Sustainable Development and the SDGs

The origin of the SD concept can be traced to the 1970s, as ^{Mata argues (2009, 12)}: “Sustainable Development emerges as a concept for the first time at the Rome Club in 1972, alluding to existing links between global economic growth and scares natural resources.” Nonetheless, for authors like ^{Pierri (2005, p. 6)}, “the introduction of the environmental crisis in the political arena took place at the end of the 1970s. This was prompted by a series of scientific reports, and had a decisive urgency at the UN Conference on the Human Environment which took place in Stockholm, Sweden.”

Nonetheless, the UN proposed the Brundtland Commission, which was presented to the General Assembly in 1987 in a report titled “Our Common Future,” in which the term SD was officially coined. This Commission established SD as a policy to be followed and its definition was taken as a framework for this article: “to satisfy the needs of the present generation without compromising the capacity of future generations to satisfy their own needs (^{Brundtland, 1987, p. 41}). It has also been described as “a holistic approach in the sense that society must pursue economic, social and environmental goals simultaneously” (^{Sachs, 2016, p. 20}).

Within this framework, a description the EDCs and their influence on SD in the region under study was performed, with the goal of identifying the satisfaction of human necessities and the generation of well-being in society, as reflected by access to the benefits of natural resources and environmental services in the SCF.

Based on the configuration of the 2030 Agenda, there are 17 SDGs represented by 169 goals, which were created as a way to implement actions which facilitate a path towards attaining SD in different countries. With respect to the SDGs, the UN states that “knowledge of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) associated with this Agenda helps to evaluate the point of departure for countries in the region [in this case the municipalities being studied] and to analyze and formulate the means with which to realize this new vision of sustainable development [analysis based on the objectives of the SDGs], which is expressed in a collective way and is reflected in the 2030 Agenda” (^{ONU, 2018, p. 5}).

Each SDG (see figure 4) encompasses a variety of topics (goals that were used as a guide to identify conflicts), that is to say, each SDG is a world in itself and does not end with the naming of its purpose, the work of the SDGs is interdependent and each one, with its positive and negative results, has an effect on the others (^{INNOVE, 2016}).

Source: UN (2018)

Figure 4 The 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the Global Development Agenda 2015-2030 

Using this framework, a description of the EDCs is presented and analyzed from the perspective of ecological distribution and its influence on SD in the region under study, with the goal of identifying the satisfaction of human needs and the generation of well-being in the society, based on access to the benefits of natural resources and environmental services in the SCF and the SDGs economic, social and environmental indicators. The above approach led to an analysis (using the SDG objectives) of environmental services, in this case coal, and whether transformations of the ecosystem are being generated (ecological-distributive conflicts) as a result of human actions (unequal ecological distribution), that is, if changes have been caused to the components of human well-being. Such a description within this context allowed for an analysis of the existence of more sustainable relationships between human being and nature.

The concept of ecological distribution proposed by ^{Martínez-Alier (2004b)} does not offer a detailed theoretical formulation that orients its characteristics and manifestations. Accordingly, in order to identify indicators that allowed for a characterization of the ecological distribution in the SCF, certain concepts were traced, leading to the adoption of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) by the United Nations. This is an “international program designed to satisfy the needs of those in charge of making decisions and obtaining information about the links between ecosystem changes and human well-being” (^{ONU, 2003, p. 5}).

The conclusions from the MEA provide scientific value regarding the condition and tendency of global ecosystems, the services that they provide and the options available to restore, conserve and better their usage (^{ONU, 2003, p. 11}). The analysis of indicators under the MEA provided an assessment that led to a deduction of validity for the present article, in terms of the categories that constitute it: social, economic and environmental. Furthermore, it has an explicit consideration of the spatial and temporal context (see figure 5).

Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (^{ONU, 2003}).

Figure 5 Conceptual Framework for the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 

As can be observed in figure 5, the list of benefits or provisions proposed by the MEA is diverse, yet, for this research an emphasis was put on provision or supply that “are the products people aquire from the ecosystem: food, combustibles, fibers, fresh water [energy resources]” (^{ONU, 2003, p. 13}), where coal mining is taken as an ecosystem service, and as a finite and non-renewable resource.

