I believe SDGs are more sort of benchmarks or optimum expected end results and hence, obviously it is an Utopian thinking rather than set goal. SDGs are multifaceted and many goals are contradicting with each other. Keeping this context in mind, it can be inferred that SDGs can't have one single solution. What is more important is to achieve the 193 agendas gradually as the time progresses.

This is the question that has worried me the most since I started investigating these issues a long time ago. I think that we must necessarily contextualize the concept of sustainable development so that it serves as a methodological guide to develop real development strategies in underdeveloped countries. My proposal is to guarantee economic growth, even when the environment is negatively impacted. First we have to save man, then we must guarantee riches that allow the protection of all the resources of the environment. I include biotic, abiotic and socioeconomic elements in the concept of the environment. Obviously, it includes man and the forms of culture. If you are interested in the subject we can exchange, I include a fragment of one of my articles published in Spanish for us to exchange ideas on how I see the issue of sustainable development.

THE DEGREES OF SUSTAINABILITY AND ITS CONCRETION IN ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES. Sustainable development as a socio-economic paradigm to reflect the levels or degrees of progress of a country must take into account the level reached by this in its productive forces and satisfaction of the needs of the different social groups involved in a social project of any kind. nature. The challenges it poses as a development model are not achievable for any country, however, its theoretical principles should be the goal to be achieved by all nations that are really interested in promoting a rational relationship with nature. All this leads us to think that sustainable development is a process that goes through different stages or degrees of development, starting from affirming that development and growth are two different concepts, that it is essential to differentiate in order to understand the way in which countries They can concretize sustainability. There is a first stage, that of growth, where countries are obliged to grow quantitatively in activities that truly generate wealth, even though they may cause negative impacts on the environment. These activities would be, fundamentally, aimed at creating a social capital to put it in function of rationally using the country's natural resources and creating alternatives that allow the introduction of transformative changes in the human-nature-society interaction. In this sense it would be very important for the analysis that we are proposing to introduce the seminal ideas of Carlos Rafael Rodríguez who was the first to establish the differences between development and economic growth. On the subject he states: "Some years ago I defended the idea that there are differences between growth (growth) and development (development). An economy can grow without moving towards its real development. Development is a special kind of growth that ensures a country grows constantly and through the self-drive of its economy "(Rodríguez, 1983a: 77). The unstinted Cuban economist makes it clear that growth is not synonymous with development, that economic growth must be accompanied by structural changes that allow a true integral development of the economy. At this level it is mandatory to grow to develop an economy that is capable of generating wealth, but with the absolute certainty that economic growth is a necessary condition for development; but by itself insufficient, that in a second level allow to compensate nature for the levels of deterioration caused by what we have called growth stage. Here it is essential to create conditions for industrialization that most countries that advocate sustainable development at any price, because obviously "... development is not possible without a certain measure of industrialization ..." (Rodríguez, 1983a: 77). This process must be preceded by an appropriate technological choice that responds to the characteristics of each country in which the transfer of technology plays a decisive role. These developments must be aimed at promoting endogenous development, at higher levels, as a way to guarantee sustainable development. From this stage it is essential to work to develop a culture of sustainability that in its theoretical assumptions coincides with what Dr. Antonio Núñez Jiménez has defined as a culture of nature and that we assume is valid to support our analysis. "Through the culture of nature, we understand that where economic development allows it, the least destruction of its natural factors must be maintained" (Núñez, 1998: 10). Note the quote in the quote that makes it clear that economic development will occur while maintaining the least destruction of natural conditions where possible, that is to say, at no time will economic development be abandoned, to the detriment of the welfare of society following protectionist criteria. that would harm the poorest countries. The accumulation of quantitative changes that lead to a new quality is produced from the use of renewable and non-renewable natural resources in economic activities that may be sustainable or not but that are essential to provide the necessary changes that produce a leap towards a superior quality in the relationship of man with nature. If the economic growth that we are referring to does not take place, inequalities will arise between the different social groups and countries located in the same region, which becomes a barrier to development.

