Students win competition with essay about why the SDGs need a system redesign

“Winning this competition was a great honor and quite unexpected for us. Our goal was to look beyond the current horizon and address the critical question of what happens after the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) expire in 2030,” say the students.

The duo are the winners of the Spring 2026 semester BI Opinion Essay Competition, organized by the BI Centre for Sustainability and Energy as part of the master’s course in Ethics and Sustainability in Organizations. Both are pursuing a Master's in Business.

Real-world questions

The competition aims to bridge the gap between academic theory and public discourse. By tasking students with writing persuasive, research-backed opinion pieces, the initiative prepares future leaders to navigate the increasingly complex landscape of global sustainability.

Marita Vogt, Corporate Sustainability Lead at EY Norway and member of this year's jury, highlights the importance of this analytical approach:

“At EY, we believe in shaping the future with confidence and integrity. As a jury member, I value how this competition pushes students to critically review complex topics and argue for their standpoints with scientific backing. This year’s finalists represent an impressively high standard. Each essay brings a clear viewpoint, strong reasoning, and credible sources to the sustainability debate.”

The failure of design

The winning essay, written for an opinion essay assignment on "What should follow Agenda 2030?", delves into the limitations of Agenda 2030. It argues that the failure to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is not a lack of ambition, but a fundamental failure of design. The authors contend that the planet cannot be governed by dashboards and measurement alone.

They highlight the "uncomfortable fact" that humanity has already crossed six of nine planetary boundaries, suggesting that current "green growth" strategies often ignore the reality of physics and ecological deficits.

“While the SDGs were vital for uniting the world under a common language, the reality is that they haven't worked as intended. It was eye-opening to see how little progress has been made. It’s clear that we cannot reach these goals through voluntary action alone,” Iver explains.

Nicolai adds, “We need to move beyond simply telling people to live sustainably and instead focus on incentive-based systems. If you increase the price of a plastic bag for example, behavior changes instantly. We must apply that same logic to the global economy, shifting from slogans to a design that makes sustainability the default through hard incentives.”

A call for systemic change

The essay emphasizes that while the SDGs provided a shared language, they cannot rely on voluntary alignment. They assert that sustainable change requires "hacking" human psychology and engineering default outcomes through stricter regulation.

“We are looking at what happens after 2030, and the solution lies in a complete system redesign. If we don't proactively change the rules now, we risk leaving the system to redesign itself through the force of a climate crisis, and that is a much more painful path,” they warn.

This year’s jury for the Opinion Essay Competition consisted of Maria Vogt from EY, Oda Bjerkan from Global Compact Network Norway, Caroline Dale Ditlev-Simonsen (BI) and Ann Kristin Helgeland Calisch (BI).

Read the winning essay here.