,Auld,G.,Cashore,B.,Chasek,P.S.,Iguchi,M.(2004).Environment: ScienceandPolicyforSustainableDevelopmentGreenPluralism:LessonsforImprovedEnvironmental Governanceinthe21stCentury.

27.Kates,R.W.,Clark,C.W.,Corell,R.,Hall,J.M.,Jaeger,C.C.,Lowe,I., Svedin,I.(2001).Sustainability Science.Science,292(292),641642.

28.Koetz,T.,Farrell,K.N.,&Bridgewater,P.(2012).Buildingbetterscience-policyinterfacesforinternational environmentalgovernance:AssessingpotentialwithintheIntergovernmentalPlatformforBiodiversityand EcosystemServices.InternationalEnvironmentalAgreements:Politics,LawandEconomics,12(1),121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-011-9152-z

29.Krasner,S.D.,Organization,S.I.,&Spring,I.R.(1982).InternationalOrganizationFoundationStructural CausesandRegimeConsequences:RegimesasInterveningVariablesPublishedby:MITPressStableURL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2706520LinkedreferencesareavailableonJSTORforthisarticle:Youma,36(2), 185205.

30.Lang,D.J.,Wiek,A.,Bergmann,M.,Stauffacher,M.,Martens,P.,Moll,P., Thomas,C.J.(2012). Transdisciplinaryresearchinsustainabilityscience:Practice,principles,andchallenges.SustainabilityScience, 7(SUPPL.1),2543.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0149-x

31.LeBlanc,D.(2015).TowardsIntegrationatLast?TheSustainableDevelopmentGoalsasaNetworkofTargets. SustainableDevelopment,187(April),176187.https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1582

32.Marín,A.,&Berkes,F.(2010).Networkapproachforunderstandingsmall-scalefisheriesgovernance:Thecase oftheChileancoastalco-managementsystem.MarinePolicy,34(5),851858. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2010.01.007

33.Mauser,W.,Klepper,G.,Rice,M.,Schmalzbauer,B.S.,Hackmann,H.,Leemans,R.,&Moore,H.(2013). Transdisciplinaryglobalchangeresearch:Theco-creationofknowledgeforsustainability.CurrentOpinionin EnvironmentalSustainability,5(34),420431.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.07.001

34.MillenniumInstitute(2016).PolicyCoherenceandIntegrationtoachievetheSustainableDevelopmentGoals. Retrievedfrom:http://www.isdgs.org/

35.Moss,R.H.,Edmonds,J.A.,Hibbard,K.A.,Manning,M.R.,Rose,S.K.,vanVuuren,D.P., Wilbanks,T.J. (2010).Thenextgenerationofscenariosforclimatechangeresearchandassessment.Nature,463(7282),747 756.https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08823

36.Nations,U.(2015).SustainableDevelopmentGoals.SustainableDevelopmentKnowledgePlatform,(82),2023. Retrievedfromhttps://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs

37.Oberthür,S.,&Gehring,T.(2006).InstitutionalInteractioninGlobalEnvironmentalGovernance:Synergyand ConflictamongInternationalandEUPolicies.(S.Oberthür&T.Gehring,Eds.).Cambridge,MA:MITPress.

38.Raustiala,K.,&Victor,D.G.(2004).TheRegimeComplexforPlantGeneticResources.International Organization,58(2),277309.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818304582036

39.Seyfang,G.,&Jordan,A.(2002).TheJohannesburgSummitandSustainableDevelopment:HowEffectiveAre EnvironmentalMega-Conferences?YearbookofInternationalCooperationinEnvironmentandDevelopment, 1926.

40.Stokke,O.S.(2008).InstitutionalInteractioninGlobalEnvironmentalChange,374375.

