Reviewed Publications for the Interlinkages Tool

Publication ID	Title
Agusdinata_2022	The role of universities in SDGs solution co-creation and implementation: a human-centered design and shared-action learning process
Alcamo_2019	Water quality and its interlinkages with the Sustainable Development Goals
Anderson_2022	A systems model of SDG target influence on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
Bandari_2022	Prioritising Sustainable Development Goals, characterising interactions, and identifying solutions for local sustainability
Bangert_2017	The cross-cutting contribution of the end of neglected tropical diseases to the sustainable development goals
Bennich_2021	The bio-based economy, 2030 Agenda, and strong sustainability – A regional-scale assessment of sustainability goal interactions
Blair_2021	Contribution of Biomass Supply Chains for Bioenergy to Sustainable Development Goals
Breu_2021	Where to begin? Defining national strategies for implementing the 2030 Agenda: the case of Switzerland
Cling_2022	Interlinkages between the sustainable development goals
Coenen_2021	Two degrees and the SDGs: a network analysis of the interlinkages between transnational climate actions and the Sustainable Development Goals
Cook_2021	An appraisal of interlinkages between macro-economic indicators of economic well-being and the sustainable development goals
Coopman_2016	Seeing the Whole: Implementing the SDGs in an Integrated and Coherent Way
Cutter_2015	Sustainable Development Goals and Integration. Achieving a better balance between the economic, social and environmental dimensions
de Miguel Ramos_2020	Towards the agenda 2030: A quantitative analysis of synergies and trade-offs between the SDGs of Spain during 2000–2019
Dorgo_2018	Evaluating the interconnectedness of the Sustainable Development Goals based on the causality analysis of sustainability indicators
Dziubaniuk_2021	Challenges of network interaction in managing sustainable development projects in developing countries: case of an international consulting company
Ehrensperger_2019	Land system science and the 2030 agenda: Exploring knowledge that supports sustainability transformation
ESTAT_2021	Sustainable development in the European Union. Monitoring report on progress towards the SDGs in an EU context. 2021 edition
Fader_2018	Toward an understanding of synergies and trade-offs between water, energy, and food SDG targets
Floerke_2019	Analysing trade-offs between SDGs related to water quality using salinity as a marker
Fonseca_2020	Mapping the sustainable development goals relationships
Fuso Nerini_2018	Mapping synergies and trade-offs between energy and the Sustainable Development Goals
Gannon_2022	Delivering the Sustainable Development Goals through development corridors in East Africa: A Q-Methodology approach to imagining development futures
Gleeson_2018	Ending AIDS by 2030: The importance of an interlinked approach and meaningful youth leadership: The
Grigorescu_2022	Synergy Analysis of Knowledge Transfer for the Energy Sector within the Framework of Sustainable Development of the European Countries
Guijarro_2018	Designing a sustainable development goal index through a goal programming model: The case of EU-28 countries
Hall_2020	Water and health interlinkages of the sustainable development goals in remote Indigenous Australia
Hoeltl_2020	The interactions of sustainable development goals: The case of urban informal settlements in Ethiopia
Horan_2020	National baselines for integrated implementation of an environmental sustainable development goal assessed in a new integrated SDG index
Hutton_2018	Potential trade-offs between the sustainable development goals in coastal Bangladesh
Iacobuta_2021	Transitioning to low-carbon economies under the 2030 agenda: Minimizing trade-offs and enhancing co-benefits of climate-change action for the SDGs
IAEG-SDGs_2019	Interlinkages of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
IAEG-SDGs_2020	Second Report of the Interlinkages Workstream
ICSU_2017	A guide to SDG interactions: From science to implementation
ICSU-ISSC_2015	Review of the sustainable development goals: the science perspective.
Jacob-John_2021	Synergistic interactions of SDGs in food supply chains: A review of responsible consumption and production
Karnib_2017	Mapping the direct and indirect interlinkages across the sustainable development goals: A qualitative nexus approach
Karnib_2019	Water as Crosscutting Factor in the SDGs Under Review at the High-Level Panel Forum for Sustainable Development (HLPF) 2019 in the Arab States
Kostetckaia_2022	How Sustainable Development Goals interlinkages influence European Union countries’ progress towards the 2030 Agenda
Kroll_2019	Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Are we successful in turning trade-offs into synergies?
Kunčič_2019	Prioritising the sustainable development goals using a network approach: SDG linkages and groups
Langou Diaz_2020	Leveraging synergies and tackling trade-offs among specific Goals
Latif_2022	Nexus implementation of sustainable development goals (SDGs) for sustainable public sector buildings in Pakistan
Laumann_2022	Complex interlinkages, key objectives, and nexuses among the Sustainable Development Goals and climate change: a network analysis
LeBlanc_2015	Towards Integration at Last? The Sustainable Development Goals as a Network of Targets
LeBlanc_2017	Mapping the linkages between oceans and other Sustainable Development Goals: A preliminary exploration.
Liu_2020	Interactions between industrial development and environmental protection dimensions of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Evidence from 40 countries with different income levels
Lusseau_2019	Income-based variation in Sustainable Development Goal interaction networks
Lyytimäki_2021	Untangling the interactions of sustainability targets: synergies and trade-offs in the Northern European context
Mainali_2018	Evaluating synergies and trade-offs among Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Explorative analyses of development paths in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa
Maksymiv_2021	Strategic challenges for sustainable governance of the bioeconomy: Preventing conflict between SDGs
Mantlana_2019	Mapping the interlinkages between sustainable development goal 9 and other sustainable development goals: A preliminary exploration
Marcinko_2021	The development of a framework for the integrated assessment of SDG trade-offs in the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve
McCollum_2018	Connecting the sustainable development goals by their energy inter-linkages
Milan_2017	Clean water and sanitation for all: interactions with other sustainable development goals
Natcher_2021	A nexus approach to water, energy, and food security in Northern Canada
Nilsson_2017	Important Interactions among the Sustainable Development Goals under Review at the High-Level Political Forum 2017
Nunes_2016	The importance of an integrating framework for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals: the example of health and well-being
OECD_2017	A preliminary assessment of indicators for SDG 14 on “Oceans”
Oghenekaro_2022	Interactions between proposed energy-mix scenarios and non-energy Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A Sub-Sahara African perspective
Osman_2022	Spatial analysis of synergies and trade-offs between the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Africa
Ospina-Forero_2020	Estimating networks of sustainable development goals
Parikh_2021	Synergies and trade-offs between sanitation and the sustainable development goals
Pham-Truffert_2020	Interactions among Sustainable Development Goals: Knowledge for identifying multipliers and virtuous cycles
Philippidis_2020	Snakes and ladders: World development pathways’ synergies and trade-offs through the lens of the Sustainable Development Goals
Pingali_2022	Hunger and environmental goals for Asia: Synergies and trade-offs among the SDGs
Pradhan_2017	A Systematic Study of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Interactions
Requejo-Castro_2020	Data-driven Bayesian network modeling to explore the relationships between SDG 6 and the 2030 Agenda
Rulisa_2022	When Local Trade-Offs between SDGs Turn Out to Be Wealth-Dependent: Interaction between Expanding Rice Cultivation and Eradicating Malaria in Rwanda
Santika_2019	From goals to joules: A quantitative approach to interlinkages between energy and the Sustainable Development Goals
Scherer_2018	Trade-offs between social and environmental Sustainable Development Goals
Singh_2018	A rapid assessment of co-benefits and trade-offs among Sustainable Development Goals
Singha_2021	Satellite evidence on the trade-offs of the food-water–air quality nexus over the breadbasket of India
Stevenson_2021	A hybrid approach to identifying and assessing interactions between climate action (SDG13) policies and a range of SDGs in a UK context
Su_2022	The role of context in identifying linkages between SDG 2 (food) and SDG 6 (water)
Taka_2021	The potential of water security in leveraging Agenda 2030
Tosun_2017	Governing the interlinkages between the Sustainable Development Goals: Approaches to attain policy integration
UN Women_2018	Why gender equality matters across all SDGs: An excerpt of “Turning promises into action: Gender equality in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”
UNEP_2021	Measuring Progress: Environment and the SDGs
UNESCAP_2016	Analytical Framework for Integration of Water and Sanitation SDGs and Targets Using Systems Thinking Approach
UNESCAP_2017	Integrated approaches for Sustainable Development Goals planning: The case of Goal 6 on water and sanitation
UN-Water_2016	Water and Sanitation Interlinkages across the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
van Soest_2019	Analysing interactions among Sustainable Development Goals with Integrated Assessment Models
Vera_2022	Land use for bioenergy: Synergies and trade-offs between sustainable development goals
Vladimirova_2016	Exploring links between education and sustainable development goals through the lens of UN Flagship Reports
Wang_2022	Accounting for interactions between Sustainable Development Goals is essential for water pollution control in China
Warchold_2021	Variations in sustainable development goal interactions: Population, regional, and income disaggregation
Warchold_2022	Building a unified sustainable development goal database: Why does sustainable development goal data selection matter?
Weitz_2018	Towards systemic and contextual priority setting for implementing the 2030 Agenda
Weitz_2019	SDGs and the environment in the EU: A systems view to improve coherence
Zhang_2022	Mapping the complexity of the food-energy-water nexus from the lens of Sustainable Development Goals in China
Zhu_2022	Trade-offs and synergies among air-pollution-related SDGs as well as interactions between air-pollution-related SDGs and other SDGs

Agusdinata_2022
2022
The role of universities in SDGs solution co-creation and implementation: a human-centered design and shared-action learning process
Agusdinata D.B.
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Subnational
Geograph context: North Lombok and Mimika, Indonesia
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 5, 7
Thematical focus: university-led community engagement
Method description: Data were collected from focus group discussions (FGDs), community surveys, university course exit surveys, stakeholder interviews, and solutions performance data. Given the relatively small scale and local nature of the SDGs projects, we report a qualitative assessment of SDGs synergistic impacts. An assessment of the SDGs synergisticimpacts is based on the scale proposed by Nilsson et al. (2016)
Key results: Overall, interactions of the SDG targets involved positive synergistic interactions by giving women and indigenous people access to production resources.
Abstract: Successful implementation of solutions to reach the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) depends on harnessing synergistic interactions among SDGs and effective engagement among a diverse group of societal stakeholders. This paper presents a framework and case study for a design and engagement process in which the university takes the lead in the co-creation of SDG solutions. The model supports university-led efforts by leveraging three elements: (i) inherent synergies across SDGs, (ii) modes of solution identification, design, and implementation, and (iii) modes of stakeholder involvement and interactions. Using an integration of human-centered design (HCD) and shared-action learning (SAL), we document a case led by a large, public, research-oriented university on how different stakeholders participated in the co-creation process to find solutions. Based on the experience of about 50 students over 4 years in support of SDG implementation in Indonesia, the initiative leveraged synergies within SDG 1, 2, and 5 (related to increasing income-generating power for women and indigenous people) and SDG 7 (use of solar energy for fish preservation and crop processing). Throughout the process, interactions with stakeholders took place during design workshop courses, community consultations, mentoring and internships programs, partnering with companies and local universities and government, site visits, and immersions in local communities. The HCD-SAL model established a system for monitoring impacts across all stakeholders, particularly how the projects helped increase communities’ economic well-being. This model provides guidance for universities to develop genuine stakeholder engagement and support for finding and continuously improving SDG solutions. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature.

