# **1. Introduction**

The principle of equality of states is the bedrock of international law and international cooperation. Yet even though states are equally sovereign, they possess different economic and human development capacities. Similarly, different groups, tribes, and nations within and across states also possess varying degrees of economic, human, and social development. Development interventions are often the first-choice tools for redressing economic and social disparities among otherwise equally sovereign yet economically unequal states, communities, societies, and groups. The adoption of global development goals by national governments confirms their commitment to bridging existing socioeconomic gaps between different countries and social groups within them, thereby providing impetus for various forms of development intervention. This global objective, initiated in 2000 with the relatively modest Millennium Development Goals, presently finds expression in the United Nations’ vastly more ambitious Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), announced in 2015 with an expected attainment date of 2030. Declared to be universally applicable to and endorsed by all 193 signatory countries, and the product of an unprecedented world-wide consultative process,<sup>2</sup> the SDGs impose responsibility on states to foster sustainable development by implementing development initiatives to address issues ranging from economic growth to social inclusion and environmental protection. The SDGs are embodied in 17 goals and 169 targets that aspire to, among other objectives, end poverty, eradicate hunger, ensure universal lifetime access to quality education and health care, attain gender equality, generate inclusive and sustainable economic growth, enhance employment opportunities, and promote peace, justice, and strong institutions “for all.”<sup>3</sup> States are expected to meet the SDGs by establishing their own national framework, policies, and programs, and by creating a corresponding array of national indicators against which to monitor progress made on attaining the goals and targets.<sup>4</sup> By claiming to be universal, the SDGs invite an inquiry into whether their objectives are indeed shared by all countries and peoples, whether all countries and indigenous peoples were involved in the consultative process that resulted in the adoption of the specific goals and targets, whether all societies desire to organize their societies in line with the SDGs, and whether they have indicated their commitment to these goals. Without pre-empting later discussions in this paper, the SDGs were clearly and appropriately adopted by member countries of the United Nations, but this process primarily involved formal systems of national government rather than traditional and indigenous peoples.<sup>5</sup> As such, how do we reconcile the singular objectives of the SDGs with the wide array of (potentially

> 2 United Nations sustainable development agenda, https://sdgs.un.org/goals (last visited Mar 25, 2024). Indeed, the UN itself declares that “ <mark>[t]he 2030 Agenda is the result of the broadest and most participatory consultation process in the history of the United Nations...”, as cited in https://www.cepal.org/en/topics/2030-agenda-sustainable-</mark> <u><mark>development/about-2030-agenda-sustainable-development (last visited Mar 27, 2024).</mark></u>

> 3 The SDGs explicitly pledge a commitment to ensuring health care (SDG 3), education (4), and justice (16) “for all”. 4 That so many low-income countries are currently deemed to be disconcertingly “off track” to attaining these goals by 2030 (see United Nations [2024] _The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024_ . New York: United Nations. <u>https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2024/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2024.pdf) has prompted recent</u> initiatives seeking to secure trillions of dollars in additional financial support from private sector actors. Much of the analytical imperative on which the credibility of this initiative rests assumes the presence of comprehensive, detailed, accurate, and readily available data on which enhanced “progress” attained via this financing mechanism can be clearly generated. For present purposes, we suggest that such initiatives – including both the scale of the potential funding and the strong imperative to empirically document progress – only intensify the nature and extent of the competing commitments to economic development that many poor, resource-scarce countries face.

5 That said, the SDGs make six explicit references to Indigenous Peoples, most prominently in Goals 2 (agriculture, output) and 4 (education, equal access).

2