How International Factors affect SDGs

As many of my readers know, this semester, I participated in a class where I was able to do research with students from the UAE who attend the American College of Sharjah. It was great to share ideas with students from so many different backgrounds. We studied other nations and how they are trying to achieve the sustainable development goals they have signed onto. I listened to the groups who researched Bangladesh and Brazil for their podcast, and I will talk about Sri Lanka, which is what I studied.
Sri Lanka has made significant improvements towards their sustainable development goals. However, there is still a considerable gap when it comes to gender equality. International social norms that revolve around women that suggest that women belong at home taking care of the family is straight BS. Sadly, thousands of women are still unemployed, participating in hours and hours of unpaid household labor. Women make up 52% of Sri Lanka’s population, but female representation in parliament is only 5.3%. Especially during the pandemic, many people were forced to adapt to work at home or stop working altogether. Sri Lanka’s economic status would be much better if they did not discriminate against women in the workforce. They need to catch up on a considerable number of able workers. The international community can sometimes understand how our countries are interconnected now, and we need to support one another to stay afloat sometimes, so they have responded with aid. India and other QUAD allies have helped Sri Lanka strive for a better economy.
Bangladesh is struggling to improve its low poverty rates, with 12.9% of its population under the extreme povert

y line. The average income is only $2, and the government needs help. Their government is corrupt, and there has been a recent concern from international agencies that that will not change. Bangladesh receives some aid from different NGOs, like the World Bank. Although that has helped their progress significantly, these NGOs have threatened to pull their aid if the corruption and poverty were decreased considerably. Surprisingly, the pandemic did not do as much damage to Bangladesh as it did to

other countries, and their government has continued to instill different methods to reduce poverty. The government has made progress in unemployment by identifying groups that need support and providing them with supplies and job opportunities they need to continue living. However, the country must learn how to continue on its own because international aid must be something other than a positive source.

Brazil, on the other hand, is working towards a higher standard when it comes to environmental preservation. With the help of their friends and partnerships, like the other BRICS states, there has been a decrease in deforestation in the Amazon rainforest since 2012. Brazil has been working towards its goals with information campaigns, buying land and preserving it with reservations, rainforest trust, various NGOs, etc. Even with people buying

An aerial view shows deforestation near a forest on the border between Amazonia and Cerrado in Nova Xavantina, Mato Grosso state, Brazil July 28, 2021

plots of the Amazon to maintain, some sneaky companies and people purchase the land and clear it for supplies, land, pastures, and more. Brazil’s Amazon rainforest is crucial for global climate stability, and its preservation is critical to achieving several SDGs related to climate action, biodiversity, and sustainable land use.


Clarke Forum: Uncertainty in Climate Change

Dr. Linda O’Mearns, the winner of the Glover Metal, spoke during her forum on how uncertainties play a role in climate change. It is impossible to measure anything for sure, but luck creates motivation to find the closest correct answer. She is a regional climate modeler and participated in work that won a Nobel Peace Prize. Her work has significantly impacted regional, national, and international climate research. She is focused on more minor scales. The talk was rescheduled to a day later because she had an unfortunate fall. I could not attend in person, but I watched the live stream the second I was available!

The IPCC is one of the most credible and official climate resources, and Linda and her colleagues were awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for their work in the IPCC. Linda has a lot of reasons for going to work like this. She could go into a director’s meeting at Encar during Hurricane Katrina. She was disgusted with how her colleagues were so focused on their excellent job of predicting the storm accurately. That’s what they were thinking about, while the reality is that 1500 people died, and there was 100 billion dollars worth of damage.

So now she wondered how we integrate social science into our weather disaster predictions. While informative and conducted by scientists, the research was limited and not written for the general public. NSF offers a program on convergence research for a more integrated scientific approach. 

Uncertainty is defined as a state of lack of knowledge or incomplete knowledge. Linda’s favorite quote is, “Doubt is not a pleasant condition; uncertainty is an absurd one.” It is unbelievable to be 100% certain about anything. When it comes to the problems we are facing today, it is dangerous, even to be specific, because with certainty comes a lack of further exploration. For example, the IPCC updates its evidence every few years so the general public can always be up to date. It has been years, and only now have they said climate change is indisputable. 

Linda needed more time in her talk but was very interested in many uncertainties, including uncertainties in future climate, impacts of climate change, and decision-making. 


Globalization From Liberal and Critical Perspectives

Liberal International Relations scholars see globalization as a positive step towards a more interdependent world government. They believe that it promotes economic interdependence, international cooperation, and the spread of democratic values. Regarding economic interdependence, we look at the trades, investments, and finance.
When a country is getting imports necessary for their citizens’ well-being, like food, they want to avoid being in a situation where those imports stop abruptly. To prevent that, from a liberal perspective, they will avert disruptions of security competition. Whether this country is a high power or not, they are having their needs satisfied, and in turn, peace between nations is preferred. There is also a comparative advantage when trade is in an open market system. When one country is not trading with others, they have to be able to satisfy the needs of their citizens in-house, and by that, I mean they need to produce everything with no help. When countries can trade, they do not need to make as much, and they can specialize in something specific. For example, Ireland and China trade dairy and electronics. Ireland has sufficient dairy production because of their geography. They have suitable land for dairy cows, and China has the industry and labor to create electronics. These two countries can get what they need at a low price because it is more beneficial for them to export, and everyone is satisfied. A liberal scholar will see this as a positive, interdependent thing.
Critical theorists see globalization very differently. They see trade and other patterns in globalization as something called dependency theory. The dependency theory explains that the comparative advantage is not because different regions have better or worse conditions to produce specific products but that colonialism created Western ideals. The idea of democracy spread because the great powers said so. That is not a very formal way to put it, but to me, that makes sense. There is constant competition for the top, and through a critical perspective lens, no one will be satisfied with just the status quo. Capitalism and monopolies are seen as favorable to the people who are getting the rewards, more money, less problems. But as companies expand, so will others across seas. This will create a division of labor between leading sectors, which will have very negative impacts on satellite countries.

Personally, I see both sides. Yes, interdependence, in theory, seems excellent. Peace among everyone, even if it is coerced peace. Globalization created progress because states could collaborate, get the needed materials, and produce newer and better things. Why would that not be good? Because these countries are now connected and almost depend on each other to keep receiving the goods and services they want, they are incentivized to avoid turning on one another. However, we do have to consider that some of these countries may not have wanted to be globalized in the first place. But because the world had so many great powers participating and trading, there was no other way to survive decently without joining the party.