41.Suni,T.,Guenther,A.,Hansson,H.C.,Kulmala,M.,Andreae,M.O.,Arneth,A.,Seneviratne,S.(2015).The significanceofland-atmosphereinteractionsintheEarthsystem-ILEAPSachievementsandperspectives. Anthropocene,12,6984.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2015.12.001

42.Swart,R.J.,Raskin,P.,&Robinson,J.(2004).Theproblemofthefuture:Sustainabilityscienceandscenario analysis.GlobalEnvironmentalChange,14(2),137146.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.002

43.Underdal,A.(2010).Complexityandchallengesoflong-termenvironmentalgovernance.GlobalEnvironmental Change,20(3),386393.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.02.005

44.UNESCAP.(2013).Water,FoodandEnergyNexusinAsiaandthePacific.Bangkok.Retrievedfrom http://www.worldwatercouncil.org/fileadmin/world_water_council/documents/programs_hydropolitics_sdgs/Wat er-Food-NexusReport.pdf

45.UnitedNations.(2015).Transformingourworld:The2030agendaforsustainabledevelopment. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/7891Transforming%20Our%20World.Pdf,(1),15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2

46.UnitedNations.(2016).GlobalSustainableDevelopmentReport2016.NewYork.

47.vandenHove,S.(2007).Arationaleforscience-policyinterfaces.Futures,39(7),807826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2006.12.004

48.vanderHel,S.(2016).Newscienceforglobalsustainability?Theinstitutionalisationofknowledgeco-production inFutureEarth.EnvironmentalScienceandPolicy,61,165175.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.03.012

49.vanKerkhoff,L.(2013).KnowledgeGovernanceforSustainableDevelopment:AReview.Challengesin Sustainability,1(2),8293.https://doi.org/10.12924/cis2013.01020082

50.vanKerkhoff,L.,&Lebel,L.(2006).LinkingKnowledgeandActionforSustainableDevelopment.AnnualReview ofEnvironmentandResources,31(1),445477.https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.31.102405.170850

51.Watson,R.T.,Soc,T.R.,&Watson,R.T.(2005).Turningscienceintopolicy:challengesandexperiencesfrom thescience policyinterfaceTurningscienceintopolicy:challengesandexperiencesfromthescience policy interface,(February).https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2004.1601

52.Wiek,A.,Ness,B.,Schweizer-Ries,P.,Brand,F.S.,&Farioli,F.(2012).Fromcomplexsystemsanalysisto transformationalchange:Acomparativeappraisalofsustainabilityscienceprojects.SustainabilityScience, 7(SUPPL.1),524.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0148-y

53.WorldEconomicForum.(2011).GlobalRisks2011SixthEdition.

54.Young,O.R.(2002).TheInstitutionalDimensionsofEnvironmentalChange:Fit,Interplay,andScale. Organization, 221. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=jd8rD4gEJLQC&printsec=frontcover&hl=es&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&c ad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

APPENDICES

3 Malaysiaisamega-biodiverse countryandmaintainingthe geneticdiversityofseeds, cultivatedplantsandanimalsis inextricablylinkedtohalting biodiversitylossandforestsas theirhabitat(MNRE2015)

11.5By2030,significantlyreducethe numberofdeathsandthenumberof peopleaffectedandsubstantially decreasethedirecteconomiclosses relativetoglobalgrossdomesticproduct causedbydisasters,includingwaterrelateddisasters,

11.6By2030,reducetheadverseper capitaenvironmentalimpactofcities, includingbypayingspecialattentionto airqualityandmunicipalandotherwaste management

3

2 Indicationsthatannualfloodsare worseningduetoclimatechange andillegaldeforestationthough furtherresearchrequired

2 Healthissuesduetoforestfiresare anannualoccurrence

2 Malaysiahasanaveragenon-

2

worseningduetoclimatechange andillegaldeforestationthough furtherresearchrequired

Table1Contd., Goal11Cities11.7By2030,provideuniversalaccessto safe,inclusiveandaccessible,greenand publicspaces,inparticularforwomen andchildren,olderpersonsandpersons withdisabilities

2 Naturalgreenspaceswillaid biodiversityconservation(i.e.see KualaLumpurGreenLungs)

Goal12SCP 12.8By2030,ensurethatpeople everywherehavetherelevantinformation and awareness for sustainable developmentandlifestylesinharmony withnature

13.1Strengthenresilienceandadaptive capacitytoclimate-relatedhazardsand naturaldisastersinallcountries

2 Ecosystembasedadaptationis researchedinMalaysiathough moreevidenceisrequired

2 Raising public awareness reinforcestheneedtoprotect biodiversity Goal13 Climate Change

Goal16

16.3Promotetheruleoflawatthe nationalandinternationallevelsand ensureequalaccesstojusticeforall