Alcamo_2019
2019
Water quality and its interlinkages with the Sustainable Development Goals
Alcamo J.
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: Target 6.3
Abstract: Interlinkages among the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) lead to important trade-offs and synergies among the goals and their underlying targets. The aim of this paper is to review the role of water quality as an agent of interlinkages among the SDGs. It was found that there are a small number of explicit interconnections, but many more inferred interlinkages between water quality and various targets. A review of case studies showed that interlinkages operate from the municipal to near-global scales, that their importance is likely to increase in developing countries, and that new SDG indicators are needed to monitor them. The analysis identifies many different SDG target areas where a combined effort between the water quality community and other sectors would bring mutual benefits in achieving the water quality and other targets. © 2018

Anderson_2022
2022
A systems model of SDG target influence on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
Anderson C.C., Denich M., Warchold A., Kropp J.P., Pradhan P.
Method type: Mixed (Data analysis; network analysis)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: 251 countries
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: comprehensive correlation analysis is first conducted with all unique pairs of SDG indicators. Following this initial step, a series of thresholds is used to extract SDG target pairs that are both globally representative and demonstrate robust directional evidence as being either a synergy or trade-off (We build the SDG systems model based on interactions among SDG targets. Globally representative pairs of synergies and trade-offs from the correlation analysis are identified and translated into directionally influential connections. These connections are then added into an initial SDG systems model). The directional relations of target pairs are identified using expert knowledge. Connecting factors, synonymous with nodes or variables, in the iMODELER software implies directional influence. Directional connections alter the influence of the SDG targets that exert change within the system on other downstream targets.
Key results: Among SDGs, we identify a mostly greater than 50% share of synergies for 64 of the 136 SDG pairs and a mostly greater than 50% share of trade-offs for 38 pairs (Fig. 3, right). SDGs 1, 3, 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and 17 (Partnership for the Goals) show positive associations with 10 or more goals. For these five goals, we observe a high share of synergies (i.e., ≥ 50%) with 10 or more goals for six countries including Bolivia, China, Ethiopia, Sri Lanka, Mexico, and Mozambique (Figure S6 and Data S1). SDGs characterized by negative associations with five or more other goals include SDGs 4 (Quality Education), 10, 11, 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and 16. For three (SDGs 4, 10, and 16) among these five goals, we observe a high share of trade-offs (i.e., ≥ 50%) with 10 or more goals for two countries—Great Britain and South Korea (Figure S6 and Data S1). Aggregation of target influence to goal level shows that the three most influential SDGs with leverage potential are SDGs 3, 5, and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). The pandemic has underscored the importance of leadership roles for woman (5.5).Targets 17.6 (knowledge sharing and cooperation for access to science, technology and innovation) and 17.8 (strengthen the science, technology and innovation capacity for least developed countries) also act as strong levers for development gains.SDGs 10 and 16 are identified as potential hurdles in achieving the SDGs due to the negative connections of 10.6 and 16.8 with other targets if current development processes.
Abstract: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted by the United Nations in 2015 as part of the “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” and aim to address issues ranging from poverty and economic growth to climate change. Efforts to tackle one issue can support or hinder progress towards others, often with complex systemic interactions. Thus, each of the SDGs and their corresponding targets may contribute as levers or hurdles towards achieving other SDGs and targets. Based on SDG indicator data, we create a systems model considering influence among the SDGs and their targets. Once assessed within a system, we find that more SDGs and their corresponding targets act as levers towards achieving other goals and targets rather than as hurdles. In particular, efforts towards SDGs 5 (Gender Equality) and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) may accelerate progress, while SDGs 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) are shown to create potential hurdles. The model results can be used to help promote supportive interactions and overcome hindering ones in the long term. © 2021, The Author(s).

Bandari_2022
2022
Prioritising Sustainable Development Goals, characterising interactions, and identifying solutions for local sustainability
Reihaneh Bandari, Enayat A. Moallemi, Rebecca E. Lester, David Downie, Brett A. Bryan
Method type: Mixed (Semantic analysis; Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Subnational
Geograph context: Goulburn-Murray region (Australia)
SDGs considered: 2, 6, 8, 13, 15
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: [see fig.1 in paper] In the first stage, we collected relevant data for our case study through interviews with local stakeholders and through contextual analysis of key literature. In the second stage, we defined priority SDGs, targets, and identified the most relevant interactions via contextual analysis of documents. In the interaction analysis, we explored the nature of each interaction from the collected documents, evaluated the interactions, and highlighted how implementing specific goals and targets may affect other goals/targets by scoring the effects against semi-quantitative evaluation criteria. Finally, we synthesised the main synergies and trade-offs among priority interactions and discussed potential solutions to achieve local sustainability.
Key results: More synergies than trade-offs among priority SDGs and their constituent targets. We discussed policy solutions that leverage synergistic interactions and limit the trade-offs for the successful implementation of priority SDGs. Our results highlighted that the Goulburn-Murray region is subject to ongoing changes in climate, agricultural commodity prices, international markets, and water policy reforms that may impede the achievement of the SDGs. Most trade-offs related to SDG 2 (Agricultural activities) and SDG 8 (economic growth) were associated with unsustainable agricultural or economic activities. Our analysis indicated that SDG 13 (climate action) and SDG 15 (life on land) were linked to other SDGs with only synergistic co-benefits. SDG 6 (Clean water and sanitation) was also mostly related to others through synergistic co-benefits.
Abstract: The United Nations 2030 Agenda brings a holistic and multi-sectoral view on sustainability via the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, a successful implementation of this agenda is contingent on understanding the multiple, complex interactions among SDGs, including both synergies and trade-offs, for informing planning for sustainability at the local level. Using a case study in the Goulburn-Murray region in Victoria, Australia, we prioritised global goals and targets for the local context, characterised the interactions between them, analysed the main synergies and trade-offs, and identified potential policy solutions to achieve local sustainability. We identified the five highest priority SDGs for the region as clean water and sanitation (SDG 6), agricultural activities (SDG 2), economic growth (SDG 8), climate action (SDG 13), and life on land (SDG 15). Across these five priority SDGs and their 45 targets, we found 307 potential interactions, of which 126 (41%) were synergistic, 19 (6%) were trade-offs, and 162 (53%) were benign. We highlight the most salient trade-offs, particularly how unsustainable agricultural practices could negatively affect water resources, the environment, and sustainable economic growth. Also, critical ongoing uncertainties like climate change, local policies on environmental water recovery, international markets, and emerging new technologies could pose risks for the future of agriculture and the economy. Our results provide important insights for local and regional sustainability policy and planning across multiple sectors. Our methodology is also broadly applicable for prioritising SDGs and assessing their interactions at local scales, thereby supporting evidence-based policy-making for the SDGs.

Bangert_2017
2017
The cross-cutting contribution of the end of neglected tropical diseases to the sustainable development goals
Bangert, M., Molyneux, D.H., Lindsay, S.W., Fitzpatrick, C., Engels, D.
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: developing countries
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: Neglected Tropical Diseases
Method description: n.a.

Bennich_2021
2021
The bio-based economy, 2030 Agenda, and strong sustainability – A regional-scale assessment of sustainability goal interactions
Bennich T., Belyazid S., Stjernquist I., Diemer A., Seifollahi-Aghmiuni S., Kalantari Z.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement; Modelling)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Subnational
Geograph context: Norrkoping municipality, Sweden
SDGs considered: 7, 12
Thematical focus: Targets 7.2, 7.3, 12.5
Abstract: Policy-makers face the challenge of assessing and implementing sustainability measures, while also dealing with parallel and sometimes conflicting policy agendas, long-term policy impacts, and contested interpretations of sustainability. To support evidence-based decision-making in this context, this paper presents the results from an integrated assessment of sustainability goal interactions. Links between the bio-based economy, the 2030 Agenda, and the so-called strong sustainability paradigm were explored in a regional-scale case. The analysis focused primarily on developments in the forestry and energy sectors. Direct trade-offs and synergies as well as broader systemic impacts were identified. The results show how goals from the bio-based economy, 2030 Agenda and strong sustainability paradigm are mutually interacting. Positive interactions were found within two clusters of goals, offering coherent and synergetic transition pathways within these. The first cluster encompasses developments toward intensified forestry, renewable energy, and closed-loop production systems. The second pathway supports diversified forestry and protection of critical natural capital. However, while internally coherent, trade-offs were identified between these goal clusters, demonstrating the difficulty in simultaneously making progress on goals belonging to different sustainability agendas. The results also stress the need for disaggregation and long-term assessments to identify trade-offs and synergies. Finally, the analysis highlights the theoretical potential but practical challenges of implementing the bio-based economy and 2030 Agenda in a way that adheres to strong sustainability. The analytical framework used in the present study may be adapted and applied to other decision-making contexts. It is particularly useful in settings characterized by uncertainty and unstructured problem spaces. © 2020 The Author(s)

Blair_2021
2021
Contribution of Biomass Supply Chains for Bioenergy to Sustainable Development Goals
Blair MJ, Gagnon B, Klain A, Kulišić B.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: 20 countries (case studies): Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark, France, Germany, Ghana, Italy, Kenya, Netherlands, Rural China, Rwanda, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania, United States, Zambia
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: Target 7.2
Abstract: This work evaluates the relationships between bioenergy and related biomass supply chains and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Using Nilsson et al. (2016) seven-point scoring framework, the relationships between biomass supply for bioenergy and the SDGs were evaluated based on existing synthesis papers, modeling studies and empirical analyses, and expert knowledge. To complement this, contributions to SDG targets of 37 best practice case studies from around the world were documented. In reviewing these case studies, it was found that when supply chains are implemented appropriately and integrated with existing systems, they can have overwhelmingly positive contributions. Beyond directly contributing to SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), at least half of all case studies supported progress toward SDGs 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), and 12 (Responsible Production and Consumption); however, the ways in which supply chains contributed often differed. Agricultural biomass supply chains (energy crops and residues) were most likely to contribute to SDGs 2 (Zero Hunger) and 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), while waste and forest supply chains were most likely to contribute to SDG 15 (Life on Land). The development of bioenergy systems in rural and indigenous communities also indirectly supports societal SDGs such as SDGs 1 (No Poverty), 4 (Quality Education), 5 (Gender Inequality), and 10 (Reduced Inequalities). This work informs how SDGs can be used as a normative framework to guide the implementation of sustainable biomass supply chains, whether it is used for bioenergy or the broader bioeconomy. Recommendations for key stakeholders and topics for future work are also proposed.

Breu_2021
2021
Where to begin? Defining national strategies for implementing the 2030 Agenda: the case of Switzerland
Breu T., Bergöö M., Ebneter L., Pham‑Truffert M., Bieri S., Messerli P., Ott C., Bader C.
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: Switzerland
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 3
Abstract: Five years after adoption of the 2030 Agenda, there is a general lack of progress in reaching its Sustainable Development Goals—be it on national, regional, or global scales. Scientists attribute this above all to insufficient understanding and addressing of interactions between goals and targets. This study aims to contribute to the methodological conceptualization of the 2030 Agenda’s implementation at the national level. To this end, taking the case of Switzerland, we tested and enhanced existing approaches for assessing interactions among the 2030 Agenda’s targets and for analysing the systemic relevance of priority targets. Building on our insights, the article concludes with an eight-step proposal for creating knowledge to support national 2030 Agendas.

Cling_2022
2022
Interlinkages between the sustainable development goals
Cling J.-P., Delecourt C.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and indicator level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: 160 countries
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Key results: Four key-results from analysis: (1) It concurs with previous studies on the predominant importance of positive interlinkages compared to trade-offs. (2) It underlines the relevance of conducting an analysis at the world level for these indicators, without neglecting the huge differences of context between countries worldwide. (3) According to our analysis, human development (covered mostly by SDGs 1–4) is the main factor differentiating countries at the world level (as it is to a lesser extent for every group of countries considered, regardless of their development level). Other relevant factors, to a lesser extent, are the environment, inequalities and governance.(4) Overall, the differences between countries for SDG Indicators derive primarily from their level of economic development as measured by their GNI/capita. Additionally, the authors reveal the existence of a sort of combined Kuznets inequality and environmental curves, which needs to be further investigated.
Abstract: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations in 2015 cover the three economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, as well as an additional institutional dimension related to governance. The monitoring framework of the SDGs is composed of 231 indicators. Our objective is to measure interlinkages between these indicators using the UN Global SDG Database, based on the premise that the United Nations from the outset considered that taking into account these interlinkages and the integrated nature of the SDGs would be a prerequisite for achieving these goals. The Multiple Factor Analysis (MFA) used to measure the correlation between indicators shows that SDGs related to human development alone contribute to 30 % of the observed variance of all the indicators at the world level, and that country performances in this field are strongly correlated to their income level. These results suggest that successful development policies contribute both to improving the national productive capacity and the different dimensions of human development. We mostly observe synergies (positive correlations) rather than trade-offs (negative correlations) between indicators. The Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA) distinguishes three groups of countries according to their performance in terms of SDG indicators. Consistent with our MFA results, we find that the differentiation between countries, and hence the composition of these groups, mainly reflects their economic development as measured by their GNI/capita. © 2022 Elsevier Ltd

Coenen_2021
2021
Two degrees and the SDGs: a network analysis of the interlinkages between transnational climate actions and the Sustainable Development Goals
Coenen J., Glass L.-M., Sanderink L.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Multinational
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: Given the interconnectedness of climate change and sustainable development, policymakers and scholars have started to investigate how climate actions can contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and vice versa. To date, research has mainly focused on the national and international levels, while little is known about the interlinkages between climate actions and the SDGs at the transnational level. Not only nation states, but also non-state actors undertake ambitious actions designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to promote sustainable development. Using content analysis and network analysis techniques, we examine the interlinkages between the climate actions of 72 transnational initiatives and the 169 targets of the 17 SDGs. We find that actions of 71 initiatives contribute to achieving 16 SDGs, thus generating valuable co-benefits. Besides SDG 13 on climate action and SDG 17 on partnerships for the goals, transnational climate actions frequently address SDGs 9 on industry, innovation and infrastructure, SDG 7 on affordable and clean energy, and SDG 12 on responsible consumption and production. While SDG 3 on good health and well-being and SDG 4 on quality education are barely addressed, SDG 5 on gender equality is not at all covered by transnational climate actions. Additionally, the network reveals that SDG 9 is highly synergistic with many other frequently addressed SDGs and functions as an important connector between them. Finally, our results indicate that transnational initiatives fill a governance gap left by states with regards to SDG 12. Climate initiatives of non-state actors can thus complement state-led actions to implement the Paris Agreement and the SDGs jointly. © 2021, The Author(s).

