MUSIC] Humanity finds itself at,

perhaps, the most exciting and challenging juncture in its history. When our early ancestors
traded their

nomadic ways for fixed addresses, they, presumably, initially, allowed their waste products to

fall wherever they were produced. And they took freely of game for

food and trees for energy. Later, they realized they needed to

manage how they used these natural resources because they were getting

sick from drinking polluted water. Water that was polluted by their

own waste and the local food and energy sources were

rapidly being depleted. As the global population grew,

it became obvious that management of resources at

the regional level was also necessary. As the quality of our air and

the water around any given region is influenced by the actions

in neighboring regions. Climate and

other impacts of human activity that can be seen at the planetary level,

have now made us realize that there’s a need to manage our use

of resources at the global level. A catalyst for moving into this phase in human history

may well have been the pictures of Earth from space sent back to Earth by

Apollo astronauts in the 1970s. I know you've all seen this

picture because it is one of, or maybe even the picture that has been

most downloaded from the Internet. Despite it's age,

this photo continues to fascinate us, and there are two things about it that

are so obvious, I can guarantee you, you have never really

stopped to contemplate them. Firstly, it shows clearly that our

ancestors were wrong to call this planet Earth, more correct would have

been to christen it water or ocean, as the ocean covers

over 70% of the earth surface. The other salient feature of the Earth

that can be seen in the photo, is that our planet is not connected in

any other way, has no umbilical cord, if you like, to any other body in space. Thus, this picture
provides proof that

once we've used the natural resources upon which we are dependent,
those resources will not be replenished. The photo also shows us that it is, essentially,
impossible to

really get rid of our waste. Plastic in the ocean? Where else would it be? When we since the
1950s have known that

it is, essentially, non-degradable. And our culture has

embraced its one time use. Climate change, our society has since

the Industrial Revolution relied on combustion of nearly inert, solid carbon

products, which has resulted in an excess production of carbon containing

greenhouse gas waste, including CO2. As in the case of plastic in the oceans, we mostly don't
see this waste,

but it is still with us. Despite the fact that we've

had this visual evidence since the Apollo space missions that

the Earth's resources are not infinite. It wasn't until 2015 when the 193

member countries of the UN adopted the 2030 Agenda for

Sustainable Development that we got a global convention

acknowledging our resources are limited. A possible explanation for

the long gap between having evidence of resource limitation and

its acknowledgment in the political arena might be that once you

acknowledge something is limited, you then have to begin to consider how

that something is going to be shared. The sustainable development goals or

SDGs are a part of the 2030 agenda. And they can be seen as a vision for

how we want to share the Earth's resources among what will soon be 9 to 10 billion

people all with a right to development. This makes the SDGs relevant for every

person, country, and company on Earth. I met with Mogens Lykketoft,

a Danish member of parliament and a former foreign minister for Denmark,

who was chairing the United Nations general assembly when

the SDGs were adopted. I asked him how he views the SDGs

in relation to earlier global development goals. Mogens, you sat at the head of the table

when the SDGs or Agenda 2030 was adopted. So, of course, that makes it

something very special for you. But is there anything really

special about the SDGs or the 2030 Agenda?

>> Well, the United Nations has defined

many good agendas for the world. But this is the most

comprehensive one we ever saw. Realizing that we should not only,

of course, continue the fight against extreme poverty, as we fought so

good in the first 15 years of the century. But we had to combine it with much, much greater
attention to

the limitation of global resources and a more fair distribution

of global resources. That is actually what the 17 goals for

sustainable development is. It's about both social, economic, and environmental sustainability.

>> And what about the process? Was it different in arriving at the goals? Was there anything
different about

that compared to earlier agendas or earlier agreements?

>> Very much so. I think it was the first time

in UN history we saw such a strong participation

from the civil society. And my strong impression is we would never have gotten such a strong,

even revolutionary, global agenda adopted only through

the work of 193 governments. If it hadn't been for at least 8

million people from civil society participating in the preparations for

this, we would not have had near as ambitious an agenda as we have now.

>> You mentioned civil society there. I've noticed, and it's really a good news, that very many
companies

are also picking up on the SDGs. But rather often we're seeing that

they're saying 17's too many we can't deal with that. So they pick out two or

three they think they're good at and really try and

profile themselves with them. What do you think about cherry picking?

>> It's important that every agent, every party in this discussion, realizes the total
interconnection

between the goals and the necessity to move forward

on all goals at the same time. But of course, there are companies

who have special qualifications and special issues. And it's very importantly, actually,

that together with the civil society we have very strong business community

now arguing for higher standards and higher national ambitions in order

to push forward the technologies and products we need for

fulfilling this great agenda. I think that what we see now is

that in the forefront of this, besides the NGOs, we have the big cities, the big states, for

instance in the U.S., and big companies. We need much more attention from national

governments still, but it's a good start. We have these strong partners

in the business community and in the civil society.

>> Mogens, I know it's impossible to look into the future, and I'm not

going to ask you to be a soothsayer. But how important do you think it is,

that we make these goals, that we achieve these goals?

>> It's really existential for humanity. >> Existential. >> It's necessary to realize that goal 13,
climate change, is the most urgent one. Because without really changing the development on
climate, without really

limiting the global warming, we will not be able to mobilize the resources for

the rest of this very great agenda. Because global warming would create huge,

forced migration, new conflicts, a lot of resources being sucked away

from the totality of this agenda. That's why it's so

urgent to act on climate. In doing that, we will be able to make

progress on a lot of other issues on this agenda, as well.