Regarding the foregoing considerations and using the MEA, socio-ecological systems provide a framework for considering ecological and social dimensions in an integrated manner, in addition to their interrelations (^{Ostrom, 2009, p. 2}). These systems “are characterized as complex, adaptive systems in which social and ecological components are linked […]. The natural system is related to the social system by way of the services offered by ecosystems, which contribute to the satisfaction of human needs and create well-being” (^{Vilardy et al., 2011, p. 19}).

That being said, the SCF and its environs are taken as a socio-ecological system, insofar as it “integrates nature, the use made of her, society and institutions as a whole that interacts in a dynamic way in time and space” (^{Vilardy et al., 2011, p. 19}). For knowledge of the socio-ecological system (see figure 6) and its dynamics, the relationships between the society and its environment were analyzed. In turn, this information “makes possible a reconstruction of the processes which generated environmental [economic] problems, and to identify patterns of changes and adaptive responses the system has to these changes, which facilitates the analysis of possible future answers” (^{Walker et al., 2004}; ^{Berkes et al., 2003}; ^{González et al., 2008} cited in ^{Vilardy and Renán (2011, p. 109)}).

Source: ^{Martín-López et al. (2009)}. Adapted by the author.

Figure 6 Socio-ecological System 

As a result of the analysis, all of the ecological distribution composition in the SCF was deducted, and the relationship of the social system to the natural system was defined; that is, the dynamic interaction of ecosystems with human populations and the result of human actions, that “on one hand, act to drive transformations of ecosystems [unequal ecological distribution] and, on the other hand, modifications in ecosystems provoke changes in the distinct components of human well-being [sustainable development]” (^{Vilardy et al., 2011, p. 49}). These aspects of human well-being are associated with “the concept of necessities, in particular essential necessities that the poor should grant top priority” (^{Brundtland, 1987, p. 67}). To analyze the EDCs, Martínez-Alier’s definition was used: “conflicts that emerge from an unequal ecological distribution or upon the worsening of ecological distribution […]”, which manifests as a common theme, as the study of social conflicts related to access to resources and environmental services, and its destruction (^{Martínez-Alier, 2001, p. 1}). In this vein, ^{Lamberti (2010, p. 307)} argues that “these conflicts also involve assessment languages, and as such cannot be studied only from economic theory, which is why it is necessary to share interdisciplinary perspectives like Political Ecology.”

Political Ecology offers a holistic look at environmental conflicts, where distinct actors have different interests, values, cultures and knowledge, and who have or can use distinct languages of assessment (^{Martínez-Alier, 2009, p. 8}). Within this framework, Fisher et al., cited by ^{Vilardy et al. (2011, p. 49)} note that “the ecosystem services are benefits that the ecosystem provides which contribute to human well-being, which can be used actively or passively.” The way that these services are used affects human well-being in a variety of ways (^{ONU, 2003, p. 13}) and the SCF, as an ecosystem, provides a range of benefits to human well-being. According to the above approach, the relationship between the different variables can be derived (see figure 7).

Source: prepared by the author.

Figure 7 Relationship between direct and indirect impacts, ecological-distributive conflicts and human well-being for SD 

Ecological distribution and environmental services in the SCF

As regards figure 7, the study was based on supplying services (coal), with an emphasis on the Amagá and Titiribí municipalities, which had 16.001 and 84.229 tons of carbon production in 2017, respectively (^{SIMCO, 2017}). This means that coal should be considered the main economic activity in these places, in addition to causing the biggest changes based in the ecosystem (see Appendix). Coal exploitation is the most important source of economic income for the inhabitants of the coalfield, and the majority of family income comes from this activity. It is for this reason that in recent years, the increase in coal mines being built has been directly linked to the current internal and national demand for the mineral, as well as to scarce geological knowledge (see Appendix). This coal exploitation, as an environmental service, is interwoven with other services that the ecosystem supplies.