Cook_2021
2021
An appraisal of interlinkages between macro-economic indicators of economic well-being and the sustainable development goals
Cook D., Davíðsdóttir B.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Modelling)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15
Thematical focus: SDG 8
Method description: A conceptual model links four capital assets (natural, human, social, and financial and physical) to well-being goals and domains, which are connected to related SDGs. An assessment (exploratory analysis) is conducted on the extent to which GDP and five alternative indicators of economic well-being (Environmentally Adjusted Net Domestic Product, Measure of Economic Welfare, Genuine Savings, Genuine Progress Indicator and Inclusive Wealth Index) align with (a) the dimensions of economic well-being, and (b) various environmental, economic, social and institutional targets set by the SDGs. This is in light of SDG Target 17.19, which calls for the development of measurements of progress on sustainable development that complement GDP.
Abstract: Recognising the well-known limitations of economic growth as a litmus test of progress and the call by Target 19 of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 17 to “develop measurements on progress on sustainable development that complement gross domestic product”, this paper advances understanding of the linkages between alternative measures of economic well-being, the well-being economy and the SDGs. A conceptual model is presented, linking four capital assets to well-being goals and domains, which are connected to related SDGs. An assessment is conducted on the extent to which Gross Domestic Product and five alternative indicators of economic well-being (Environmentally Adjusted Net Domestic Product, Measure of Economic Welfare, Genuine Savings, Genuine Progress Indicator and Inclusive Wealth Index) align with (a) the dimensions of economic well-being, and (b) various environmental, economic, social and institutional targets set by the SDGs. The Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) is found to be the most comprehensive in coverage, accounting for market-based welfare, services from essential capital, and various environmental and social costs, and linking directly to targets in fourteen of the seventeen SDGs. The paper discusses how greater use of alternative measures of economic well-being by policymakers can encourage transitions to economies which prioritise well-being and desirability objectives. © 2021 Elsevier B.V.

Coopman_2016
2016
Seeing the Whole: Implementing the sdgs in an Integrated and Coherent Way
Coopman, A., Osborn, D., Ullah, F., Auckland, E. and Long, G.
Method type: Expert judgement
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
Thematical focus: SDG 12

Cutter_2015
2015
Sustainable Development Goals and Integration. Achieving a better balance between the economic, social and environmental dimensions
Cutter, A., Osborn, D., Romano, J. and Ullah, F.
Method type: Semantic analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: Using the OWG’s proposal for SDGs, we identified goals and targets where their aim has a direct link to another goal or target in the framework. Although, it can be argued that many goals or targets are indirectly linked or reinforcing, maintain the focus on areas where the text can be used to make an explicit link to another area of the framework, in terms of their aims and the language used. Also identifies areas of reciprocity within the Framework, i.e., targets in different goals that are mutually reinforcing without being duplicative. Simple interlinkages can be one-way relationships with a theme feeding into the achievement of Another theme. Whereas reciprocity creates a two-way relationship between thematic areas. Reciprocity in the current proposed framework is weak.
Key results: Goal 1 and 12 have the most interlinkages with other goals, with eleven each. This is not surprising given the crosscutting and multi-dimensional nature of both these themes. Conversely, Goal 10 has been identified as having the fewest, with only three direct interlinkages to other goals. Note that having fewer interlinkages does not necessarily always mean a goal is less well designed than another, some goals may naturally better lend themselves to interlinkages than others.

de Miguel Ramos_2020
2020
Towards the agenda 2030: A quantitative analysis of synergies and trade-offs between the sdgs of spain during 2000–2019
de Miguel Ramos C., Laurenti R.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Indicator level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: Spain
SDGs considered: 5, 8, 10
Thematical focus: 8.6
Key results: During the years 2000–2019, almost 80% of the SDG targets had significant interactions in Spain, either positive (synergy) or negative (trade-off). SDG 4 (quality education), SDG 5 (gender Equality) and SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy) contained the largest number of positive interactions, more than 60% in all of them. SDG 3 (good health and wellbeing) was strongly linked with indicators from SDG 4 (quality education) and also SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation). Furthermore, indicators from SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy) shared a high correlation with the ones from SGD 12 (responsible consumption and production) and SDG 15 (life on land). SDG 1 (no poverty), 2 (zero hunger), 6 (clean water and sanitation), 8 (decent work and economic growth) and 11 (sustainable cities and communities) had the slowest evolution during the years 2000–2019, showing contractions in some instances. Spain is running an important energy transition toward greener and renewable sources, but its progress is being slower than other northern countries, as Gales et al. postulated. It seems to work similarly in the health sector. Spain counts as one of the more advanced Public Health systems in Europe [44], and the positive evolution of the sanitation indicators verify this claim (targets 3.9 and 6.2 among others). They are not only fulfilling health-related targets to each other, but also reducing the mortality and benefiting other social indicators.
Abstract: Global sustainable development has been marked by the United Nations plans for more than two decades. These plans were adopted by most of the developed and developing countries to achieve the Agenda 2030, currently formed by the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Analysis of the interactions between the SDGs has been a growing area in research and of interest for governments. However, studies on how deteriorated goals can be accelerated by positive interactions with other goals are lacking for specific countries at present. This study aims at filling this gap by finding and quantifying the synergies and trade-offs between the SDGs for Spain. During the years 2000–2019, almost 80% of the SDG targets had significant interactions, either positive (synergy) or negative (trade-off). SDG 4 (quality education), SDG 5 (gender Equality) and SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy) contained the larger number of positive interactions, more than 60% in all of them. SDG 3 (good health and wellbeing) was strongly linked with indicators from SDG 4 (quality education) and also SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation). Furthermore, indicators from SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy) shared a high correlation with the ones from SGD 12 (responsible consumption and production) and SDG 15 (life on land). SDG 1 (no poverty), 2 (zero hunger), 6 (clean water and sanitation), 8 (decent work and economic growth) and 11 (sustainable cities and communities) had the slowest evolution during the years 2000–2019, showing contractions in some instances. We developed a regression model to assess the influence that selected targets have had on a less evolved target (target 8.6—proportion of youth not in education, employment or training). We managed to clarify high influence from target 1.3 (unemployment compensations), target 8.4 (domestic material consumption) and target 10.5 (non-performing loans) on the dependent variable. Identifying numerical dependencies between the SDGs may help nations to develop a roadmap where targets work as cogwheel towards achieving the Agenda 2030. © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

Dorgo_2018
2018
Evaluating the Interconnectedness of the Sustainable Development Goals Based on the Causality Analysis of Sustainability Indicators
Dörgő, G.; Sebestyén, V.; Abonyi, J.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal, target, indicator level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: 283 geographical regions
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Key results: Approximately 4000 causal relationships were identified and the most important global connections were represented in a causal loop network. The results highlight the drastic deficiency of the analysed datasets, the strong interconnectedness of the sustainability targets and the applicability of the extracted causal loop network. The analysis of the causal loop networks emphasised the problems of poverty, proper sanitation and economic support in sustainable development.
Abstract: Policymaking requires an in-depth understanding of the cause-and-effect relationships between the sustainable development goals. However, due to the complex nature of socio-economic and environmental systems, this is still a challenging task. In the present article, the interconnectedness of the United Nations (UN) sustainability goals is measured using the Granger causality analysis of their indicators. The applicability of the causality analysis is validated through the predictions of the World3 model. The causal relationships are represented as a network of sustainability indicators providing the opportunity for the application of network analysis techniques. Based on the analysis of 801 UN indicator types in 283 geographical regions, approximately 4000 causal relationships were identified and the most important global connections were represented in a causal loop network. The results highlight the drastic deficiency of the analysed datasets, the strong interconnectedness of the sustainability targets and the applicability of the extracted causal loop network. The analysis of the causal loop networks emphasised the problems of poverty, proper sanitation and economic support in sustainable development.

Dziubaniuk_2021
2021
Challenges of network interaction in managing sustainable development projects in developing countries: case of an international consulting company
Dziubaniuk O., Ivanova-Gongne M., Berdysheva E.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: National; Subnational
Geograph context: Local Nepalese communities, Finland
SDGs considered: 3, 5, 6, 13, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 17
Method description: The study is based on narrative interviews with core managers involved in the project on water supply and sanitation executed by a Finnish consulting company in Nepal + obtained data were analysed using narrative analysis. Interviews integrated with secondary literature. The study’s empirical findings were systematically matched with relevant theoretical patterns.
Key results: Phase II of the RWSSP-WN project primarily sought to contribute to SDG 6 Clean Water and Sanitation, via interactions and networking among stakeholders from developed and developing countries that enabled project completion. This case illustrates that SDG 17 Partnership for the Goals is crucial to meet project targets, a finding that is in line with previous research and embraces the premises of multi-stakeholder interaction. In addition, implementation of water supply, in addition to providing clean water access, impacted local communities by promoting Goal 3 Good Health and Well-being and Goal 5 Gender Equality. The project results also pointed to the challenges and effects of climate change in rural Nepal: an issue that requires special attention in the future and a further focus on addressing Goal 13 Climate Action.
Abstract: Purpose: This study aims to explore the challenges and complexities of interaction in international stakeholder networks within the context of projects focused on the implementation of sustainable development goals (SDGs). In particular, it examines the challenges faced by stakeholders in a network from a developed country during interaction in the context of a developing country. Design/methodology/approach: Using a qualitative approach, this study analyses interview data collected from the key managers of an international consulting company in charge of a water supply and sanitation project in Nepal. The primary data is triangulated with secondary data, such as project reports and related academic articles. Findings: This study illustrates how interaction in international stakeholder networks affects and is interrelated with SDGs, as well as how aiming to achieve one specific goal can stimulate the implementation of other sustainable goals. Further, this research shows how project managers from a developed country had to adapt to the specifics of the developing country context and how their sustainability project influenced the well-being of local communities by improving environmental and social sustainability. Research limitations/implications: The research suggests that challenges in stakeholder interaction may arise because of differences in process management methods used by the international stakeholders involved in the project and country-context specifics, such as corruption, imperfect national regulations, cultural specifics, effects of climate change, etc. Originality/value: The paper contributes to the literature on international multi-stakeholder interaction between actors from developed and developing countries. Furthermore, it adds to the literature on stakeholder networking by highlighting the importance of engaging in a dialogue with local communities during the conceptualisation stages of both sustainability and SDG implementation because of diverging worldviews and practices. © 2021, Olga Dziubaniuk, Maria Ivanova-Gongne and Ekaterina Berdysheva.

Ehrensperger_2019
2019
Land system science and the 2030 agenda: Exploring knowledge that supports
sustainability transformation.
Ehrensperger, A., de Bremond, A., Providoli, I., & Messerli, P.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: Land system science
Abstract: Implementing the 2030 Agenda may well translate into competing claims on scarce land resources. Thus, there is a call for a better linkage of science, policy, and practice to navigate development trade-offs and use co-benefits. We found that since 2015, scientists formally associated as members to the Global Land Programme (GLP) have mainly researched on topics that are relevant to the 2030 Agenda, but only half of the sampled publications actually address interactions between its targets. Of those, many are concentrating on the interactions between climate action, environmental targets, and food security, while interactions between land-related issues and poverty are addressed much less often. Our results point to opportunities for further strengthening GLP’s capacity to engage in transdisciplinary dialogue and interdisciplinary collaboration and respond to the knowledge needs of societal partners.

ESTAT_2021
2021
Sustainable development in the European Union. Monitoring report on progress towards the SDGs in an EU context. 2021 edition
Eurostat
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Indicator level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: EU 28
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.

Fader_2018
2018
Toward an understanding of synergies and trade-offs between water, energy, and food SDG targets
Fader M., Cranmer C., Lawford R., Engel-Cox J.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 2, 6, 7
Thematical focus: WEF nexus
Abstract: Achieving the targets set out in the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) will require committed efforts by nations and organizations over the coming decade. To determine which actions work most harmoniously within funding, infrastructure development, and implementation of three closely aligned goals, we conducted an assessment to identify where the greatest synergies may occur and where conflicting resource needs create trade-offs that may threaten SDG success. The SDGs each have several targets that need to be realized for the goal to be reached. In the present study, we developed a methodology where each target of the SDG 2 (food), 6 (water), and 7 (energy) was analyzed for its input requirements, infrastructure needs, and the risks and benefits for the provision of ecosystem services. Then the targets were compared pairwise and a total score of interaction was calculated to determine different levels of synergies and trade-offs for every pair. In some cases targets were mutually supportive, in other cases there were no interactions among the targets, and for some areas the targets were in conflict with each other. For example, targets 2.5 (maintain genetic diversity), 6.5 (implement integrated water resources management) and 7.a (enhance international cooperation to facilitate access to clean energy) have no conflicts with other targets and have different levels of synergies with most of the other targets. On the contrary, various targets of SDG 2, and especially the target 2.b (correct and prevent trade restrictions), are in slight conflict with other targets by potentially overusing resources needed by other targets or threatening ecosystem services. Our approach confirms the general belief that SDG 6 (water) has the highest number of potential synergies (a total of 124). Thus, achieving the water targets will make it continuously easier to achieve other targets. While the results may need to be adapted for a specific locality or country, overall they provide an improved understanding of the interactions between the targets. The value of the study lies in the quantitative methodology as it can be used as a replicable analysis for any level of work on SDG implementation. © 2018 Fader, Cranmer, Lawford and Engel-Cox.