2 Manypoliciesexistinbiodiversity conservationbutenforcementis lacking(seeSDGsreporton Malaysia) Goal16

16.4By2030,significantlyreduceillicit financialandarmsflows,strengthenthe recoveryandreturnofstolenassetsand combatallformsoforganizedcrime

16.5Substantiallyreducecorruptionand briberyinalltheirforms

16.6Developeffective,accountableand transparentinstitutionsatalllevels

2 Manypoliciesexistinbiodiversity conservationbutenforcementis lacking(seeSDGsreporton Malaysia)

2 Manypoliciesexistinbiodiversity conservationbutenforcementis lacking(seeSDGsreporton Malaysia)

2 Manypoliciesexistinbiodiversity conservationbutenforcementis lacking(seeSDGsreporton Malaysia)

16.7Ensureresponsive,inclusive, participatoryandrepresentativedecisionmakingatalllevels

2 Accesstojusticeisnotguaranteed (SeeAlizan2015onhumanrights andEnvironmentinMalaysia)

2 Accesstoinformationisnot guaranteed(SeeAlizan2015on humanrightsandEnvironmentin Malaysia) Goal10

Goal1 Poverty

Goal3Health

16.10Ensurepublicaccessto informationandprotectfundamental freedoms,inaccordancewithnational legislationandinternationalagreements

10.2By2030,empowerandpromotethe social,economicandpoliticalinclusion ofall

1.4By2030,ensurethatallmenand women,inparticularthepoorandthe vulnerable,haveequalrightsto economicresources

3.3By2030,endtheepidemicsofAIDS, tuberculosis,malariaandneglected tropicaldiseasesandcombathepatitis, water-bornediseasesandother communicablediseases

1 Forestdwellingcommunitiesand landandenvironmentalrights linkedtomanyforestclearing areasinMalaysia

1 Forestdwellingcommunitiesrights tocontroloverland

1 Bacterialdiseaseleptospirosisis connectedwithirresponsiblewaste disposalaroundriverareas

editor@iaset.us

and Infrastructure

9.5Enhancescientificresearch,upgrade thetechnologicalcapabilitiesofindustrial sectorsinallcountries,inparticular developingcountries

9.5Enhance ,upgrade thetechnologicalcapabilitiesofindustrial sectorsinallcountries,inparticular developingcountries resource-basedeconomy

1 Knowledge-based economy requiredtomoveawayfrom resource-basedeconomy

practicesthataresustainable

12.7Promotepublicprocurement practicesthataresustainable

foundationforgoodpractices

1 GovernmentGreenProcurement oneofthekeypolicyactionsin Malaysiatocreateanenabling foundationforgoodpractices Goal2

2.3By2030,doubletheagricultural productivityandincomesofsmall-scale foodproducers

2.3By2030,doubletheagricultural productivity foodproducers

7.2By2030,increasesubstantiallythe shareofrenewableenergyintheglobal energymix

energymix

9.2Promoteinclusiveandsustainable industrialization significantlyraiseindustry’sshareof employmentandgrossdomesticproduct, inlinewithnationalcircumstances,and doubleitsshareinleastdeveloped countries

-1

-1 Doublingproductivityandincomes wouldrequireland-usechangeand conversionfromPermanentForest ReservestoAgriculturalland

-2

-2 Bioenergyandbiomassisoneof thelargestshareandfastest growingsectortowardsrenewable energymixinMalaysia.Bioenergy isoftenfromoilpalminMalaysia whichmayaffectbiodiversity conservation

-2 Variousindustriallandusechange proposed,causingbiodiversityloss (seeNationalPhysicalPlan)

-2

Figure1:InterlinkagesofBenefitsandDrivers ofForestCoverwithotherSDGTargets

ofForestCoverwithotherSDGTargets

Table2:SpectrumofusableKnowledgeforSDGInterlinkages

IPCCreports(scenario analysis)

ICSUframeworkbasedon literaturereview Nexusapproach

NAASRating3.17

LowerComplexity HigherComplexity Highparticipation (highlegitimacy)  ICSUframeworkthrough expertJudgement  GSDRreport  IPCCreports(scenario analysis) Lowparticipation (lowlegitimacy  ICSUframeworkbasedon literaturereview  Nexusapproach  Integratedassessmentsin

earthsystemscience

Highparticipation ICSUframeworkthrough expertJudgement GSDRreport