The 2030 Agenda and the SDGs respond to humanity’s challenge to live humanely, justly, sustainably and in peace on our interconnected globe. Pursuit of the Agenda is inevitably subject to forces that ‘shake and stir’ it. Correspondingly, our analytical frameworks need to be shaken and stirred too, to be more perceptive and responsive to emergent objective threats, subjective fears, and their impacts. A human security perspective offers an essential complement to the thinking and action underway for the SDGs, because insecurities arise in diverse and fluctuating forms in the daily lives of most people, produced by local, national, international and global forces. The worldwide ‘shake and stir’ triggered by COVID-19 is a reminder of how serious and all-encompassing such disruption can be. A human security perspective should be added in and/or to SDGs planning and implementation, at country level and in multilateral arenas. The perspective can draw together many available tools and stimulate their use focused on recognising and managing threats in people’s daily lives, not least by increasing human resilience. This paper presents the approach’s rationale, certain components, and its relevance to the SDGs Agenda, then presents two extended case studies: first, from almost 20 years of experience with human security-related thinking and practice in Latvia, and, second, from the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting crises. It concludes with some suggestions for UN organizations, governments, and policy researchers. Keywords: Sustainable Development Goals, human security approach, human resilience, Latvia, COVID-19 crisis, social contract

抄録全体を表示

By analyzing the unequal water treaties signed between Nepal and India from 1920 to 1996, the paper critically analyzes if it is possible for Nepal to sign an ‘equal’ water treaty with India. Furthermore, the research draws on the lessons learned by Nepal from its past experiences to optimize the benefits of utilizing its trans-boundary water resources. By using the hydro-hegemony framework, the researchers argue that power is the prime determinant which leads downstream India to enjoy more water resource benefits in comparison to upper riparian Nepal. Against the backdrop of extreme power asymmetry, Nepal cannot sign equal water treaties with hydro-hegemon India, as political power is the most significant factor determining the control of land and resources. As a weaker riparian, the most significant objective for Nepal will be to increase its bargaining power against its larger neighbor to gain a fair share of benefits. This can be done in the following five ways: i) adopting a long- term national water policy explicitly for India, ii) involving a third party (another riparian in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region) during negotiations, iii) changing Nepalese politicians’ attitudes toward India, iv) involving the private sector for more economic gains, and v) inviting international water hub or community members for trans-boundary water resource management. Trans-boundary water resource management is important to both co-riparians. Harnessing trans-boundary water resources can provide economic gains to Nepal, mostly through the construction of hydro-power projects. Similarly, the materialization of such a mechanism can help India not only to address perennial problems such as flood control and irrigation, but also to meet the energy needs of adjacent states. However, impeding the utilization of these resources prevents both countries from making any productive gains. Therefore, by realizing the importance of trans-boundary water, Nepal can cooperate with India to design jointly operated projects after the necessary preparation is done.

抄録全体を表示