So you're asking me to go back to grad school. I will pass on a definition from the Brundtland commission, if I may. It's been a while.
SD is a simple concept with a really poor track record in implementation, and there has been a real problem with taking this notion, the general definition of balancing environment, economy, and society, balancing decisions to get sort of positive outcomes in those three spaces, and making clear the trade-offs. We actually do it very well in regulatory analysis. If you look at the RIAS, regulatory impact analysis statements, in the Gazette part I online, there's a very clear outline for what you get for what you spend, and who's impacted and how much. But there then seems to be a gap up to the SDS level where that view, which is ingrained in the bureaucracy, doesn't make it into the high-level declarations around the SDS.
Just to finish, it's balancing environment, economy, society, and decisions, and making clear trade-offs, but I think more importantly, moving to implementation. That's where I think we're really suffering.