Floerke_2019
2019
Analysing trade-offs between SDGs related to water
quality using salinity as a marker
Floerke, M., Baerlund, I., van Viet, M.T.H., Bouwman, A.F., Wada, Y.
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 2, 6, 7, 12, 15
Thematical focus: SDG 6
Method description: The paper maps trade-offs between water quality and other Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) using salinization as an example. Review recent literature focussing on salinization of freshwater resources, its impacts on water quality (SDG 6), which in turn is interlinked with SDG 2,7,12,15. First, describe the status and main sources of salinization and how these impair freshwater resources for further use. Second, discuss the challenges in a broader context of the potential for achieving other SDGs.
Abstract: Salinisation can have different adverse impacts on water resources that are used for drinking, irrigation, or industrial purposes. In addition, salinisation in its turn is also strongly influenced by anthropogenic activities such as irrigation. This paper maps trade-offs between water quality (SDG 6.3) and other Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) using salinisation as an example. Many interlinkages exist between SDG 6.3 and other SDGs as identified in the literature review part. These are however not yet fully addressed in studies applying a comprehensive systems approach or modelling frameworks. In order to find solution options for achieving a sustainable future the interlinkages between SDGs related to salinisation and its impacts need to be considered as they play a key role in mitigating impacts, prioritising measures for action and hence turning trade-offs into synergies.

Fonseca_2020
2020
Mapping the sustainable development goals relationships
Fonseca L.M., Domingues P., Dima A.M.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: 193 UN Member States
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Key results: The results highlight that there is indeed dominance of positive over negative interactions between the SDGs. The results also indicate that SDG2 (Zero hunger), SDG3 (Good health and well-being), SDG4 (Quality education), SDG7 (Affordable and clean energy), SDG8 (Decent work and economic growth), SDG9 (Industry, innovation, and infrastructure) and SDG11 (Sustainable cities and communities), present the highest number of strong positive correlation with other SDGs. While concerning trade-offs, SDG12 (Responsible consumption and production) is the only one that shows all negative correlations with other SDGs, and all negative correlations detected involve SDG 12.
Abstract: Sustainable development addresses humanity's aspiration for a better life while observing the limitations imposed by nature. In 2015, the United Nations General Assembly approved the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with the aim to foster the organizational operationalization and integration of sustainability and, therefore, to address the current and forthcoming stakeholder needs and ensure a better and sustainable future for all, balancing the economic, social, and environmental development. However, it is not entirely clear which are the mutual relationships among the 17 SDGs and this study aims to tackle this research gap. The results of the correlation confirm that Poverty elimination (SDG1) and Good health and well-being (SDG3) have synergetic relationships with most of the other goals. SDG7 (Affordable and clean energy) has significant relationships with other SDGs (e.g., SDG1 (No poverty), SDG2 (Zero hunger), SDG3 (Good health and well-being), SDG8 (Decent work and economic growth), SDG13 (Climate action)). However, there is a moderate negative correlation with SDG12 (Responsible consumption and production), which emphasizes the need to improve energy efficiency, increase the share of clean and renewable energies and improve sustainable consumption patterns worldwide. There is also confirmation that SDG12 (Responsible consumption and production) is the goal strongly associated with trade-offs. To sum up, this research suggests that change towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals offers many opportunities for reinforcing rather than inhibiting itself. However, some SDGs show no significant correlation with other SDGs (e.g., SDG13 (Climate action) and SDG17 (Partnerships for the goals), which highlights the need for future research. © 2020 by the authors.

Fuso Nerini_2018
2018
Mapping synergies and trade-offs between energy and the Sustainable Development Goals
Fuso Nerini F., Tomei J., To L.S., Bisaga I., Parikh P., Black M., Borrion A., Spataru C., Castán Broto V., Anandarajah G., Milligan B., Mulugetta Y.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 7
Abstract: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development -including 17 interconnected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 targets -is a global plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. SDG7 calls for action to ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. Here we characterize synergies and trade-offs between efforts to achieve SDG7 and delivery of the 2030 Agenda as a whole. We identify 113 targets requiring actions to change energy systems, and published evidence of relationships between 143 targets (143 synergies, 65 trade-offs) and efforts to achieve SDG7. Synergies and trade-offs exist in three key domains, where decisions about SDG7 affect humanity's ability to: realize aspirations of greater welfare and well-being; build physical and social infrastructures for sustainable development; and achieve sustainable management of the natural environment. There is an urgent need to better organize, connect and extend this evidence, to help all actors work together to achieve sustainable development. © 2017 The Publisher.

Gannon_2022
2022
Delivering the Sustainable Development Goals through development corridors in East Africa: A Q-Methodology approach to imagining development futures
Gannon K.E., Pettinotti L., Conway D., Surminski S., Ndilanha E., Nyumba T.
Method type: Mixed (Expert judgement; data analysis)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: East Africa
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: In this paper we advance a novel approach to integrated assessment of the ways in which the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are likely to manifest and interact within a given development context, using Q-Methodology and the conceptual framing of imaginaries. We apply this to development corridors and identify three qualitatively distinct imaginaries of SDG futures that exist among stakeholders across five development corridors in East Africa. These imaginaries articulate shared understandings of the ways in which corridors are likely to support, or limit, achievement of the SDGs and construct explanatory logics around the ways in which SDG trade-offs and synergies are likely to manifest within corridors. Our analysis suggests that SDG goals and targets are mostly synergistic in corridor landscapes, but that interactions can be multi-dimensional. We also (1) identify specific clusters of goals and targets that may be directly mutually reinforcing and which, strengthened in parallel, could upscale development within corridors and; (2) identify ways in which, following current corridor trajectories, progress towards some SDGs is likely to threaten progress towards other goals and targets. Particularly, the analysis identifies biodiversity conservation (SDG14/SDG15), sustainability (SDG11, SDG12, SDG13), secure and equal access to land (SDG2.3) and inequality reduction (SDG10) to be likely trade-offs to other development gains in current corridor trajectories. The research emphasises the need for more integrated corridor governance to achieve the SDGs efficiently, as a whole and for all. The method is flexible and could be applied to enable rapid assessment of SDG trajectories within other development contexts. © 2021 The Authors

Gleeson_2018
2018
Ending AIDS by 2030: The importance of an interlinked approach and meaningful youth leadership: The
Gleeson H.S., Oliveras Rodriguez C.A., Hatane L., Hart D.
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 3, 4, 5, 10, 16, 17
Thematical focus: Target 3.3 and proxy of ending AIDS among youth
Method description: In this commentary, authors from the Adolescent HIV Treatment Coalition argue that progress in the HIV response for young people can be improved by leveraging the links between HIV and other SDG targets.
Abstract: Introduction: This commentary by authors from the Adolescent HIV Treatment Coalition calls for action to improve advocacy and service delivery for young people by leveraging the interlinkages between HIV and the broader development agenda. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development includes target 3.3 on ending the AIDS epidemic by 2030, and along with the 2016 Political Declaration on HIV and AIDS, this has led to a global renewal of political commitment to the HIV response. However, young people are still being left behind, and to provide an equitable and sustainable response to HIV we must ensure that we are meeting the needs of the 3.9 million young people living with HIV, and the millions more at risk. Discussion: While HIV has its own target within the 2030 Agenda, efforts to end AIDS are inextricable from other goals and targets, such as on poverty eradication, education, gender equality and peace. To tackle HIV we must work beyond target 3.3 and provide a comprehensive response that addresses the underlying structural inequalities that impact adolescents and young people, ensuring that we enable the meaningful engagement of youth and adolescents as partners and leaders of sustainable development and the HIV response. Finally, it is necessary to collect better disaggregated data and evidence on the HIV epidemic among adolescents, as well as on best practices for supporting them. Conclusions: Ending the AIDS epidemic among adolescents and young people (aged 10 to 24) by 2030 is possible. However, it requires an integrated, multi-sectoral response to HIV which pays attention to the social determinants that put adolescents at risk and fuel the epidemic. Positioning efforts to end AIDS among young people within the broader 2030 Agenda and building youth leadership will contribute to building a more healthy, equitable and sustainable society for all. © 2018 The Authors. Journal of the International AIDS Society published by John Wiley & sons Ltd on behalf of the International AIDS Society.

Grigorescu_2022
2022
Synergy Analysis of Knowledge Transfer for the Energy Sector within the Framework of Sustainable Development of the European Countries
Grigorescu A., Ion A.-E., Lincaru C., Pirciog S.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: 24 EU countries and 4 other European states
SDGs considered: 4, 7, 8, 9
Thematical focus: 7
Method description: A new methodology has been developed in the field of quantitative synergy measurement for the better approach to the planning of policy. Moreover, this tool is used to compare countries based on their specific policies while assessing the results based on potential synergies and trade-offs across different trends. The analysis can only point to the status of a trend and cannot fully support a causal explanation of the latter. The results of this research are highly case specific, every case must be analysed separately, and the comparative analysis between countries is possible based on the policy evaluation tool. The latter can simultaneously analyse various sustainability development dimensions and underline whether the policies have determined synergies. The measurement of synergies is rather straightforward: the closer the synergy factor is to 1, the stronger the effect between the variables can potentially grow, and the closer the ratio is to 1, the stronger the potential for a trade-off. If the synergy factor is close to 0, there is a declining between trends. This analysis cannot interpret the results and categorize them as good or bad.
Key results: Significant progress in the realization of SDG 8 and SDG 9 across certain countries included in the study while addressing the apparition of certain trade-offs that derailed the target realization in case of SDG 4, SDG 8, and SDG 9. Moreover, the average calculations for bi-dimensional synergies showed that there is no indication for synergies at the regional level, and in terms of industry sustainability, there is a slight trade-off registered in the model. It can be disclosed that the European model presents partial success and is unilateral. The growth in the share of renewable energy consumption from the final consumption is linked to the trade-off in air emissions and has a positive impact on the environment, although it does not generate new jobs. The job creation and employment rate are delinked from the share of renewable energy consumption growth. This is a side effect of the sectoral KT, as the knowledge creation in the energy sector is low. Moreover, the growth of the consumption of energy products and services and the number of researchers in the field is also delinked. The main knowledge transfer occurs trans-sectoral, as the production of knowledge in the energy sector is relatively low, and it is not adopted, utilized, and exploited through tacit knowledge mechanisms.
Abstract: The target for 2030 of reaching a 32% share of renewable energy in the gross final energy consumption can be achieved by speeding up the transformation pending the implementation of knowledge transfer (KT) policies that foster regional cooperation for the cost‐effective development of renewables. The research purpose is the analysis of important factors in the development of the renewable energy sector through knowledge sharing and collaboration across the Member States in a comparable manner. The hypotheses are as follows: Hypothesis 1 (H1) there are synergies between knowledge transfer and economic impact through income and jobs for the renewable energy sector and Hypothesis 2 (H2) the EU countries have different profiles of synergy. The research proposition was established through the employment of a quantitative synergy and trade‐offs analysis based on the knowledge transfer indicators and the sustainable development framework. The research method, namely the advanced sustainability analysis (ASA), uses the quantitative assessment tool for the understanding of synergies between two or three dimensions of sustainable development, presuming that the combined effect of the factors is greater than the sum of their individual effects. The current research comprises an evaluation of the renewable energy sector knowledge transfer policy models at the national level for 24 EU countries and four other European states, focusing on the capabilities to create synergies. The results of the study represent a valuable input for the policy makers, allowing for a coherent and sustainable planning and programming of the new electricity market, adopted through the Clean Energy Package, and following a highly dynamic and radically disruptive background, exploiting the ‘successful’ profiles. © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

Guijarro_2018
2018
Designing a sustainable development goal index through a goal programming model: The case of EU-28 countries
Guijarro F., Poyatos J.A.
Method type: Modelling
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: EU 28
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: The paper focuses on proposing a Goal Programming model to calculate a composite SDG index. In the framework of the development of the composite SDG index, a correlation analysis was carried out between estimated multicriteria SDG goals, where SDG indicators were aggregated through the model for each SDG Goal. Pearson correlation, 95% confidence level. The dataset used is from the EC, uses EU-28 countries and can be downloaded from Eurostat. Those indicators where three or more countries have reported no information were removed; this reduced the number of indicators to 154 (Table A1 in the Appendix lists the targets considered in the study). The authors have filled with the median those countries with no information on a specific indicator. The sign of the indicators that have to decrease to attain sustainable development was inverted.
Key results: The correlation analysis performed on the 17 estimated SDGs has confirmed that several goals are statistically related to others.
Abstract: The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations are at the center of the global political agenda to eradicate extreme poverty, achieve universal education, promote gender equality and ensure environmental sustainability between others. These goals are organised in 169 indicators, which give an accurate perspective on the main dimensions related with country sustainable development. To gain insight into the relative position of involved countries, it is necessary to develop a composite index that summarises the global progress in the achievement of these goals, but considering possible conflicts and trade-offs between individual SDGs. The objective of this paper is to introduce a Goal Programmingmodel to calculate a composite SDG index, capable of overcoming some of the limitations of celebrated approaches such as arithmetic and geometric averages. The proposed model balances between two extreme solutions: one which calculates a consensus index that reflects the majority trend of the SDGs, and another one which biases the estimated index towards those SDGs that show the most discrepancy with the rest. The model is applied on the EU-28 countries, and shows that the best performing countries regarding the sustainable development are Austria and Luxembourg, while Greece and Romania remain as the worst performers. © 2018 by the authors.

