Acceso usuarios
Este artículo analiza el potencial democrático de la Agenda 2030 para el Desarrollo Sostenible desde un enfoque crítico basado en la teoría de la democracia sustantiva. Partiendo de la hipótesis de que la Agenda 2030 contiene, en su formulación, una propuesta implícita de fortalecimiento democrático se plantea que el desarrollo sostenible solo puede ser alcanzado mediante estados activos y políticas públicas orientadas a la protección de derechos, la redistribución de recursos y el fortalecimiento institucional. En este marco, el artículo asume que el vínculo entre desarrollo y democracia sustantiva es clave para enfrentar la crisis actual de legitimidad que atraviesan las instituciones democráticas a nivel global.
La investigación emplea un enfoque cualitativo basado en una estrategia de análisis de contenido predominantemente deductivo. A partir de un marco teórico que articula aportes de diversas corrientes democráticas contemporáneas, se construye un sistema de categorías analíticas que permite evaluar las ciento sesenta y nueve metas específicas que integran los diecisiete Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible. Las cuatro categorías utilizadas como variables analíticas son: i) protección de los derechos de la ciudadanía; ii) redistribución y equidad; iii) participación política y empoderamiento ciudadano; y iv) fortalecimiento institucional orientado a la paz y la seguridad humana. Cada meta fue analizada y codificada utilizando el software Atlas.ti, y los resultados fueron validados por dos investigadoras en rondas sucesivas.
Los resultados obtenidos evidencian que los ODS incorporan de forma significativa los ejes relativos a dos de las dimensiones: protección de los derechos y redistribución y equidad, con una presencia cercana al 40% en ambos casos. La dimensión institucional está presente en un 34% de las metas, mientras que la participación ciudadana aparece de forma marginal (5%). Este patrón revela que la Agenda 2030 prioriza un enfoque democrático orientado a resultados (garantía de derechos y equidad), pero presenta debilidades estructurales en relación con los procesos participativos y de empoderamiento ciudadano.
El artículo concluye que la Agenda 2030 puede ser interpretada como una herramienta de profundización democrática, aunque con importantes matices. Su implementación efectiva requiere una lectura crítica, situada y transformadora por parte de los Estados y las sociedades civiles, capaz de conectar el desarrollo sostenible con la justicia social, la equidad y la participación política como condiciones necesarias para restaurar la legitimidad democrática en el siglo XXI
This article presents a critical analysis of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, focusing on its democratic potential in the current context of institutional crisis and democratic disaffection. The study is grounded in the theoretical framework of substantive democracy, which emphasizes not only the procedural dimensions of democracy, but also the material, symbolic and political conditions necessary for the effective exercise of citizenship. From this perspective, the article posits that the 2030 Agenda incorporates, albeit implicitly, a normative commitment to democratic deepening, insofar as it promotes the protection of human rights, the redistribution of wealth, and the strengthening of public institutions as central pillars of sustainable development.The research departs from the hypothesis that sustainable development, as framed in the 2030 Agenda, cannot be achieved without active and capable states that guarantee fundamental rights and promote equity. In light of the increasing erosion of democratic legitimacy in many liberal democracies—driven by socioeconomic inequality, institutional inefficiency, and the emergence of authoritarian populisms—the article argues that reconnecting development with the ideals and practices of substantive democ-racy is essential. By locating the 2030 Agenda within this debate, the paper proposes a systematic examination of the extent to which the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) reflect and promote the principles of democratic governance.To that end, the study adopts a qualitative content analysis methodology (Mayring, 2000), using a pre-dominantly deductive approach. Based on a thorough literature review on democratic theory, the role of the state, and the crisis of liberal democracy, the article constructs an analytical framework composed of four key dimensions derived from the concept of substantive democracy: (i) protection of citizens’ rights; (ii) redistribution and equity; (iii) political participation and citizen empowerment; and (iv) political insti-tutions oriented toward peace and human security. These four variables function as analytical proxies for evaluating the democratic content of the 169 targets that make up the 17 SDGs. Each target was treated as an autonomous textual unit and coded based on the presence (1) or absence (0) of each variable.Data collection and coding were carried out in two phases. In the first, one researcher conducted the initial coding of all 169 targets using the Atlas.ti software. In the second, a second researcher reviewed and validated the coding results, discussing discrepancies and reaching consensus decisions. This du-al-phase validation process enhanced the internal reliability of the findings and allowed for a more consistent interpretation of the data. Quantitative aggregation of the coding results enabled the iden-tification of general trends as well as comparative analysis across the different goals and dimensions.The results of the analysis show that the Agenda 2030 incorporates democratic principles in a partial and asymmetric manner. The most strongly represented dimensions are the protection of rights (88%) and redistribution and equity (88%), which appear explicitly or implicitly in the majority of the SDG targets. These results confirm the presence of a results-oriented vision of democracy, emphasizing the need for material conditions and state interventions to ensure social justice and inclusion.The institutional dimension—understood as the strengthening of public institutions and democratic gover-nance—was present in 70% of the targets. This reveals a moderate but relevant concern for the consoli-dation of state capacities and the role of institutions in delivering sustainable development. However, the most underrepresented dimension was political participation and citizen empowerment, which appeared in only 47% of the targets. This indicates a significant democratic deficit in the Agenda, as it fails to suffi-ciently incorporate the active role of citizens in decision-making processes and the design of public policies.The paper provides a detailed analysis of each of the four dimensions across the 17 SDGs. Notably, Goals 1 to 5 (covering poverty, hunger, health, education, and gender equality) strongly reflect the rights-based dimension, while Goal 5 (gender equality) stands out as the most balanced, integrating all four dimensions at higher levels than the rest. Goals focused on economic prosperity (Goals 7 to 11) display an intermediate integration of equity and institutional concerns but lack citizen participation components. Environmental goals (Goals 12 to 15) show limited democratic content overall, suggesting that sustain-ability has not been fully conceptualized from a rights- or governance-based perspective. The article also presents aggregated data showing the degree of convergence between the SDGs and each democratic dimension. These comparative graphs and tables underscore a recurring pattern: while the Agenda engages with social justice and human rights rhetorically and normatively, it does not fully translate these values into mechanisms that promote civic agency or participatory governance. This reveals a technocratic bias in the design of the Agenda, aligned with critiques in the development litera-ture that highlight its managerial orientation, normative universalism, limited participatory frameworks, and depoliticized narratives (Cornwall & Brock, 2005; Sachs, 1992).Moreover, the study identifies a methodological limitation in that environmental dimensions were not included in the analysis framework, despite being a core component of the sustainable development paradigm. This was a deliberate choice aimed at narrowing the scope of the analysis and enhancing the applicability of the proposed methodology. However, the article acknowledges this exclusion as a lim-itation and suggests that future research should incorporate environmental rights as part of a broader democratic conception.In conclusion, the article argues that the 2030 Agenda has the potential to contribute meaningfully to the democratic renewal of development policy. However, realizing this potential requires a situated, crit-ical, and political interpretation by states and civil societies. The Agenda must be implemented not only as a set of technocratic goals but as a political project that reconnects sustainable development with substantive democracy. Strengthening public action, ensuring equitable distribution, and protecting hu-man rights are necessary but insufficient if not accompanied by active civic engagement, participatory mechanisms, and institutional accountability.Ultimately, embracing a democratic reading of the 2030 Agenda is not merely an academic task but a polit-ical imperative. In a context of increasing authoritarianism, social fragmentation, and institutional distrust, re-politicizing the development agenda and expanding the role of citizens in shaping public decisions are essential steps toward legitimizing and strengthening the democratic pact in the 21st century.
