Missed SDG targets: from ‘trying harder’ to engaging critically with paradox and conflict

This article explores a radical hypothesis: that our repeated failure to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) signals something inherently paradoxical within the current approach, suggesting that simply doing ‘more of the same’ will not transform the fortunes of the failing SDG mission. We examine four interrelated paradoxes–those of universality, implementation, information, and signification–that characterize the dominant approach to the SDGs. These paradoxes, which apply across all the SDGs, are illustrated through SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), which seeks to ‘make cities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable’. We argue for recognizing the political double-voicing embedded in a top-down ‘we’ that imposes obligations on a bottom-up ‘we’ it claims to represent. Furthermore, we contend that implementation plans, rather than being the most efficient route to achieving the SDGs, risk recasting the SDG challenge as a technical issue, overshadowing the political and ethical questions in problem framing. Additionally, we critique the reliance on metrics as straightforward conduits to objective truth, advocating instead for ‘critical datathons’ that question prevailing narratives of truth and progress while exploring alternative perspectives. Finally, we caution against the use of popular terms that have become empty signifiers; having lost their specific meanings, these terms risk confusing, distracting, or even obscuring critical issues. We propose that reframing these paradoxes offers a path toward a deeper understanding of the structural challenges within the SDG mission, suggesting a more reflective and critical approach to sustainable development.