Hall_2020
2020
Water and health interlinkages of the sustainable development goals in remote Indigenous Australia
Hall N.L., Creamer S., Anders W., Slatyer A., Hill P.S.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Indicator level
Geograph scale: Subnational
Geograph context: Indigenous Australia
SDGs considered: 3, 6
Thematical focus: Targets 3.2.1, 3.3.5, 3.9.2, 6.1.1, 6.2.1, 6.3.1, 6.3.2
Abstract: Australia has committed to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) goals under the UN’s 2030 Agenda. However, these goals may not be fully achieved in Australia under current policy settings. Australia reports success in achieving the goal for quality and access to safe drinking water and sanitation (SDG 6), though for Australians living in remote Indigenous communities, the experience is very different. Furthermore, the burden of disease is higher in remote communities (SDG 3). Many of these diseases are waterborne or hygiene-related, including prevalence in some remote Indigenous communities of endemic trachoma eye infection, preventable through access to functioning water services and available soap. This research provides a case for identifying, then understanding the interlinkages between SDGs 3, 6, and others locally, as well as nationally. This will enable governments to enact policies for long-term sustainable solutions for remotely-located and marginalised peoples in Australia in line with Agenda 2030 commitments. © 2020, The Author(s).

Hoeltl_2020
2020
The interactions of sustainable development goals: The case of urban informal settlements in Ethiopia
Hoeltl A., Brandtweiner R., Bates R., Berger T.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: Ethiopia
SDGs considered: 1, 3, 7, 11, 13, 15
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: The paper investigates interconnections between six SDGs in the context of urban informal settlements in Ethiopia. The six SDGs and 18 targets included in the analysis were identified through a participatory process (interviews and focus groups involving government officials, urban planners, informal settlers and NGOs). The method used to assess interlinkages is unclear: it seems to have been conducted through both the participatory process and a literature review; however, also field research is mentioned. Interlinkages are classified as either synergies or mixed synergies/trade-offs. They consider both interactions between different SDGs, as within the same SDG.
Key results: The interactions within the selected targets of SDG1, SDG7, SDG13 as well as SDG15 are all evaluated as synergies, corresponding to the results of the analysis of Pradhan et al. [16] for SDG1 and SDG13, but not for SDG7 and SDG15. This confirms the assumption that the SDG interactions may depend more or less on the specific context, project or country. Regarding the interactions between the SDGs, the greatest trade-offs are related between SDG1 and SDG13, between SDG1 and SDG15, between SDG7 and SDG13, and between SDG7 and SDG15. This corresponds more or less with the trend analysed by Pradhan et al. [17]
Abstract: Ethiopia is challenged by a strong development progress. Currently the major issues in Ethiopia, as a least developed country with a rapid urbanisation, include a high level of income inequality, lack of formal employment opportunities, deeply rooted poverty, tenure insecurity, poor infrastructure, and limited access to electricity and energy. The Erasmus+ Project “Social Inclusion and Energy Management for Informal Urban Settlements”, enables European and Ethiopian universities to develop new university courses integrating the aspects of sustainability for future professionals in the field of architecture, urban planning but also social sciences. The paper investigates the respective situation in Ethiopia, and demonstrates the interactions of six selected Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations highly linked with this topic. These six Sustainable Development Goals were identified in a participative process, involving different stakeholders like government officials, urban planners or informal settlers by interviews, focus groups, workshops and conferences. The focus is on SDG1 “No Poverty”, SDG3 “Good Health and Well-being”, SDG7 “Affordable and Clean Energy”, SDG11 “Sustainable Cities and Communities”, SDG13 “Climate Action” and SDG15 “Life on Land”. In the context of Ethiopian cities, energy production and distribution have been highly centralised under state entities and the scope for exploring local/business driven and decentralised energy systems has been limited. Transitions can be implemented towards sustainability and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, if collective identification and structuring of issues along with collective envisioning of the future, and the interactions and trade-offs of different goals are taken into consideration. © 2020 WITPress. All rights reserved.

Horan_2020
2020
National baselines for integrated implementation of an environmental sustainable development goal assessed in a new integrated SDG index
Horan D.
Method type: Expert judgement
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: Island states
SDGs considered: 14, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 14
Method description: The article develops an integrated SDG14 (I-SDG14) index focusing on island states. While developing the index, the author considers the interlinkages occurring between SDG 14 and other SDGs. To this end, the author uses the interlinkages data from the ICSU_2017 publication (data not recorded for Horan_2020), and integrates with its own assessment the interlinkages data for SDG 16 and 17. The interlinkages considered are first-order and within-country.
Key results: The interlinkages found are all synergies.
Abstract: Most indicator-based assessments of progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) focus on identifying priorities for implementation. However, once priorities are established, policymakers are called to implement them in an integrated way which requires progress not just on a Goal's targets (siloed approach) but also progress in interrelated policy areas. To assess baselines for integrated implementation, this article introduces a new family of SDG index based on a Goal's targets and first-order interrelations with other goals that divides targets linked to the prioritized or focal SDG into pressure, impact, and response components. Focusing on an application to SDG14, the conservation and sustainable use of marine resources, an important priority for many small island developing states, the article develops an integrated SDG14 (I-SDG14) index based on an international study of SDG14 interlinkages with indicators selected from SDSN's global indicator set for all island states with sufficient data available for the year 2018. While all island states assessed face challenges on SDG14, top-performers in terms of I-SDG14 (United Kingdom, New Zealand, Japan, Ireland and Iceland) tend to face greater challenges on pressures, primarily reflecting their performance on targets related to SDGs 2, 12, 13 and 15, whereas bottom-performers (Timor-Leste, Vanuatu, Haiti, Jamaica and Comoros) tend to face greater challenges on responses, i.e., country capacities to influence SDG14, owing to their status on targets related to SDGs 4, 9, 16 and 17. In particular, country scoreboards, "traffic-light" visual representation of performance, and radar-diagrams are used to investigate country-level strengths and challenges for integrated implementation. The proposed index offers a useful starting point to frame discussions with different stakeholders around integrated approaches to implementation and can be flexibly applied to other SDGs and contexts. The article concludes with several suggestions for future research aimed at improving integrated assessments for the SDGs. © 2020 by the authors.

Hutton_2018
2018
Potential trade-offs between the sustainable development goals in coastal Bangladesh
Hutton C.W., Nicholls R.J., Lázár A.N., Chapman A., Schaafsma M., Salehin M.
Method type: Mixed (Expert judgement; Modelling)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Subnational
Geograph context: coastal zone of southwest Bangladesh
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 6, 8, 10, 13, 14, 15
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: A multi-disciplinary and multi-national team of policy analysts, scientists, and engineers developed an analytical framework and an Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) to evaluate changing ecosystem services, livelihoods and poverty across coastal Bangladesh. This included a strongly participatory approach with policy relevant stakeholders. The multiple drivers considered are in Table 2. DDIEM is an IAM based approach coupling biophysical, socioeconomic and governance processes to consider a range of plausible futures. The spatial resolution of DDIEM is at the lowest administrative tier. The temporal resolution is daily for the bio-physical and monthly for the socio-economic calculations. The bio-physical environment is based on statistical emulators land process-based calculations. DDIEM simulates the livelihood potential, well-being and health of 36 household types. The household-level calculations are developed based on the ESPA Deltas’ qualitative and seasonal quantitative surveys of 1586 households and are similar to an agent-based model. All calculations are tightly coupled in Mat lab. Model testing and validation had been conducted extensively. Given a particular development trajectory, including interventions, DDIEM can assess the resulting implications of change over time on the ES-based livelihoods and well-being of the people in coastal Bangladesh. Simulations focus on the next 30 years (to 2050) over which they are considered socio-economically valid, but can extend to 2100 for biophysical and exploratory purposes. The model can consider a wide range of environmental changes, natural hazards and climate change, and policy interventions, in varying permutations, which are of relevance to interpreting several SDGs. This model allows examination of the complex social–ecological interactions of rural agricultural livelihoods, ecosystem services and poverty using multiple indicators, which can be associated with multiple SDGs (Figure 2) + case studies used to show integrated approach.
Abstract: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are offered as a comprehensive strategy to guide and encourage sustainable development at multiple scales both nationally and internationally. Furthermore, through the development of indicators associated with each goal and sub-goal, the SDGs support the notion of monitoring, evaluation and adaptive management, underpinned by the aspirations of social justice, equity and transparency. As such, the ethical intention of the SDGs is well founded. However, possible conflicts and trade-offs between individual SDGs have received little attention. For example, SDGs relating to poverty (SDG 1), inequality (SDG 10), food security (SDG2), economic development (SDG 8) and life in water and on land (SDGs 14 and 15), are potentially competing in many circumstances. In a social-ecological context, policy support and formulation are increasingly adopting systems approaches, which analyse the complex interactions of system elements. Adopting such an approach in this work, the above SDGs are analysed for coastal Bangladesh. This demonstrates multiple potential trade-offs between the SDGs, including agricultural farming approaches in the light of poverty reduction, and between economic growth and environmental integrity as well as equity. To develop coherent and policy relevant socio-ecological strategies, appropriate decision frameworks need to be co-developed across the range of stakeholders and decision-makers. Integrated models have great potential to support such a process. © 2018 by the authors.

Iacobuta_2021
2021
Transitioning to low-carbon economies under the 2030 agenda: Minimizing trade-offs and enhancing co-benefits of climate-change action for the sdgs
Iacobuţă G.I., Höhne N., van Soest H.L., Leemans R.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
Thematical focus: SDG 13
Abstract: The 2030 Agenda with its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Agreement on climate change were adopted in 2015. Although independently defined, the two agreements are strongly interlinked. We developed a framework that scores the impacts of climate-change actions on all SDG targets based on directionality (i.e., trade-offs or co-benefits) and likelihood of occurrence (i.e., ubiquitous or context-dependent), and categorizes them by dependence on four key context dimensions—geographical, governance, time horizon and limited natural resources. Through an extensive literature review, we found that climate-change mitigation measures directly affect most SDGs and their targets, mostly through co-benefits. Improving energy efficiency, reducing energy-services demand and switching to renewables provide the most co-benefits. In contrast, carbon capture and storage and nuclear energy likely lead to multiple trade-offs. We show how understanding the relevant context dimensions facilitates policy design and policy mixes that enhance co-benefits and minimize trade-offs. Finally, by assessing the prevalence of climate-change mitigation measures in G20 countries, we found that measures with more co-benefits are more frequently adopted. Our study advances the knowledge of climate–SDG interactions, contributing to climate and sustainable development governance research, and facilitating policy design for a joint implementation of the Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda. © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

IAEG-SDGs_2019
2019
Interlinkages of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
UN Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs)
Method type: Mixed (Expert judgement; Semantic analysis)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal, target, indicator level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 3
Method description: The publication presents the interlinkages between SDG 3 and the other SDGs, at goal, target and indicator level, as an illustrative example of the results of the SDG interlinkages mapping that the IAEG-SDGs performed. A few interlinkages are indicated having been found through semantic analysis conducted in a previous work. The authors assumed that by default, all targets and indicators under a goal are interlinked; for this reason, interlinkages within SDG 3 are not illustrated.
Key results: 809 interlinkages recorded found through expert judgement; 3 interlinkages recorded for semantic analysis.

IAEG-SDGs_2020
2020
Second Report of the Interlinkages Workstream
UN Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs)
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Multinational; National
Geograph context: France, Italy, multinational
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: The focus of this second report is to build upon the first report through a) a more in-depth look at how the System of Environmental and Economic Accounts can be used for the SDGs, b) the examination of the interlinkages of the treaties/legislation related to the SDGs, c) discussion of the interlinkages within regions and how these may differ across regions and d) provide more explanation and examples of practical application of the interlinkages of the Sustainable Development Goals to support integrated policy analysis and development
Key results: n.a.

