IISD’s Stefan Jungcurt has interviewed Kai Niebert, President of the German League for Nature and Environment and member of the German Council for Sustainable Development (RNE). Niebert shares his perspectives on the success stories of German transformation and SDG reporting and what we can learn from them for the future of sustainable development governance.

How is your organization advancing sustainable development in Germany and internationally?

I am the President of the German League for Nature. Our member organizations represent 11 million Germans engaged in nature conservation and sustainable development. I am also a member of the German Council for Sustainable Development – an arms-length advisory body to the German government. RNE consolidates the wisdom of different stakeholder perspectives including industry, civil society, research, and policy. We serve in our individual capacity, which allows us to put issues into context and stimulate societal dialogue on sustainability issues.

What do the SDGs mean to you and your organization ten years after their adoption?

The SDGs are a central reference, a kind of a North Star, for sustainable development. I see their importance along two lines. The SDGs promote science-based discussions on key sustainability issues, like the concept of planetary boundaries that highlights increasing risks of human pressures to processes that are critical for our planet’s health. But when we talk to our Chancellor, the SDGs serve as a frame of reference that helps to explain linkages between policy, environmental sustainability, and social justice – and coherence among them.

In Germany, the discussion about sustainability is still very focused on the environmental SDGs. Sustainable means green. But it is important to look at the other SDGs as well, inequality, for example. Unequal distribution of wealth correlates with a higher environmental footprint. If we ignore inequality, we won’t be able to fix the climate crisis. This helps to reframe the discussions and engage with organizations that are more socially oriented.

How do you engage with German SDG implementation and the VNR process?

When the SDGs were adopted, RNE held a series of conferences even before the first guides or policy papers were written so we could influence the framing in Germany. We had some influence on the government’s approach to voluntary national reviews (VNRs) to ensure the report sees citizens as agents of transformation rather than as objects. This is reflected in Germany’s evolving approach to VNRs.

We also influenced the debate on key transformations needed in Germany – the lignite coal phase-out and the future of agriculture. The government set up two commissions where stakeholders negotiated. The commissions generated a societal compromise that provides a way forward. They show that governments do not need to be afraid of their citizens. Civil society can help solve complex issues. At the same time, citizens learned that talking to and acting with government officials can influence key policies.

This culture is also reflected in Germany’s third VNR. The government took the inputs from civil society very seriously. There was no cherry picking. In my view, this is a great achievement at a time when the space for civil society engagement is shrinking everywhere.

What impact do you expect from Germany’s third VNR?

I hope to see an impact on other Member States attending the UN High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF). We want to show that a government can make civil society an active part of transformation. But I fear we won’t reach beyond the “New York bubble.” I am not sure the SDGs can transport the message to other sectors. Most ministries have no idea what a VNR is.

What are your priorities for the next five years to 2030?

I think internationally we must look at equality, focus on financing for the Global South, and enable governments to work with stakeholders.

We should also focus on success stories, like renewable energy. We have seen social tipping points when a new technology is accepted, and transformation takes off. What are the positive social tipping points for other transformations? How can we leverage them to accelerate progress?

We should also be realistic with our targets. It is unlikely that we will stop climate change to a point where everything is fine. For example, as a scientist, I agree with the need to keep climate change below 1.5°C, but as a political scientist, I know it was a mistake. The target implies such deep disruptions in people’s daily lives that no politician can survive the decisions needed to achieve it. We must reframe SDG topics positively, as issues of resilience and prosperity.

What are your thoughts for the SDGs beyond 2030?

The SDGs are still a very good idea. We should not try to prioritize in keeping with the principle of indivisibility. We should also be aware that the Global South has no interest in negotiating a beyond 2030 framework as they are focused on implementation towards 2030.

So, we should keep the SDGs framework and assess what is missing – artificial intelligence (AI), for example, or the role of social media in promoting democratic disruption. The circular economy should also be more present.

Is there anything else you would like to share regarding your experience with SDG implementation?

We should keep in mind the educational origin of sustainability work and how it influences our expectations. To date, we have focused on individual behavior. We teach that climate change is caused by society, but we place the responsibility for change on the individual. However, individuals have very limited impact when changing their own behavior, and it often comes at a high cost. We should talk more about political participation. How can we solve political challenges that hinder the transformation we need? This can be local as well as national. We should refocus on the public domain.