A Realistic Goal? Culture in the Sustainable Development Agenda

Seventeen is a lot.

It is surely the sign of a United Nations insider that they can remember the names and numbers (and even the associated colours) of each of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), while most other people can likely only name one or two.

It is perhaps understandable that there might be resistance to adding a further goal, which would risk making the global sustainable development agenda even harder for people to get their heads around.

However, the core message of the #culture2030goal campaign, in underlining the need to consider culture as a goal alongside the other existing SDGs, is: can we afford not to?

The campaign brings together global and regional democratic networks, representing people and institutions from across the arts, culture and heritage sectors. It concentrates their insights and energy to advocate for a more focused, comprehensive approach to the integration of culture into policy planning and action.

Crucially, it sees the role of culture in development as:

1. a goal in its own right, one that is already recognized in the place of cultural rights in the broader human rights framework as well as various United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) conventions;
2. an enabler of the achievement of other goals, through its promotion of growth, well-being and social cohesion; and
3. an underpinning factor that determines not just policy effectiveness but also how we live together as societies.

Bearing witness to the role of culture in development

Particular highlights of the campaign’s work to date have included contributions to wider debates around development and our analysis of the place accorded to culture in current implementations of the 2030 Agenda, as seen in voluntary national and local reviews.

Our analysis in 2025 shows that in all but two clusters of goals identified, over a third of VNRs [voluntary national reviews] acknowledged the role of culture.

These analyses have already brought to light some significant conclusions. Despite the arguably limited attention paid to culture in the 2030 Agenda, all voluntary national review (VNR) countries in recent years have made a connection between culture and development.

Far from being restricted to those SDGs that explicitly touch on culture (SDG 4 on promoting a culture of peace and appreciation of cultural diversity, SDG 8 on cultural tourism and SDG 11 on safeguarding cultural heritage), governments are highlighting connections across the Agenda. Our analysis in 2025 shows that in all but two clusters of goals identified, over a third of VNRs acknowledged the role of culture.

The analysis also echoes the campaign’s assessment of the diverse role that culture plays in and around development frameworks. It highlights aspects from a focus on the protection and promotion of culture as a public policy goal, through to an understanding of how culture can act as a determinant of the success in achieving objectives in other areas. Beyond that, not only do nearly 40 per cent of reviews cite culture as something that makes their countries what they are, but two thirds highlight the need to promote cultural change across different areas.

The other – and perhaps most significant – element of our work has been the development of a draft culture goal, complete with a set of possible targets. In the context of VNRs, these have provided a lens through which to look at implementation.

In particular, it allows us to identify those countries taking a particularly broad and deep approach. Over the last three years, we have highlighted as strong examples Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Ecuador, the Federated States of Micronesia, Finland, Guyana, Lithuania, Malta, Mexico, Oman, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Portugal, Qatar, Seychelles, the Solomon Islands, Suriname, Vanuatu and the European Union. It is notable that this list includes countries from almost every continent, and at very different levels of economic development.

Hard questions, clear answers

The draft goal is, however, much more than just a framework for analysis. Indeed, it also aims to provide an answer to one of the key questions facing those advocating for culture to be considered as a goal: is culture “goalable”? Other questions include whether a culture goal is desirable, whether this carries risks and whether it is too early to talk about it.

Addressing the first question, the zero draft of a culture goal published at the 2022 UNESCO World Conference on Cultural Policies and Sustainable Development, known as MONDIACULT, held in Mexico City, set out to demonstrate that culture could be presented in the same format as existing SDGs, including targets and means of implementation. The revised draft – Version 1 – was launched at MONDIACULT 2025 (Barcelona, Spain, 29 September–1 October 2025), and takes us a step further, highlighting a set of potential indicators that would allow for progress to be tracked.

The draft, of course, remains a draft, and there are significant refinements still to be made, but already the process followed in its preparation has allowed voices to be heard from around the world, across the arts, culture and heritage spaces, and beyond. We need to continue to listen. Nonetheless, we believe that the draft goal represents an important proof of concept, and evidence that culture is, indeed, “goalable”.

Next comes the question of whether a culture goal is desirable. We are clear in our support for this – it is in the title of our campaign. However, it is also a goal that has been supported by the UNESCO member States that signed up to the MONDAICULT output document released last month.

This conference, explicitly focused on the topic of the need for a goal, highlighted both the contribution that culture can make to development – if properly mobilized – as well as the importance of culture as an objective in itself. In doing so, it echoed a long-standing argument of the campaign: that a lack of a goal leads to an under-mobilization of resources and energies for development, less well-designed policies and an incomplete framework.

We believe that a culture goal, far from diluting investment in and attention to other goals, will make them more achievable.

The third question is linked to the second, based on the argument that a culture goal risks embedding an undesirable policy approach. Ironically, fears here are directed as much towards more socially liberal actors as towards more nativist or conservative ones.

Clearly, as a campaign we have consensus that public investments in culture pay off many times over, but more importantly here, our conception of a goal includes but also goes beyond more traditionally defined cultural policies. It is hard to argue that culture affects success in other areas, both as a source of inventiveness and well-being, but also as an underpinning factor that shapes how people view and engage with change. These are factors that go beyond politics.

Finally, there are voices that argue that it is too soon to be talking about a culture goal. With 2030 rapidly approaching, we need to focus our energies on success in the current agenda. However, this is precisely why we also see the need to talk about culture as a goal: to encourage its integration into frameworks for sustainable development implementation today. Indeed, our culture goal is also intended to provide a framework that interested governments – at the local, national and regional levels – can use to structure their mobilization of culture. 

Conclusion

This article has argued that the case for the role of culture in sustainable development, and for a dedicated goal, is strong. Yet this cannot only be a discussion for the culture sector itself. As part of the preparation of the latest version of our draft goal, we have explicitly included the inputs of a wider range of stakeholder groups, including particular Indigenous communities. The goal sets as one of its targets the need to integrate culture into broader policymaking.

We are aware, however, that advocates for a culture goal need to go further still, to ensure that there is consensus that such a goal is possible, desirable, non-political and timely. Indeed, we believe that a culture goal, far from diluting investment in and attention to other goals, will make them more achievable. Discussions around the shape of a goal that serves not just culture but all areas of development are both necessary and welcome. We look forward to engaging with anyone interested in taking such discourse further.