ICSU_2017
2017
A guide to SDG interactions: From science to implementation
Griggs, D.J., Nilsson, M., Stevance, A., McCollum, D.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDGs 2, 3, 7, 1

ICSU-ISSC_2015
2015
Review of the sustainable development goals: the science perspective.
ICSU, ISSC
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: The report review SDGs goals, assessing whether they are backed up by scientific evidence, whether they address the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development in an integrated way, and whether they are sufficiently specific to be effectively implemented and monitored. In this context, the most important interlinkages between each goal and targets of other SDGs are indicated.
Key results: A lot of interlinkages found (995 entries), in particular concerning SDG 2 and 3

Jacob-John_2021
2021
Synergistic interactions of sdgs in food supply chains: A review of responsible consumption and production
Jacob-John J., D’souza C., Marjoribanks T., Singaraju S.
Method type: Mixed (Semantic analysis; Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 12, Target 12.3, SDG 2 (sustainable methods of food production and consumption)
Key results: n.a.
Abstract: In light of the significance of Food Supply Chains (FSCs) in attaining the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a greater focus on synergistic interactions between these SDGs is called for. Although there is research within this area, the impact on the interactions of responsible consumption and production for supply chains is either fragmented or inconclusive. Implementing supply chain solutions to achieve one goal could potentially support or inhibit progress in other goals; thus, before implementing such solutions, a better understanding of the interrelationships between SDGs is required. A systematic review is conducted to evidence the current nature of the understanding of these interrelationships within the food supply chain context by focusing on Responsible Consumption and Production, which refers to SDG number 12. This review is conducted through a filtering process, where 171 peer-reviewed articles addressing different SDGs were analysed and synthesized. In addition to a detailed summary of the recent literature on the SDGs and their interrelationships, as addressed in the literature, this paper establishes the limitations in the existing literature and research challenges surrounding the SDGs. This article contributes a conceptual framework that identifies stakeholder and consumer pressures as enablers of synergistic interactions between SDGs, thus directing managerial and regulatory interventions through a holistic perspective of SDGs. Finally, the review discusses contradictory findings on SDGs and provides future research avenues. © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

Karnib_2017
2017
Mapping the direct and indirect interlinkages across the sustainable development goals: A qualitative nexus approach
Karnib, A.
Method type: n.a.
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 2,6,7
Thematical focus: SDGs 2, 6, 7 (WEF Nexus)
Key results: n.a.

Karnib_2019
2019
Water as Crosscutting Factor in the SDGs Under Review at the High-Level Panel Forum for Sustainable Development (HLPF) 2019 in the Arab States
Karnib A.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal, target, indicator level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: Arab states
SDGs considered: 4, 8, 10, 13, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 6

Kostetckaia_2022
2022
How Sustainable Development Goals interlinkages influence European Union countries’ progress towards the 2030 Agenda
Kostetckaia M., Hametner M.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: EU MS
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: We apply a quantitative approach for assessing SDG interlinkages based on Spearman's rank correlation analysis. The results of the correlation analysis are then used to assess whether there is a relationship between the synergies and trade-offs found in the EU member states and these countries' progress towards the SDGs.
Key results: Climate change (SDG 13) has many synergistic relationships with other goals, such as clean and affordable energy (SDG 7), good health and well-being (SDG 3) and responsible consumption and production (SDG 12). Conversely, fighting climate change (SDG 13) in the EU appears to be negatively associated with ending poverty (SDG 1) and hunger (SDG 2). Additionally, indicators on partnerships for the goals (SDG 17) show quite many trade-offs with other goals.
Abstract: The analysis of interlinkages between the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and the assessment of countries' progress towards the goals are two prominent research areas in the debate around the 2030 Agenda. The central questions are whether countries are progressing towards the goals at sufficient speed, and whether the SDGs can be achieved in their entirety. While it is evident that trade-offs between the 2030 Agenda's objectives might prevent countries from achieving all 17 SDGs simultaneously, the extent to which interactions (synergies and trade-offs) between the goals facilitate or hinder countries' progress towards achieving the 2030 Agenda has so far received little attention. The present study combines the two topics by linking the analysis of synergies and trade-offs between the SDGs in the European Union (EU) member states with a longitudinal assessment of these countries' progress towards the goals. SDG interlinkages are assessed through Spearman's rank order correlation, while progress is calculated according to Eurostat's progress measure. Using regression analysis, we find a significant negative relationship between countries' progress and the shares of trade-offs among SDG indicators and a moderate positive relationship between progress and synergies, suggesting that trade-offs have a bigger influence on the pace of countries' progress towards the goals than synergies. In order to achieve the SDGs by 2030, it is thus crucial to not only exploit synergies between the goals but also to overcome trade-offs. © 2022 The Authors. Sustainable Development published by ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Kroll_2019
2019
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Are we successful in turning trade-offs into synergies?
Kroll C., Warchold A., Pradhan P.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: 196 countries
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: The Agenda 2030 with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provides the framework that all United Nations (UN) member states have pledged to fulfill. The achievement of this agenda crucially depends on whether humankind will be able to maximize synergies and resolve existing trade-offs between the SDGs. We provide the first analysis of future interactions for projected SDG trends until 2030 within and between goals, and we analyze how trade-offs and synergies have evolved in the recent past globally. For certain goals, we find positive developments with notable synergies in our projections, especially for SDGs 1, 3, 7, 8, and 9: Poverty alleviation and strengthening the economy, rooted in innovation, and modern infrastructure, therefore continue to be the basis upon which many of the other SDGs can be achieved. However, especially SDGs 11, 13, 14, 16, and 17 will continue to have notable trade-offs, as well as non-associations with the other goals in the future, which emphasizes the need to foster innovations and policies that can make our cities and communities more sustainable, as well as strengthen institutions and spur climate action. We show examples of a successful transformation of trade-offs into synergies that should be emulated in other areas to create a virtuous cycle of SDG progress. The alarming inability to overcome certain persistent trade-offs we have found, and indeed the deterioration for some SDGs, can seriously threaten the achievement of the Agenda 2030. © 2019, The Author(s).

Kunčič_2019
2019
Prioritising the sustainable development goals using a network approach: Sdg linkages and groups
Kunčič A.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are central to the operationalization of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Both represent an ambitious developmental framework whose potential to focus on smart policies and prioritise measures that bring the maximum impact on the highest number of SDGs is crucial for achieving progress. We propose this can be accomplished using the criteria of efficiency in policy targeting of SDGs. In particular, by examining the links among SDGs, identifying positive and negative connections, and the core goals and tightly knit communities in the developmental networks of today and tomorrow. Utilising the SDGs’ interconnected nature for developmental planning and comparing the characteristics of developmental networks may be the missing component in accelerating sustainable development. © 2019, Ljubljana University, Faculty of Social Sciences. All rights reserved.

Langou Diaz_2020
2020
Leveraging synergies and tackling trade-offs among specific Goals
Langou, G.D., Florito, J., Biondi, A., Sachetti, F.C. and Petrone, L.
Method type: Mixed (Semantic analysis; Literature review; Modelling)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: Peru, Bolivia, India, Sri Lanka Ghana, Nigeria
SDGs considered: 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15
Thematical focus: SDGs 4, 7, 8
Method description: See table 5.1 p 104 for each case.

Latif_2022
2022
Nexus implementation of sustainable development goals (SDGs) for sustainable public sector buildings in Pakistan
Latif M.H., Amjad M., Tahir Z.U.R., Qamar A., Asim M., Mahmood W., Khalid W., Rehman A.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: Pakistan
SDGs considered: 6, 7, 11, 13
Thematical focus: SDGs 6, 7, 11, 13 (nexus)
Method description: The study deals with SDGs as nexus and presents a case study. The direct interlinkage exists between all four SDGs with their sub-goals connected, depicting the nature of complex inter-linkages.. The scope of nexus approach and SDGs interlinkage can be attributed to synergies and tradeoffs between goals, sub-goals and the relevant indicators. The interlinkages between the SDGs are either direct or in-direct which connects via another target. Causality is one of the tools which is employed by the researchers to determine the cause and the effect. This research intends to develop a nexus implementation approach in order to enhance the implementation, optimal resource allocation and to conserve the financial pool. In order to map the nexus, a co-relation analysis of the 4 SDGs for Pakistan is conducted. Due to the conceptual complexity of the SDGs Nexus it has been challenging to translate some goals into measurable indicators. In addition to this, the data for Pakistan is not readily available having issues including limited reporting and reliability. To cater these limitations and to consider a data source having international legitimacy, the Sustainable Development Goal Index (SDG-I) is mainly relied on alongside a comprehensive literature review to understand the linkages between devised nexus. For the quantification of the causal links between the devised nexus, Pearson correlation coefficients are extracted using the data. The Pearson correlation coefficients range from 􀀀 1 to 1, indicating the linearity of the relationship amongst the targets. The negative co-efficient portrays the negative linear relationships while the positive depicts the positive linear relationships. Co-efficient having strong co-efficient i.e. large absolute values depicts strong linearity (e.g., 0.9) while smaller absolute values (e.g. - 0.2) indicate weak linear relationship.
Abstract: The United Nations (UN) has introduced 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) intending to achieve a conventional trio of social, economic, and environmental prosperity across the world. Pakistan is making a fair contribution to SDG achievement under its ‘Vision 2025’. However, the introduced strategy for SDG implementation is a sectoral based approach which leads to severe resource inefficiency. The objective of this study is the development and implementation of a nexus strategy of SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), and SDG 13 (Climate Action) in Pakistan due to their indepth interlinkage and interdependence, to achieve sustainability in Energy, Water, and Environment. This study comprises an onfield Energy-Water-Sustainability assessment of 24 public sector premises across Punjab to create a pilot model for future implementation. The Pearson correlation analysis of the SDGs substantiates the argument of the nexus approach. The results of this work show the energy conservation potential of approximately 12.8 MW and renewable energy installation potential of 40.4 MW to achieve SDG 7. Moreover, rainwater harvesting is calculated to be 0.035 million cm3 per annum, contributing to approximately 7% reduction in water use to achieve SDG 6 and minimizing the environmental impact on cities by reducing 14.8 million tons of Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) per annum to achieve SDG 11 and 13. The results show that due to indepth interlinkage, the nexus implementation approach enhances the execution process while eliminating resource duplication to reduce inefficiency. © 2022 Elsevier Ltd

Laumann_2022
2022
Complex interlinkages, key objectives, and nexuses among the Sustainable Development Goals and climate change: a network analysis
Laumann F., von Kügelgen J., Kanashiro Uehara T.H., Barahona M.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Global; Multinational
Geograph context: 180 countries
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: climate change
Abstract: Background: Global sustainability is an enmeshed system of complex socioeconomic, climatological, and ecological interactions. The numerous objectives of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Agreement have various levels of interdependence, making it difficult to ascertain the influence of changes to particular indicators across the whole system. In this analysis, we aimed to detect and rank the complex interlinkages between objectives of sustainability agendas. Methods: We developed a method to find interlinkages among the 17 SDGs and climate change, including non-linear and non-monotonic dependences. We used time series of indicators defined by the World Bank, consisting of 400 indicators that measure progress towards the 17 SDGs and an 18th variable (annual average temperatures), representing progress in the response to the climate crisis, from 2000 to 2019. This method detects significant dependencies among the time evolution of the objectives by using partial distance correlations, a non-linear measure of conditional dependence that also discounts spurious correlations originating from lurking variables. We then used a network representation to identify the most important objectives (using network centrality) and to obtain nexuses of objectives (defined as highly interconnected clusters in the network). Findings: Using temporal data from 181 countries spanning 20 years, we analysed dependencies among SDGs and climate for 35 country groupings based on region, development, and income level. The observed significant interlinkages, central objectives, and nexuses identified varied greatly across country groupings; however, SDG 17 (partnerships for the goals) and climate change ranked as highly important across many country groupings. Temperature rise was strongly linked to urbanisation, air pollution, and slum expansion (SDG 11), especially in country groupings likely to be worst affected by climate breakdown, such as Africa. In several country groupings composed of developing nations, we observed a consistent nexus of strongly interconnected objectives formed by SDG 1 (poverty reduction), SDG 4 (education), and SDG 8 (economic growth), sometimes incorporating SDG 5 (gender equality), and SDG 16 (peace and justice). Interpretation: The differences across groupings emphasise the need to define goals in accordance with local circumstances and priorities. Our analysis highlights global partnerships (SDG 17) as a pivot in global sustainability efforts, which have been strongly linked to economic growth (SDG 8). However, if economic growth and trade expansion were repositioned as a means instead of an end goal of development, our analysis showed that education (SDG 4) and poverty reduction (SDG 1) become more central, thus suggesting that these could be prioritised in global partnerships. Urban livelihoods (SDG 11) were also flagged as important to avoid replicating unsustainable patterns of the past. Funding: Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, UK Research and Innovation. © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license

LeBlanc_2015
2015
Towards Integration at Last? The Sustainable
Development Goals as a Network of Targets
Le Blanc, D.
Method type: Semantic analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Thematical focus: SDGs 10, 12

LeBlanc_2017
2017
Mapping the linkages between oceans and other Sustainable Development Goals: A preliminary exploration.
Le Blanc, D., Freire, C., Vierros, M.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Multinational
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 14