For Carlos Rafael Rodríguez it was very clear that development was a process that took place as a result of transformations of a quantitative and qualitative nature. In an interesting analysis that has to serve as a reference to understand the levels of sustainability we are proposing, it says: "Developed countries are those that have a higher real income per capita because they have a determined economic structure, based on a certain degree, more or less than industrialization. Therefore, the economic development of a country must be defined as a process that leads from its subaltern economic position to that developed position "(Rodríguez, 1983b: 57). Observe how the idea of ​​promoting a "determined economic structure" is constantly present, which speaks of the structural foundations that it is essential to have in order to consider that an economy is developed. Among the factors of a quantitative type, industrialization is a factor to which a preponderant value is attached, of those that lay the foundations to promote development. For economists "... we love development - says the Cuban economist - to develop is, in the first place, to grow harmoniously: to grow in a way that allows the self-sustained development of the economy" (Rodríguez, 1983c: 481). In another interesting article on the subject, it outlines a very illuminating idea in the current conditions of neoliberal globalization that has an extraordinary importance for the underdeveloped peoples. It raises that not always the increase of the productivity in consumption, the national saving and the income constitute economic development. They are simply accumulation of quantitative changes that by themselves do not produce a new quality. For these "developments" to become sources of development they need to be accompanied by a political will in favor of all sectors of the country and this can only be achieved in social systems where social property does not become a barrier to social development. This problem is analyzed in the following way by Carlos Rafael: "The Cuban economy of the first years of the Republic grew [...] but it did not develop. On the contrary, if Cuban economic growth had continued in the same direction and at the same pace after the 1920s, today we would be in a more critical and acute phase than we are "(Rodríguez, 1983d: 42). In these affirmations a creative application of the dialectic to the analysis of the social events is appraised. An idea pointed out in another work makes it clear that "development has to be twofold: in consciousness and in the forms of distribution" (Rodríguez, 1983e: 459). This call is very clear, it takes a development of consciousness, of all those involved in social projects to develop them, in two senses; in understanding the role of the subjective factor. The other edge of the problem lies in "the forms of distribution", referring to the theme that without a fair and equitable distribution of the goods that society produces there will never be economic development in the terms that utopically consider the defenders of sustainability that is possible achieve within capitalist society. A second stage to achieve sustainable development comes from the fact that economic growth facilitates the use of existing natural and human resources aimed at compensating nature for the damage it causes with its actions on the environment. This level is that of compensations, in essence it consists of the ability to introduce transformations of a positive nature in the natural and social processes that take place in the environment in which man lives and which as a consequence of his actions causes changes that can be irreversible These compensations can be ecological and social, starting from the idea that the relationship between man and nature has as its first act the body's own corporeal condition and the need to satisfy needs of a properly biological nature. However, these relationships are conditioned in turn by other social relations that are decided in social contexts well determined by the relationship that each individual keeps with respect to the means of production.

The compensations are produced as a result of a degree of development of the productive forces and a political will that allow changes in the productive and social processes to be introduced, by the flexibility of the different production schemes, the capacity of human resources of assuming the changes and of the existence of social organisms with maturity that have the sufficient conditions to generate social strategies directed to compensate the affected groups as a consequence of an unsustainable management of the natural resources in the region. The most illustrative example of the compensations we are referring to are the programs of the revolution considered, by far, compensations to correct necessary mistakes made in the construction of socialism in Cuba, as a result of the difficult pressures of the Special Period brought to levels never before seen by the resurgence of the policy of the US government and other socio-economic blocs against our country. The quantitative changes in the evolution of countries in the process of achieving sustainability as a higher stage of man's relationship with nature take place in all dimensions of development. In other words, communities, as social organizations, need to be able to compensate for the impacts caused by the economic activities of institutions that put into practice the policies aimed at achieving compensation. The quantitative changes, in this sense, refer to the formation of a citizenship with real capacity to participate in development, and to the construction of institutions and representative roads of the exercise of social justice, materialized in equity, equal opportunities for all the members of the society and possibilities of realizing themselves as individuals. All this forces the countries that build truly sustainable societies, that in both the first and second stages make quantitative changes that lead to new qualities in both the dimensions of development. The guarantee of the achievement of sustainability resides precisely in the accumulation of quantitative and qualitative changes in the sociopolitical dimension that facilitate the elaboration of social projects that privilege the appearance of superior qualities in the eco-environmental dimension, which logically is supported by the existence of a Social and political development strategy in accordance with the principles of sustainable development. This logic of thought leads us to find compensations through alternative socio-economic activities with a high participation of science and technology, without ignoring in this type of development the national values ​​of the participating groups. When a country produces the exhaustion of a non-renewable source of wealth for many people, there are social contradictions caused by the loss of hundreds of jobs that generate resources for directly employed workers and their families. These contradictions can be solved only if there are social systems with the sufficient capacity to reorient the existing infrastructures in the closed facilities towards new economic activities, thus avoiding the occurrence of environmental damages as a consequence of the appearance of subsistence activities that are generally they produce without arrangement to socially concerted management plans. Hence the importance of having social organizations that guarantee social compensation when such events occur. A moment to take into account at this stage is to continue developing the culture of sustainability, we talked about it in the previous stage, in the population through environmental education using all available means at that time. If the awareness of the need to move towards sustainability has not been achieved, it will not be possible to assume behaviors that generate modes of action that privilege the protection of the environment. Within this line of action a privileged place is occupied by the formation of values ​​based on the identity of each community, it is essential that the interests of each of the groups involved in the product processes be taken into account in order to respect the diversity cultural. But the existence of such projects can be considered, only if national independence is guaranteed, if all the material and human resources of the country are put in function of the development of the nation, in this aspect the economy - development link in the just political sense that Its dialectical interrelation is pointed out once again by Carlos Rafael Rodríguez when he says: "[...] an indispensable prerequisite for development is national independence. That is to say, to take into their hands the economic resources, and national independence does not mean simply having the right to the anthem and the flag but, as is well known, to assume the controls of the national economy, the fundamental controls "(Rodríguez, 1983f : 493). The solution we offer for sustainable development, at any of the levels we are proposing, is the revolutionary way. The system analysis allows to ensure, once again, that this paradigm is achieved only in the interaction of economic activities that pay the development of a region or a country, to see sustainability in an independent activity, it is possible only for not considering all its dimensions and for the existence of a linear thought where it is not taken into account that man is an active part of all the processes that take place in nature, that he is included within it, that it is impossible to separate it from all the interactions that take place between it and society. The third stage is the sustainable development to which it is not possible to arrive, from our point of view, if we have not gone through the previous ones and where both the first and the second stage elements take place, but on the basis of the existence of elements that guarantee the achievement of sustainability in all its dimensions.

