search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
gained priority and has been realised in some sectors, particularly the industrial sector. Concurrently, energy intensity has steadily declined at the Asia-Pacific regional level (UNESCAP 2018). For SDG 14 (Oceans), progress was made against indicator 14.5.1 (marine protected areas) with Asia-Pacific region’s total increase of 13.8 percent for coastal and marine protected areas in the period 2004-2017 (SDG target 14.5) (The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services [IPBES] 2018). For SDG 15 (Life and Biodiversity), five indicators (15.1.2, 15.2.1, 15.4.1, 15.6.1 and 15.a.1) showed positive progress over the past 15 years. Countries in the Asia-Pacific region saw a 0.3 per cent growth in protected area coverage in terrestrial protected area between 2004 and 2017. Also, many countries in the region are on track to fulfil Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 of declaring 17 per cent of the land as protected areas.


The two areas that require most urgent and significant attention in the Asia-Pacific region are disaster risk reduction and resource efficiency. Indicators in these two areas are related to multiple SDGs and have showed setback during the past 15 years. For instance, disaster-related indicators (persons affected by disasters, economic loss from disasters, national/local disaster risk reduction strategies) belong to SDG 1 (indicators 1.5.1, 1.5.2, 1.5.3, 1.5.4), SDG 11 (indicators 11.5.1, 11.5.2, 11.b.1, 11.b.2) and SDG 13 (indicators 13.1.1, 13.1.2, 13.1.3), holding back progress of these three goals. Considering that the region lies in the ‘Pacific Rim of Fire’ and within the cyclone belt, Asia-Pacific needs urgent and significant attention in disaster risk reduction strategies. Indicators related to resource efficiency (material footprint, domestic material consumption) contribute to the regression of SDG 8 (indicators 8.4.1, 8.4.2) as well as SDG 12 (indicators 12.2.1, 12.2.2) and ultimately threaten the long-term sustainability of the resource- intensive, manufacturing-oriented economies of many countries in the region while contributing to significant environmental degradation with its health-related impacts. Inadequate capacity to manage fast-growing amounts of waste and wastewater undermines progress being made under other SDGs. The Asia-Pacific region alone generates almost 40 per cent of the world’s waste (Kaza et al. 2018) and open dumping of waste continues to be the most commonly deployed waste management approach (UNEP 2017a). As to SDG 3 (Health), progress has been polarised. While a positive change has been observed for one of its 3 indicators (3.9.3), there are signs of major deterioration in condition associated with indicator 3.9.1 on air pollution mortality.


25 Indian states ban plastic bags (Phartiyal and Jadhav 2018). Conclusion


Progress towards the SDGs in each Asia-Pacific sub-region varies significantly. All sub-regions must accelerate progress if they are to achieve the environmental dimension of the SDGs. East and South-East Asia leads the region in its progress towards restoring water-related ecosystems (6.6.1), supporting LDCs in building sustainable and resilient buildings (11.c.1), and ensuring the conservation and restoration of forest area (15.1.1). Oceania has shown positive progress in maintaining the genetic diversity of local breeds (2.5.2) and reducing CO2


per unit of value added (9.4.1), but has faced setbacks in disaster risk reduction, water quality and ecosystems, and sharing biodiversity benefits. The Central and South Asia sub-region shows progress in persons affected by disasters (1.5.1, 11.5.1, 13.1.1) and reducing CO2


but shows set back in biodiversity-related indicators such as local breeds for agriculture (2.5.2), sustainable fish stocks (14.4.1), and strategies for sharing biodiversity benefits (15.6.1).


emission


emissions per unit of value added (9.4.1),


Sustainable Development Goal


19


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136