Liu_2020
2020
Interactions between industrial development and environmental protection dimensions of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Evidence from 40 countries with different income levels
Liu S.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Indicator level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: 40 countries
SDGs considered: 9, 12
Thematical focus: Targets 9.2.1, 12.4.1
Method description: To analyze the interactions between SDG indicators 9.2.1 and 12.4.1, the article uses correlation analysis between MVA per capita (MVA per capita is accepted as a parameter to measure country’s industrial development and sustainability under SDG indicator 9.2.1) and E-waste per capita in forty countries selected according to their income levels. At first, an overall correlation was conducted to explore the relationship between MVA per capita and E-waste per capita in all the forty selected countries. Then the correlations were run in each of the ten countries according to the four income levels. This generated more detailed evidence of whether the interactions between different SDG indicators are associated with income levels of countries. The article reports Pearson’s r values of the correlations because the data for the two SDG indicators were both linear and numerical.
Key results: The interaction between SDG indicators 9.2.1 and 12.4.1 varies across countries with different income levels. Although in general a country with higher MVA per capita also generates more E-waste per capita, this is not necessarily for all countries, especially for high-income countries. Nevertheless, the expected negative correlation between MVA per capita and E-waste per capita only weakly and insignificantly exists in high-income countries. For low-income and upper-middle-income countries, the correlation between these two indicators is positive, strong, and statistically significant. For lower-middle-income countries the correlation is still positive, but is neither strong nor statistically significant. This generates evidence to partially support the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC), which argues that the relationship between economic development and environmental protection follows an ‘inverted U shape’ (except upper-middle-income countries, the positive association between MVA per capita and E-waste per capita becomes weaker and finally turns negative for high-income countries).
Abstract: This article explores the interactions between industrial development and environmental protection dimensions of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In consideration of the suitability and data availability, this article uses the SDG indicators 9.2.1 (manufacturing value-added per capita) and 12.4.1 (E-waste per capita) as the two indicators to reflect industrial development and environmental protection under the SDGs framework. Based on a cross-country data source, this article examines the correlation between manufacturing value-added per capita and E-waste per capita in forty countries across four income levels as defined by the World Bank. The results show that the manufacturing value-added per capita and E-waste per capita increase with the countries’ income levels. In addition, the positive correlation between manufacturing value-added per capita and electronic waste (E-waste_ per capita) becomes weaker with the increase of the countries’ income levels, and for high-income countries the correlation turns negative. This provides evidence to partially support the Environmental Kuznets Curve, which demonstrates the ‘inverted-U shape’ relationship between economic development and environmental protection. It also generates a number of implications on the monitoring and management of SDG indicators. In consideration of the interactions between different SDGs (including targets and indicators), a holistic, multi-disciplinary, and cross-departmental management and monitoring of SDG indicators is recommended. © 2020 Copyright by University of Silesia in Katowice.

Lusseau_2019
2019
Income-based variation in Sustainable Development Goal interaction networks
Lusseau D., Mancini F.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: World, Low-income countries
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: The 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are set to change the way we live, and aim to create, by 2030, a sustainable future balancing equitable prosperity within planetary boundaries. Human, economic and natural resources must be used in tandem to achieve the SDGs; therefore, acting to resolve one SDG can impair or improve our ability to meet others that may need these resources to be used in different ways. Trade-offs arising from these SDG interactions are a key hurdle for SDG implementation. We estimate the network of SDG interactions—the sustainome—using global time series of SDG indicators for countries with different income levels. We analyse the network architecture to determine the hurdles and opportunities to maximize SDG implementation through their interactions. The relative contributions of SDGs to global sustainable success differ by country income. They also differ depending on whether we consider SDG goals or targets. However, limiting climate change, reducing inequalities and responsible consumption are key hurdles to achieving 2030 goals across countries. Focusing on poverty alleviation and reducing inequalities will have compound positive effects on all SDGs. © 2019, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.

Lyytimäki_2021
2021
Untangling the interactions of sustainability targets: synergies and trade-offs in the Northern European context
Lyytimäki J., Lonkila K.-M., Furman E., Korhonen-Kurki K., Lähteenoja S.
Method type: Expert judgement
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: Finland
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: Agenda 2030 and sustainable development goals (SDG) are key formulations of sustainability policies, consisting of 17 general-level goals and 169 more detailed targets. The target setting is based on tedious international policy negotiations and compromises addressing myriad of different and sometimes incompatible interests. Identification of key trade-offs and synergies between the targets can help the efficient implementation of SDGs by improving the opportunities to focus policy attention and actions on the most relevant issues. This article focuses on trade-offs and synergies of nationally relevant targets in the context of an industrialised and affluent nation state. Results from a cross-matrix examination of targets in Finland show that most of the selected targets are characterised by synergistic interactions with other nationally relevant targets. However, policies aimed at advancing economic growth and the use of renewable energy risk a number of serious trade-offs. Methodological advances are required to make the assessment of interactions more transparent and reliable, manageable within the limited resources and capable of producing results relevant to decision-making. A recommendation for the use of cross-matrix examination as a tool of collaborative ex ante sustainability assessment is put forward, also acknowledging the risk of “paralysis by analysis” related to the wide-ranging SDG framework. © 2020, The Author(s).

Mainali_2018
2018
Evaluating synergies and trade-offs among Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Explorative analyses of development paths in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa
Mainali B., Luukkanen J., Silveira S., Kaivo-Oja J.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement; Data analysis)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: Developing countries + focus on Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, Ghana and Rwanda
SDGs considered: 1,2,6,7
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: Understanding the linkages between multiple targets of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) may help to integrate different sectoral programmes and develop coherent cross-sectoral policy to explore synergies. Synergy is interaction among two or more actions, which will lead to an impact greater or less than the sum of individual effects. Therefore, synergy can be positive or negative (trade-off). This paper aims at developing an analytical framework to evaluate sectoral linkages and examine potential synergies and trade-offs among various SDGs' goals and targets. Synergies and trade-offs related to energy access (SDG7), clean water and sanitation access (SDG6), food security and sustainable agriculture (SDG2) and poverty alleviation (SDG1) have been evaluated from the perspective of developing countries using examples from South Asia (Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka) and Sub-Saharan Africa (Ghana, Ethiopia and Rwanda), and historical data for the period between 1990 and 2012. The analytical framework includes both qualitative and quantitative methods. Network analysis technique has been used for exploring the conceptual linkage among different indicators, and capturing the targets associated with SDGs. Advanced Sustainability Analysis (ASA) developed under the European framework programme has been used for quantifying the synergies and trade-offs among sustainability indicators. The analysis showed strong synergy among various SDG targets. Interestingly, the potential synergy differs from country to country and over time. Ghana and Sri Lanka had relatively higher potential synergy, whereas Rwanda and Nepal had relatively lower potential synergy among the various targets. Higher synergy values were evidenced in those cases where the policy have recognized and emphasized on linkages among cross-sectoral targets. © 2018 by the authors.

Maksymiv_2021
2021
Strategic challenges for sustainable governance of the bioeconomy: Preventing conflict between sdgs
Maksymiv Y., Yakubiv V., Pylypiv N., Hryhoruk I., Piatnychuk I., Popadynets N.
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 2, 3, 7, 9, 12, 13, 15
Thematical focus: n.a. (bioeconomy)
Method description: Analysed the works of leading scientists and strategic documents in which the desire to develop the economy, considering sustainable development based on bioeconomy in particular, is declared (using keywords).
Abstract: The paper analyzes approaches to understanding the concept of the bioeconomy in highly cited journals, and bioeconomy strategies in associations of countries (the OECD and EU) and at the national level. Strategic challenges for sustainable bioeconomy governance are identified and an understanding of this concept is presented. The main aims, such as decoupling, the use of biotechnology, the use of sustainable biomass in the production process, and a high level of corporate social responsibility, are proposed for the identification of industries related to the bioeconomy. Specific goal achievement within the bioeconomy strategy and possible risks of conflict between SDGs are presented in the model. The bioeconomy should be considered a tool for achieving SDGs; the most relevant being 2, 3, 7, 9, 12, and 13–15. However, the achievement of bioeconomy goals can lead to a conflict between SDGs in practice. Therefore, this aspect must be taken into account at the stage of developing bioeconomy strategy and regulated in governance, to prevent conflicts between SDGs and to involve citizens and stakeholders in participating consciously in this process. © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

Mantlana_2019
2019
Mapping the interlinkages between sustainable development goal 9 and other sustainable development goals: A preliminary exploration
Mantlana K.B., Maoela M.A.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Data analysis)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 2, 6, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15
Thematical focus: SDG 9
Key results: The targets of SDG 9 showed interlinkages with all six SDGs that were evaluated. The analysis showed that co-benefits were the most dominant interaction (79%)(Table 2, Fig.3), indicating compatibilities between industry, infrastructure, and innovation and the food–water–climate–energy–land use nexus. The largest contribution (68%) came from the prerequisite context independent relationships. Results showed few neutral interactions (13%) and even fewer trade-off interactions (8%). Three SDG 9 targets (9.5, 9.b, and 9.c were the most interlinked with all other targets (Table 3). The same three targets also showed the largest number of positive relationships. Target 9.2 showed the highest number of trade-off, while target 9.3 had the highest number of neutral interlinkages. The targets of SDG 11 showed the highest number of positive interlinkages with the targets of SDG 9 (Table 4); the strongest positive interlinkage was shown by the targets of SDG 9 and those of SDG 7; SDG 2 had the largest number of neutral interlinkages; SDG15 the largest number of the trade-offs.
Abstract: The set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 targets aims to move the world to a sustainable trajectory of economic development, environmental sustainability, and social inclusion. This paper presents a review of relevant reports as well as scientific publications to assess the interlinkages between SDG 9 dealing with industrial innovation and infrastructure and SDGs relating to social inclusion (SDG 2 and 11), environmental sustainability (SDG 6, 13, and 15), and economic development (SDG 7). The identified interlinkages were mapped and characterized based on compatibility (co-benefit, trade-off, neutral) in attaining the targets of the considered SDGs. Our results showed that the co-benefits were by far the most dominant interactions between the targets of SDG 9 and the targets of the SDGs that were considered. The targets of SDG 2 had the largest number of neutral interlinkages with the targets of SDG 9, while trade-off interlinkages were found mainly between SDG 9 targets and the targets of SDG 6, 13, and 15. This review will raise awareness of the significance of understanding the nature of interlinkages between the different SDGs to relevant role players and will also inform and stimulate science–policy dialogue on the importance of interlinkages in the implementation, monitoring, and reporting of SDG 9 targets. © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Marcinko_2021
2021
The development of a framework for the integrated assessment of sdg trade-offs in the sundarban biosphere reserve
Marcinko C.L.J., Nicholls R.J., Daw T.M., Hazra S., Hutton C.W., Hill C.T., Clarke D., Harfoot A., Basu O., Das I., Giri S., Pal S., Mondal P.P.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement; Modelling)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Subnational
Geograph context: Sundarban Biosphere Reserve (SBR), India
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: The approach consists of five steps. Step 1 is the conceptualization of the system and the selection of the SDGs to analyze. Step 2 is the review/analysis of literature, data, models, current policies available for the study region + stakeholders interviews and workshops for SDGs/key issues selection. Step 3a is the development of key questions based on important potential trade-offs between SDGs. Step 3b is the development of future scenarios of change based on the key issues and likely future trends. Step 4 is the exploration of questions within each scenario using an integrated assessment modelling (IAM) approach (fig.5 in the paper). Step 5 is the evaluation of the outputs from the assessment in terms of SDG trade-offs and synergies (not carried out?) (see section 3 and 4 of the paper for more info)
Key results: n.a.
Abstract: The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and their corresponding targets are significantly interconnected, with many interactions, synergies, and trade-offs between individual goals across multiple temporal and spatial scales. This paper proposes a framework for the Integrated Assessment Modelling (IAM) of a complex deltaic socio-ecological system in order to analyze such SDG interactions. We focused on the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve (SBR), India, within the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna Delta. It is densely populated with 4.4 million people (2011), high levels of poverty, and a strong dependence on rural livelihoods. It is adjacent to the growing megacity of Kolkata. The area also includes the Indian portion of the world’s largest mangrove forest--the Sundarbans--hosting the iconic Bengal Tiger. Like all deltaic systems, this area is subject to multiple drivers of environmental change operating across scales. The IAM framework is designed to investigate socio-environmental change under a range of explorative and/or normative scenarios and explore associated policy impacts, considering a broad range of subthematic SDG indicators. The following elements were explicitly considered: (1) agriculture; (2) aquaculture; (3) mangroves; (4) fisheries; and (5) multidimensional poverty. Key questions that can be addressed include the implications of changing monsoon patterns, trade-offs between agriculture and aquaculture, or the future of the Sundarbans’ mangroves under sea-level rise and different management strategies. The novel, high-resolution analysis of SDG interactions allowed by the IAM will provide stakeholders and policy makers the opportunity to prioritize and explore the SDG targets that are most relevant to the SBR and provide a foundation for further integrated analysis. © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

