KATHMANDU, Nepal, Nov 25 2025 (IPS) - Less than five years from 2030 it is time for the international community to confront the future of the Agenda 2030 and its Sustainable Development Goals.
The SDGs turned what was a generic declaration into a tangible and actionable blueprint.
As ample evidence shows, so far, the implementation of the SDGs have been a tremendous disappointment with all the goals being off the track.
Recent UN assessments show how far the world is from meeting the SDGs. Only 16 to 17 % of targets are on track. Out of 137 targets with available data, about 35% show on track or moderate progress, 47% show marginal or no progress, and 18% have moved backwards since 2015.
Some of the most urgent areas are among the furthest off track, including Zero Hunger (SDG 2), Sustainable Cities (SDG 11), Life Below Water (SDG 14), Life on Land (SDG 15), and Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions (SDG 16).
Weak institutional commitments, poor coordination, the failure to integrate SDGs into budgets and policies, and the voluntary nature of reporting have all held back progress. At the same time, breaches of planetary boundaries tied to climate and biosphere integrity threaten the conditions needed for sustainable development.
Even where gains exist, such as in education and disease reduction, they remain slow and fragile. The data is clear. The world is not on course for 2030.
As the world edges toward 2030, these conversations can no longer be postponed. The SDGs did more than outline global aspirations. They created a shared language for justice, dignity, and sustainability. They shaped policy debates and mobilized public attention in ways the development field had not seen before, even if governments often ignored the direction they set.
Yet the SDGs have served an important, we would say, indispensable purpose to the international community even if states wasted it.
First, the SDGs functioned not only as a springboard for action but also as an accountability tool
to keep a check on states’ commitments towards achieving a world without poverty, inequalities and deprivations while guaranteeing a greener, more sustainable and just economic framework.’
Unfortunately, leadership never matched the ambition of the goals.
Many governments failed to translate the SDGs into national and regional strategies capable of real impact.
Least developed countries lacked financial resources and effective institutions, with weak governance, corruption, and mismanagement limiting their ability to plan and implement reforms.
At the same time, wealthier nations refused to scale up development cooperation to levels required for transformative progress.
In short, both governments in the Global South and Global North are complicit in avoiding fulfilling their duties towards the present next generations.
As much as this absence of stewardship towards the people and the planet has been a moral disaster, the international community has enough time to frame a different formula to ensure that whatever will come after the expiration of the Agenda 2030 will be a success.
This loss of momentum reflects more than technical shortcomings.
It shows how fragile political will has been, especially in a model built around voluntary participation. The SDGs lost traction because governments were free to treat them as optional. The gap between aspiration and action became a moral failure as well as a governance one.
Let’s remind ourselves that the launch of the SDGs had started with a “boom”. There was a visible, contagious enthusiasm and everyone was interested to know more about the Agenda 2030.
Notwithstanding the complex negotiations at the UN Secretariat first with the Open Working Group and then with the Intergovernamental Negotiations that followed, there was a vibrant participation of non state actors.
Civil society organizations and global advocacy networks were deeply involved in shaping the SDGs. Their expertise, campaigning, and coordination helped bring local realities, social justice concerns, and thematic priorities into the negotiation rooms.
Then, there was a period, in the aftermath of 2015 when the document was endorsed after three years of negotiations, in which talking about the SDGs was very trendy and on the top of the agenda not only for governments but also for non-state actors, from civil society organizations to universities to corporate players.
That passion soon vanished and there are many reasons for this, including the rise of climate change as a threat to our planet, a phenomenon of paramount importance but somehow overshadowed other important policy agenda.
What will be next?
In 2027 the UN will formally start a conversation about the future of the Agenda 2030.
How to shape the conversation that will lead to a revised framework?
In the months and years ahead, assuring the same level of involvement and participation will be important but not enough. Civil society inputs and contributions must evolve into a broader, more democratic process that moves beyond representation by established organizations.
Communities who live the consequences of global policies every day must be able to shape the next framework directly. Should we start imagining a revamped roadmap that will enable Planet Earth to decarbonize where inequalities are wiped out and where every child will have a chance to have quality health and meaningful educational pathways?
The negotiations that led to the SDGs were contentious and complex in such a way that some of the goals were more the results of internal bargains and trade-offs among governments at the UN rather than genuine attempts to solve policy issues.
Certainly, while brainstorming for the next agenda, the global oversight system of the SDGs will be put into discussion.
Rather than the current model centered on the High-Level Political Forum where, on rotation some goals are discussed and where nations at their complete will voluntarily share their reports, what in jargon is called National Voluntary Reviews, it would be much more effective to have a model resembling the Universal Periodic Reviews applied at the Human Rights Council.
States should mandatorily present updates of their work in implementing the next generation of the SDGs and if we are serious about creating a better world, such reviews should happen annually.
Localization must also become central rather than optional. The localization of the SDGs should also be formally adopted and mainstreamed in the official playbook, prompting local governments to play their parts.
Some have already been doing that but it is a tiny minority and often such a process of localization happens without engagement and involvement of local communities.
This must change in such a way to truly empower local communities to have an ownership over local planning and decision making in matters of sustainable and equitable development.
True localization requires building formal pathways for community participation and ensuring that subnational institutions shape priorities. People closest to the issues should help define the solutions.
Without local ownership, global frameworks remain abstract and ineffective.
While some local governments have aligned their work with SDG priorities, most of these efforts remain isolated and disconnected from the communities they are meant to serve.
Localizing the next Agenda offers an opportunity to democratize the future of the goals.
Development cannot be sustainable when local voices are excluded from planning and decision making.
These and other propositions should be up for debate and review in the months and years ahead.
We do hope that experts and policy makers will discuss in detail ways to strengthen the future development agenda, building on the lessons that led first to the establishment of the SDGs and also leaning on the experiences that are still being made on their implementation.
At the start of the discussions on “what’s next”, we do believe that young people should have a big and real say.
Involving young people and enabling them to have agency in contributing to the future of the Agenda 2030 is one of the best guarantees that the new governance related to the future goals will be stronger and more inclusive.
Imagine youths lab around the world starting the conversation about the post Agenda 2030 scenarios.
How can the goals be strengthened?
Capacity building of students could also become an opportunity to open up the decision making on one of the most important agendas of our time.
Imagine youths’ assemblies and forums to discuss and ideate the future global development goals. Such exercise should not become the traditional top down approach designed and backed by donor agencies like in the past.
Rather it can embed more radical and ambitious principles of grassroots level deliberative democracy and shared decision making.
One thing is certain: without a profound acceleration, the current trends in implementing the SDGs will not shift.
Realistically speaking, it is highly probable that we will reach the 2030 with an abysmal record of accomplishment in terms of realizing the Agenda 2030.
The international community can avoid such shameful outcomes while designing a post 2030 framework.
There is still time to design an agenda that is accountable, inclusive, and grounded in lived experience. But this requires listening to those who will inherit the consequences of today’s decisions.
The next framework can be drastically different if young people, rather than diplomats and government officials, will meaningfully own the process.
The young generations should not only lead in the designing of a new “Global Sustainable Development Deal” but also have a say and voice into its implementation.
Only then, governments at all levels will take the job of ensuring a future for humanity seriously.
Ananthu Anilkumar writes on human rights, development cooperation, and global governance. Simone Galimberti writes about the SDGs, youth-centered policy-making and a stronger and better United Nations.
IPS UN Bureau
