The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Beyond Cockpit-ism: Four Insights to Enhance the Transformative Potential of the Sustainable Development Goals
Open accessAbstract
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) have the potential to become a powerful political vision that can support the urgently needed global transition to a shared and lasting prosperity. In December 2014, the United Nations (UN) Secretary General published his report on the SDGs. However, the final goals and targets that will be adopted by the UN General Assembly in September 2015 risk falling short of expectations because of what we call “cockpit-ism”: the illusion that top-down steering by governments and intergovernmental organizations alone can address global problems. In view of the limited effectiveness of intergovernmental efforts and questions about the capacity of national governments to affect change, the SDGs need to additionally mobilize new agents of change such as businesses, cities and civil society. To galvanize such a broad set of actors, multiple perspectives on sustainable development are needed that respond to the various motives and logics of change of these different actors. We propose four connected perspectives which can strengthen the universal relevance of the SDGs: “planetary boundaries” to stress the urgency of addressing environmental concerns and to target governments to take responsibility for (global) public goods; “the safe and just operating space” to highlight the interconnectedness of social and environmental concerns and its distributive consequences; “the energetic society” to benefit from the willingness of a broad group of actors worldwide to take action; and “green competition” to stimulate innovation and new business practices. To realize the transformative potential of the SDGs, these four perspectives should be reflected in the focus and content of the SDGs that will be negotiated in the run up to September 2015 and its further implementation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A safe operating space for humanity
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., et al. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/461472a · Cited by 13,333
Self-citationPrins, G., & Rayner, S. (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/449973a · Cited by 199
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- Newell, 2002, A World Environmental Organisation: The Wrong Solution to the Wrong Problem, World Econ., 25, 659, 10.1111/1467-9701.00455 · doi:10.1111/1467-9701.00455
- Biermann, 2012, Navigating the Anthropocene: Improving Earth System Governance, Science, 335, 1306, 10.1126/science.1217255 · DOI · Paper page
- Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S.E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E.M., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S.R., de Vries, W., and de Wit, C.A. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science. · DOI · Paper page
- Griggs, 2013, Policy: Sustainable Development Goals for People and Planet, Nature, 495, 305, 10.1038/495305a · DOI · Paper page
- Dearing, 2014, Safe and just operating spaces for regional social-ecological systems, Glob. Environ. Chang., 28, 227, 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.06.012 · DOI · Paper page
- Cole, 2014, Tracking sustainable development with a national barometer for South Africa using a downscaled “safe and just space” framework, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, E4399, 10.1073/pnas.1400985111 · DOI
- Rosenau, J.N., and Czempiel, E.-O. (1992). Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics, Cambridge University Press. · DOI · Paper page
- Hajer, M.A. (2009). Authoritative Governance: Policy Making in the Age of Mediatization, Oxford University Press. · DOI · Paper page
- Strange, S. (1996). The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy, Cambridge University Press. · DOI · Paper page
- Pattberg, 2012, How Climate Change Became a Business Risk: Analyzing Nonstate Agency in Global Climate Politics, Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy, 30, 613, 10.1068/c1179 · DOI
- Elzen, B., Geels, F.W., and Green, K. (2005). System Innovation and the Transition to Sustainability: Theory, Evidence and Policy, Edward Elgar Publishing. · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Geels, F. W. (2019) · Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2019.06.009 · Cited by 949
Towards systemic and contextual priority setting for implementing the 2030 Agenda
Weitz, N., Carlsen, H., Nilsson, M., & Skånberg, K. (2018) · Sustainability Science · doi:10.1007/s11625-017-0470-0 · Cited by 573
Self-citationPolitics and the plastic crisis: A review throughout the plastic life cycle
Nielsen, T. D., Hasselbalch, J., Holmberg, K., & Stripple, J. (2020) · WIREs Energy and Environment · doi:10.1002/wene.360 · Cited by 499
Governance of the water-energy-food security nexus: A multi-level coordination challenge
Pahl-Wostl, C. (2019) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2017.07.017 · Cited by 429
Buijs, A. E., Mattijssen, T. J., Van der Jagt, A. P., Ambrose-Oji, B., Andersson, E., Elands, B. H., & Steen Møller, M. (2016) · Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2017.01.002 · Cited by 308
Metadata
- Authors
- Hajer, M., Nilsson, M., Raworth, K., Bakker, P., Berkhout, F., De Boer, Y., Rockström, J., Ludwig, K., & Kok, M.
- Venue
- Sustainability
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2015-02-04
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1651-1660
- ISSN
- 2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1985401316
- Cited by
- 501
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 31.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Beyond Cockpit-ism: Four Insights to Enhance the Transformative Potential of the Sustainable Development Goals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/su7021651
- The paper
- Hajer, M., Nilsson, M., Raworth, K., Bakker, P., Berkhout, F., De Boer, Y., Rockström, J., Ludwig, K., & Kok, M. (2015). Beyond Cockpit-ism: Four Insights to Enhance the Transformative Potential of the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7021651
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.