Among other productive activities which are environmental benefits provided by the SCF, agricultural production should be highlighted (see table 1); yet, in the Amagá municipality coal production currently exceeds coffee farming, which has been the source of economic conflicts generated by the lack of land available for farming, the deterioration of soil and the recreational use of property (see Appendix). An alternative to coffee farming is banana farming, as well as avocado and orange cultivation in smaller proportions, which are found to be isolated given their little commercial importance (see table 1). Agricultural, livestock, and forest production (^{BIRD, 2011}) as environmental services have seen decreasing participation as economic activities, given the preference of the inhabitants to work in coal exploitation (Amagá and Angelópolis), which is expressed by the mayors, who argue that the greatest economic livelihood of the municipalities’ families comes from coal exploitation (see Appendix).

The unequal appropriation and use of environmental services generates environmental conflicts which are associated with damages to the soil’s surface and to vegetation, which cause the emission of particles into the atmosphere when blasting (^{Najera et al., 2011}), decreasing water quality is found in the level of negative nature and mean impact (^{Corantioquia, 2007}), caused by practical deficiencies of illegal and informal or traditional mining, which increases constantly, according to the National Association of Industries (^{ANDI, 2010}), which states that “in environmental terms, the biggest problem is associated with unsustainable illegal mining practices” (see Appendix).

The above originates in the discharging of acid water, and the high solid content which when dumped without being treated come to affect the fauna that lives in the water bodies where they end up (^{Corantioquia, 2007, p. 125}). On a temporal scale, these environmental effects are taken advantage of on short, medium and long terms, depending on the type of ecosystem service. On a spatial scale, usage is local, given that such services are present in the same region. Distribution of benefits is differential and provokes changes in different aspects of human well-being.

As a way to describe ecological distribution, drivers of change were defined as the factors that alter an ecosystem; these drivers are important in determining the origin of transformations which the ecosystem is suffering. That is, it allows for establishing which are the EDCs that are causing changes to the ecosystem and are thus direct drivers that influence ecosystem processes and the indirect drivers that it uses, changing one or more direct drivers. Direct drivers, like indirect ones, generally operate synergistically (^{ONU, 2003, p. 22}). The interaction between some of these drivers affect resource consumption levels, and the society’s participation in consumption. Below, the main drivers of change present in the SCF are described, and the spatial scale on which they are developed (see table 2).

Table 2 demonstrates that transformations exist that affect the ecosystem and are established as drivers: population growth, energy demand, international coal prices, environmental and mining regulations, and macroeconomic policies, among others. These drivers deduce the key indicators that are the basis of the EDCs that affect access, usage or appropriation of the benefits provided by natural resources and environmental services, adding to the changes caused by human actions that are reflected through soil degradation and water contamination.

Below, the EDCs that are derived from ecological inequality in provision and supply to the SCF are described.

Coal mining and EDCs

As a result of the analysis of provision and supply for the SCF, drivers and empirical evidence (see Appendix), the EDCs that emerge are the following:

Socioeconomic conflicts

In table 3, users classify them as having greater relevance for the problem present in the SCF (see Appendix).

A decisive conflict can be verified by the necessity to earn economic income without taking into account social and mining security in processes of exploitation, that is, when life protection moves to the background. According to testimonies by community members (see Appendix): “Unfortunately there is still not awareness in the municipality about mining security, which means that miners are being worked with so that they organize, legalize and comply with regulations on mining security”; followed by the testimony: “security conditions in the municipality’s coal mines are very diverse, and great risks persist in the exploitation of these minerals, especially for a large number of tunnels and mines that are still being informally worked in.”

In addition to the above, mining exploitation does not coincide with good practices towards the environment and life, given that tradition and ancestral forms of exploitation have a greater weight and value than any other practice (see Appendix). The environment is new for the mine owners and miners, and is a new preoccupation. Accordingly, it is not yet within their priorities, as expressed by a mine worker (see Appendix): “Our mining is not very sophisticated, but we are working with good assemblies, the mines have their lamps, so it’s not with candles anymore. There are less accidents than before. We have failed in some things, but now we are trying to do things the right way.” Added to these conflicts, miner actors (see Appendix) find the following to exist:

Environmental conflicts

To complement the map of conflicts in the region, the EDCs of an environmental nature were presented (see table 3), allowing for a recognition of the consequences through environmental damages of a greater magnitude. These conflicts impact water, air and soil to a greater degree. According to the ANDI:

In environmental matters the biggest problem is associated with illegal mining and its unsustainable practices; an evident line of questioning is the impossibility in some cases and negligence in others, of many regional environmental authorities, with respect to illegal mining, making it necessary to open the debate on structure, formation of executive boards, requirements, functions and reporting systems.