Thank you, for the detailed explanation, Juan Manuel Montero Peña but when i look to the real situation then i am confused and disappointed to see the real implementation of SDGs in the project.

SDGs are the with real objective, its not possible to think or even plan for Sustainability without objective. The only part, which confused me that all the chains of targets are connected and dependable on each other Usama Awan . I am totally agree with you Priyakrushna Mohanty but to achieve one goal/target is connected with another one, off course the planning work as per our proposed objective, what we want from our project or what we want to achieve.

I strongly believe that per se a master plan approach is not helpful in promoting sustainable development. Sustainability science has increasingly opened itself to approaches of adaptive management, incremental open innovation processes, and experimental methods to increase the diversity of solutions. That is strengthening joint knowledge production and co-design processes, under the aspect of transition as a "living" process. You can see this for example in the Experimental City Approach (@James Evans). This includes a strong anchoring of co-governance and definitely a strengthening of bottom-up capacities. All this is not taken into account by a master plan. He is rigid and inflexible and favors a supposedly "strong" solution direction. In case of doubt, a master plan approach would negatively affect the resilience of an intended solution. You can see in our research that we use participatory processes with different stakeholders in flexible solutions, including in your research contexts.

It seems to me that you are right in what you say, you can not enclose reality in a Master Plan, although I do not think that is the idea that was taken into account in its preparation, the question is much more complex. From this part of the underdeveloped world where I live reality looks different, so much so that our visions are different, although I agree with you in almost everything you say. That is why I will comment on your answer in this way with the theoretical elements that I consider should contain a strategy. 1. Obviously you can not make any strategy without the participation of people who will be involved in the processes, each group has to be listened to, it must be taken into account to be able to decide. And participating is not being present, it is being listened to and considering your opinion, since those who are in the process have knowledge of what they are deciding. 2. The needs have a contextual character, depend on the geographical conditions, the culture and the level of development of the productive forces of each community, this must be taken into account to make a decision. 3. Natural resources are not factors of development, they are simply conditions of this. I think one of the problems of underdevelopment is precisely this, those who decide policies have to take into account the political, cultural, religious and ethnic variables of each region in any strategy. 4. For people to participate in their own development, we must empower them, and that is not generally done in this part of the world, Latin America, that is why they do not participate in its development. Many examples can be put to illustrate this statement, just read any newspaper about Africa or Latin America to know what we are talking about. 5. We must take into account the conditions of the world economy to develop development strategies (Master Plan), in the conditions of globalization the peripheral countries are not actors of development, we are spectators. Definitely we need a different look at this problem and scientists have a great responsibility in this, we elaborate a theory about sustainable development in the conditions of underdevelopment.

Kindly refer to my article:

The role of private sector in the implementation of sustainable development goals

It is available in my page