Synergy – for example SDG 5 harmonizes with other SDGs in order to be long-standing and prevalent

rather than to compromise other SDG in order for SDG 5 to withstand.

Trade-off problems – allocating funds.

SUMMARY

 SDGs or Sustainable Development Goals is an agenda set by the United Nations with over 193
state members all over the world to participate in achieving the goals set by the year 2030.
 Basically SDGs are framework for the policies created in order to live a world where
interconnecting system and facets such as economic, social, and environmental facets are in
harmony.
 However, of course the world is not perfect. A form of paradox will always exist in the world, the
only thing we can do to create a harmonious world to minimize harm and maximize the
improvement of living conditions considering the different facets. The authors indicated that
there are synergies and trade-offs between and within the goals themselves.
 Synergy in simple term is how two or more SDGs interact and work together in order to improve
the living conditions of human lives. The authors of the study found that SDG 1 has the highest
level of synergy as it encompasses and correlates to many SDGs. For example, if walang poverty
or if poverty is eliminated, then people would no longer suffer from lack of healthcare that is
SDG 3, people then would be productive thus contributing to the economy this is SDG 8, and
lastly, people and children, especially, would receive equal and proper education this is SDG 4.
 On the other hand, some SDGs have higher trade-offs. In simple terms, trade-off means having
to compromise other SDGs in order for one SDG to be achieved. The authors found that out of
all the SDGs, SDG 13 that is Climate Action has the highest trade-off. This just means that climate
action is compromised for the other SDG to flourish. An example would be creating more
infrastructure leads to neglecting to consider the impact of building more infrastructure to
climate.

TAKEAWAY

 Although SDGs are very simple to understand, for example no poverty means eliminating
poverty and Peace, justice and strong institution means as it is. However, as easy as it may
sound, by treating the 17 SDGs as intertwined it now becomes complicated and would introduce
a lot of conflict to policy makers.
 For example, in the Philippines, although we would want to introduce ourselves with new
innovation and strengthen our ties with other countries economically—if we put more of our
attention to this, we might neglect the needs of the local which compromises other SDGs. A
good example of this is the struggle of local products when competing with imported goods.
 Another good example of the complex nature of SDGs is the occurring problem we have in the
Philippines, that is the modernization of jeepneys. Although it aims to be innovative and
sustainable specifically referring to SDG 9 and 11, it now overlooks the situation of the jeepney
drivers that is the fact that they cannot afford to adapt with the sudden program for the
phaseout of traditional jeepneys as one modern jeep already costs a lot of money. In this
 problem, SDG 1 is evidently being compromised. Just like what the research study indicated, one
of the main consequence of trade-offs between SDGs is the allocation of funds.
 For me, I think it would be better if we consider the context to which where we are currently
living in—does the current state of living or socioeconomic status of most people in the country
compatible with the SDGs of the country? Which SDGs should be prioritized first especially that
we are a developing country?
 Prioritization is vital because to be able to have a developed community and sustainable living,
the principle of minimizing harm and maximizing benefits should always be considered.
 For example the priority of the Philippines is becoming more progressive on gender equality
o The church recognizes the LGBTQ+
o We have national women’s month, that is this month of march