Accordingly, Corantioquia (the governmental environmental organism) and the Antioquia government identify the biggest environmental problems (see table 3) as the following: worsening air and water quality, inadequate residue disposal, change in soil characteristics, soil subsidence and instability. This is in agreement with a professor at the University of Antioquia (see Appendix), who states that: “Today miners who, despite not being formal workers and being considered illegal, are advancing the betterment of the measurement system and gas control. The slide hammer technique is impacted the most by the use of combustibles, but is the most competitive.”

On a spatial scale, where changes that originate in the ecosystem also originate on a local scale, they have impacts on environmental services (described previously as agricultural and livestock production, forest loss, and availability of water fit for human consumption), according to a community member (see Appendix): “All of life revolves around mining. We have no other destination than to go to the little hole (the mine), in agriculture there is nothing to do, to bring food home […].”

EDCs and SDGs

After having analyzed the EDCs deriving from unequal ecological distribution, the goals and global indicators of SDGs were corroborated, and it was determined that the SDGs (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15) would articulate with the conflicts. In table 3 it is demonstrated that on the basis of the conflicts generated by mining exploitation, the SDGs are not complied with. In particular, these conflicts include:

In summary, the EDCs generated by coal exploitation do not allow for fulfillment of the central SDGs, which are SDG 1 “Ending poverty” in the case of socioeconomic conflicts, and SDG 13 “Climate action,” due to environmental conflicts.

Ecological distribution as an object of study

Table 5 demonstrates changes and transformations (unequal ecological distribution) that are present in the ecosystem, where coal exploitation in the coalfield is an environmental service easily accessible to inhabitants, and which is currently the primary economic activity generating income for family subsistence. However, security in the SCF is affected by the changes that are caused by other environmental supply services such as food. Additionally, mining activity is performed with the risk of developing illnesses or lesions and without having adequate health insurance.

Table 5 Provision services that supply the SCF and its connections to human well-being 

	Human well-being		Indirect drivers of change
	Minimum material godos for a good life. Coal exploitation in the Sinifaná coalfield has been present for around 200 years, and is an ancestral economic activity which the inhabitants of the area carry in their veins. Accordingly, it is an environmental service which is easily accessible for the coalfield's inhabitants. It is currently the main source of income for family subsistence. In terms of other provision services, like agricultural and livestock production, have been decreasing, which causes a risk for access to basic goods life, in this case food.		1. Demogaphic -population growth: The SCF population has been increasing. For the intercensal growth rate, the average population went from 1985-1993 to 1993-2005 of 0.30 to 0.35%, rspectively, in the five municipalities. There is also a migratory population that moves between different mines in the region, which has a meant a large concentration of the population in areas where there is more coal explotation, in this case the Amagá municipality.
	Health. Social Security System Affiliation: miners that work in ilegal or informal mining, which from the majority, have no health affiliation. This indicates that they are working at risk of illneses or lesions, with no adequate health insurance. This issue is closely related to provision services, in terms of Access to coal exploitation.		2. Economic coal mining boom: With the tendency explicated here towards coal exploitation at an international level, this has increased for three reasons: -Energy demand originating in developed countries and some developing ones. -Favorability of international coal prices- -Benefits of exploitation for producer countries. In addition to other factors: -Ilegal mining over-exploitation- Coal prices and the coal market.
	Water quality: Currently there is high water contamination, generated mostly by coal exploitation, that dump toxic waste in water sources, causing contamination of river water. Accordingly, quality of life decreases, as wáter is a source of life.		3.Sociopolitical: International and national environmental and mining legislation. -Macroeconomic policies related to natural resource exploitation.
	Air quality: air quality is worseing, as a consequence of toxic gases issued by coal exploitation in the región, this being caused both by mining and by people close to mines, respiratory illnesses diminish quality of life.		Direct drivers of change
	Safety: Safety at the Sinifaná coalfield is affected by changes in provisional environmental services, since food supplies and other godos used by the region's inhabitants are affected. Similary with the increased use in coal exploitation, a service which clashes with agricultural and livestock production, which has been decreasing. Other environmental services are also affected, like the water supply, which then effects material and health well-being of people living in the area.		1.Soil and subsoil: - Changes in soil characteristics -Soil subsidence and instability -Contamination and degradation of soil. -Changes in soil use towards subdivisions and inappropriate usage of soil. -Erosive process: soil degradation.
	Technology: Mineral extraction is mostly done manually, and in many mines with artisanal methods, with only 13% of mining units employ resources for technification and better their productive processes. Few coal exploitation mining units are recognized with appropiate technological development. This indicates that each mining business makes the necessary investments for operation, which allows them to work under adequate conditions. Accordingly, one can conclude that mining exploitations is still performed primarily in empirical form, traditional mining (workers adn worker descendants who learn the trade by necessity and proximity to mining developments), in the case of informal mining. For formal mining, efforts are made to make the necessary investments for mine operation.		2. Water: -Decreasing water quality -Drainage changes. -Mishandling of residual water. - Inadequate residue disposal. -Poor state of existing aqueduct and drainage networks. - Water contamination: water not fit for human consumption.
	Social Organization: As a form of social organization, the coalfield has seen structural changes in recent decades. This is because the región comeswith an ancestral structure of coal exploitation, as a main source of income, and all conflicts that have been exarcebated have caused changes in the family structure. Family incomes are based in the head of the household, now women and children are prepared for mining because they need economic resources in order to sustain their families. Mining with its risk, may leave them without a father, with an invalid father, ageing and without social security (fieldwork, 2012); accordingly, the desintegration of the nuclear family is increasing.		Ecosystem services “Sinifaná coalfield”
	Institutions: In terms of environmental and mining legislation and environmental and mining management, benefits to human well-being are not automatic, not are they distributed equally. The Mining Code does not differentiate between large-scale and small segments of the population, in this case the large-scale mining, which ae those who have the capital important to comply with regulations established by the Colombian state, leaving to one side a considerable precentage of miners, whose bad practices are increasing environmental problems with the excessive use of coal as an ecosystem service is jeopardizing its future availability.		Provision and supply: Food production, related to forests, supply of fresh water and energy resources -coal. Agricultural, livestock and forest production as envioronmental services have decreased in production and participation as an economic activity, given inhabitant's preference to work in coal exploitation, especially in the Amagá and Angelópolis municipalities, where mayors express that the large part of familiy economies are sustained by voal exploitation for the people who live in those municipalities.

Source: Prepared by the autor base on ^{UN (2003)}.

As a consequence, environmental services provided by the ecosystem, and what people expect from it, were elaborated on. This made it possible to highlight coal exploitation as the principal economic activity among the region’s inhabitants. Similarly, it reveals the way human well-being has multiple components, including the minimum material goods required for a good life, health, security, technology, social organization and institutions. Human intervention in the ecosystem can affect benefits to society, and are given through indirect drivers, which in the case of the coalfield are caused by demographic growth, the coal mining boom -the overexploitation of illegal and informal mining-and Colombian environmental and mining legislation.

EDCs as a central dilemma

From a holistic perspective, EDCs were identified as unleashing social and economic conflicts which go against SD in the region. This makes possible the deduction that within the reach of EDCs, two major limitations exist: small scale mining -informal or traditional-, which is done based on coal exploitation without any fulfillment of technical and environmental requirements; and coal exploitation as an economic activity upheld by the inhabitants with a strong tradition and set of customs, and which is considered the main source of income.

Seen from different interests, or assessment languages, it is difficult for miners to stop working with coal, given that their main concern is survival and the generation of economic resources. Accordingly, it becomes difficult for miners to resolve these conflicts. Until these differences are resolved, then, new conflicts based on bad mining practices will continue to arise, and the well-being of future generations will be damaged as a consequence.