McCollum_2018
2018
Connecting the sustainable development goals by their energy inter-linkages
McCollum D.L., Echeverri L.G., Busch S., Pachauri S., Parkinson S., Rogelj J., Krey V., Minx J.C., Nilsson M., Stevance A.-S., Riahi K.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Thematical focus: SDG 7
Method description: Literature collected through expert identification and search on Scopus. Based on the literature reviewed, the authors identify and assess interactions between SDG 7 and the other SDGs. For each interlinkage, the authors assess (1) the type and strength using Nilsson's 7 point scale; (2) the robustness of the evidence base backing up the finding (‘limited,’ ‘medium,’ or ‘robust’); (3) the degree of agreement of the body of literature on the finding (‘low,’‘medium,’or 'high’); (4) the confidence that can be assigned to the interlinkage, based on the evidence and agreement (=points 2 and 3) (‘very low,’‘low,’‘medium,’‘high,’and 'very high’).
Key results: Positive interactions between SDG7 (Energy) and the other SDGs outweigh the negative ones, both in number and magnitude.
Abstract: The United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide guide-posts to society as it attempts to respond to an array of pressing challenges. One of these challenges is energy; thus, the SDGs have become paramount for energy policy-making. Yet, while governments throughout the world have already declared the SDGs to be 'integrated and indivisible', there are still knowledge gaps surrounding how the interactions between the energy SDG targets and those of the non-energy-focused SDGs might play out in different contexts. In this review, we report on a large-scale assessment of the relevant energy literature, which we conducted to better our understanding of key energy-related interactions between SDGs, as well as their context-dependencies (relating to time, geography, governance, technology, and directionality). By (i) evaluating the nature and strength of the interactions identified, (ii) indicating the robustness of the evidence base, the agreement of that evidence, and our confidence in it, and (iii) highlighting critical areas where better understanding is needed or context dependencies should be considered, our review points to potential ways forward for both the policy making and scientific communities. First, we find that positive interactions between the SDGs outweigh the negative ones, both in number and magnitude. Second, of relevance for the scientific community, in order to fill knowledge gaps in critical areas, there is an urgent need for interdisciplinary research geared toward developing new data, scientific tools, and fresh perspectives. Third, of relevance for policy-making, wider efforts to promote policy coherence and integrated assessments are required to address potential policy spillovers across sectors, sustainability domains, and geographic and temporal boundaries. The task of conducting comprehensive science-to-policy assessments covering all SDGs, such as for the UN's Global Sustainable Development Report, remains manageable pending the availability of systematic reviews focusing on a limited number of SDG dimensions in each case. © 2018 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd

Milan_2017
2017
Clean water and sanitation for all: interactions with other sustainable development goals
Milan B.F.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement; Modelling)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal, target, indicator level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: Urban context
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 6
Abstract: Access to water and sanitation for all is a part of the recently (September 2015) approved Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, natural constraints, climate change and the increase of population forecasts will challenge this goal and how it interacts with others. In particular, domestic water will compete with additional water demands essential for the achievement of other goals (i.e. SGD2 on zero huger or SDG14 life below water). We assess how future domestic water demand in cities will interact with other SDGs. First, we use an evaluation framework to identify positive and negative relations. We then calculate the required water to meet this demand and compare it with the performance of other water-dependent goals. Our results show that larger increases in domestic water demand will happen in countries underperforming in other water-dependent goals. How urban areas deal with water resources will shape these relations. Crucially, urban water decisions will determine the sustainability of global water resources and, ultimately, the performance of all SDGs. © 2017, Springer International Publishing Switzerland.

Natcher_2021
2021
A nexus approach to water, energy, and food security in Northern Canada
Natcher D., Ingram S.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Subnational
Geograph context: Northern Canada
SDGs considered: 2,6,7
Thematical focus: n.a. (WEF)
Method description: To assess SDG target interactions, various public data sources on energy profiles, GHG emissions, and other reports. For the analysis of interactions, approach developed by Fader et al. (2018) who, building on Nilsson et al. (2016), provide a step-wise methodology for calculating and ranking the degree of interaction between WEF-SDG targets. In the analysis, first an evaluation of the resource input needs, infrastructure requirements, and the risks and benefits toward ecosystem services associated with achieving each target; every pairwise combination of targets in SDGs 2, 6, and 7 were evaluated in this manner. The total interaction score (TIS) between two targets is the sum of the negative input interactions, positive infrastructure interactions, and the net effect on ecosystem services.
Abstract: Residents of northern Canada experience high rates of water, energy, and food (WEF) insecurity relative to the national average. Historically, WEF systems have been treated independently with little policy or institutional coordination occurring between sectors. This paper presents the results of a WEF nexus analysis for northern Canada. We assess the positive and negative interactions between the WEF sectors that could facilitate or impede the attainment of WEF-related sustainable development goals. Out of 210 pair-wise interactions, 87% were found to be synergistic of some magnitude, meaning that efforts to address insecurity in one WEF sector will have positive spillover effects toward the others. With synergies significantly outweighing trade-offs, opportunities exist to simultaneously address WEF insecurities through mutually beneficial actions that capitalize on and promote synergetic policies. © The Arctic Institute of North America.

Nilsson_2017
2017
Important Interactions among the Sustainable Development Goals under Review at the High-Level Political Forum 2017
Nilsson, M.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDGs 1, 2, 3, 5, 9 and 14
Key results: Most interlinkages are synergies (76%); then trade-offs (20%) and mixed (3%).

Nunes_2016
2016
The importance of an integrating framework for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals: the example of health and well-being
Nunes, A.R., Lee, K., O'Riordan, T.
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ,9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 3
Abstract: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development came into force in January 2016 as the central United Nations (UN) platform for achieving ‘integrated and indivisible’ goals and targets across the three characteristic dimensions of sustainable development: the social, environmental and economic. We argue that, despite the UN adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a framework for operationalising them in an integrated fashion is lacking. This article puts forth a framework for integrating health and well-being across the SDGs as both preconditions and outcomes of sustainable development. We present a rationale for this approach, and identify the challenges and opportunities for implementing and monitoring such a framework through a series of examples. We encourage other sectors to develop similar integrating frameworks for supporting a more coordinated approach for operationalising the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

OECD_2017
2017
A preliminary assessment of indicators for SDG 14 on “Oceans”
Recuero Virto, L.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 14

Oghenekaro_2022
2022
Interactions between proposed energy-mix scenarios and non-energy Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A Sub-Sahara African perspective
Oghenekaro R.E., Kant S.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: Nigeria; Ethiopia
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14, 15
Thematical focus: SDG 7
Method description: This paper analyzes interactions from an integrated perspective by assessing the potential impacts that the energy scenarios projected for Africa could have on the other non-energy SDGs. Based on the review of scientific and grey literature, the interactions between the increased energy access from specific energy sources and selected non-energy SDGs are scored within each scenario, and policy recommendations are proposed based on score outcomes. This approach builds on studies by McCollum et al (2018) and Fuso-Nerini et al 2018 in which SDG interactions were evaluated from an energy vantage point (SDG 7). This study goes a step further to enhance the methodology by evaluating the interactions not just from the broad SDG 7 perspective, but from within the context of specific energy sources, such as fossil fuels, hydropower, and other renewables, that have been projected for African countries. A comparative assessment of the differences in the interactions between the energy sources as projected in the Africa Case 2040 scenario by the International Energy Agency (IEA) 2019 Africa Outlook report, and that of the 2 °C decarbonization 2065 scenario by the European Commission’s Joint Research Center (JRC) 2019 technical report for Africa, with respect to the current 2018 scenario was conducted [For the future scenarios, we do not have the data about the composition of all the different energy-mixes, such as the composition of renewable energy sources, and evidence from the contextual literature about future technologies, policies, and economic reforms and their impacts on the interactions between SDG 7 and non-energy SDGs in the two countries. We, therefore, conducted our analysis like a thought experiment]. In the first step of scoring, interaction of each energy source with the selected targets of 10 non-energy SDGs were scored using 7 points scale of Nilsson’s framework. The current national contexts and circumstances, geography, technology, and level of governance, were used to determine the principal unidirectional interactions between the specific energy source and the underlying targets of 10 non-energy SDGs. These interactions were summarized and scored as either positive, negative, or consistent with each other as well as having no interactions at all. For interactions having both positive and negative interactions, scores were assigned as either negative or positive where there was significantly more evidence to support either interaction. Where an almost equal number of positive and negative interactions for a target was found, a net score was obtained. In the second step of scoring, the interaction scores obtained for each energy source in the previous step were then aggregated by using a weighted average based on the proportion of the energy source’s contribution to the energy mix. The scores were rounded off to single decimal places where applicable and were interpreted based on the adapted 13 points typology scale which is given in figure 1. This adaptation involved the addition of subpoints to allow for results that did not sum up to whole numbers due to the weighted averaging of energy sources. In addition to scores of interactions, we also calculated the strength of literary evidence, which was classified, similar to McCollum et al (2018), as low, medium, and strong for 0–3, 4–7, and 8 literary sources, respectively. [note that the assessment was unidirectional and interactions, which are based on the state of current national contexts, circumstances, economic policies, and governance structures: the analysis does not account for future reforms/developments in policies, economic systems, governance, and technologies]
Key results: The results confirm high-level interactions between SDG 7 and non-energy SDGs, existence of both positive and negative interactions, and the variation in the direction of interactions being dependent on energy sources. The identified interactions for Nigeria and Ethiopia are based on the available resources each country can harness to meet its energy needs. It is however important to understand how meeting these energy needs may impact meeting the other crucial developmental needs as reflected in these interactions. This study has shown that even the application of cleaner energy resources may constrain or counteract the pursuit of other developmental goals, and to checkmate this, holistic, coherent, and effective cross-sectoral sustainable development planning and decision-making processes are essential.Our key findings are that the IEA 2040 scenario with the highest fossil fuel mix has the most negative impacts on the other non-energy SDGs while the JRC 2065 scenario has much less negative interactions compared to the IEA 2040 scenario. Hence, energy planning and development for the future should focus more on increasing renewable energy into the energy mix for both countries, especially in Nigeria which has large oil and gas reserves. This stands to prevent achieving energy goals while not simultaneously impeding or worsening the state of the other non-energy SDGs as seen in the 2040 scenario.
Abstract: Sub- Sahara Africa (SSA) has the lowest access to energy globally which is partly responsible for its dismal socio-economic indices. The continent, however, has the unique opportunity to fuel its sustainable development using clean and sustainable energy. Given the continent's aspirations, as well as its position and peculiarities within the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) such as its hosting up to 90% of the world's poorest countries, and generally lagging behind in development as most countries in Africa are not on track to meet the SDGs with the exception of the SDG on climate action, an assessment of the interactions and implications between the goal to provide access to clean, reliable, affordable, sustainable, and modern energy (SDG 7) and the other non-energy related SDGs is important for coherent cross-sectoral sustainable development planning and decision-making. This paper analyzes the interactions between SDG 7 and selected non-energy SDGs for three energy-mix scenarios - the current (2018), 2040 energy mix scenario proposed by International Energy Agency (IEA), and 2065 energy mix scenario proposed by Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission. The analyses are done for two countries - Nigeria and Ethiopia - that capture the wide variation in economic growth and energy sources across SSA. The analyses were carried out by adapting a seven-point scoring typology proposed by Nilsson et al (2016). The results indicate that in the case of Nigeria, the interactions between SDG 7 and many non-energy SDGs, such as SDGs 2, 6, and 13, become negative for the IEA 2040 scenario while they were positive for 2018 scenario. For the same two scenarios (IEA 2040 and the current), for Ethiopia, there are some negative influences on selected non-energy SDGs, but the direction of overall interactions does not change from positive to negative. In the case of JRC 2065 scenario, there are marginal negative influences on some non-energy SDGs, but neither in Nigeria nor in Ethiopia, there is no complete reverse change from positive to negative for any non-energy SDGs. Hence, JRC 2065 scenario is preferred. The study concludes with recommendations for policy interventions that would prevent the change of the interactions that move from positive in the 2018 scenario towards negative in the 2065 scenario (such as those that protect the rights of local communities to natural resources), as well as policies that may reduce the influence of negative interactions seen in both scenarios (such as reduction of air pollution). © 2022 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd.

Osman_2022
2022
Spatial analysis of synergies and trade-offs between the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Africa
Osman, A., Mensah, E.A., Mensah, C.A., Asamoah, Y., Dauda, S., Adu-Boahen, K., Adongo, C.A.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: African countries
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: The study adopted a spatial analytical approach to assess the hypothesis set. Spatial statistics helps in mapping mean centre, direc- tional trend of phenomenon, patterns of clustering or dispersion [spa- tial autocorrelation], identify statistically significant hotspots/coldspots [spatial clustering], estimate values over spaces [interpolation], build relationships [exploratory & geographic weighted regression] and predict [spatial machine learning]
Key results: On the front of the spatial relationships between SDGs, the study found that synergies and trade-offs were not always linear and uni- form across countries. In 2016, most Western African countries such as Burkina Faso, Cote D’ Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria, and Sierra Leone exhibited a positive relationship between SDGs 1 and 4, while Cameroon, Malawi, Madagascar, Ethiopia, and Niger had a convex relationship. Non-uninformative and different types of relationships for the same SDGs across countries were exhibited for SDGs 1 and 9, 1 and 16, 4 and 6, 4 and 9, 4 and 10, 6 and 10, 7 and 11, and 10 and 16. The remaining SDG pairs had single relationships but were spatially defined by specific countries. Some of the relationships were more than linear with other undefined and complex for SDGs 2 and 16, 2 and 17, 4 and 16, 7 and 11, and 10 and 16. Results showed that SDG 4 had three distinct types of relationships with SDGs 6, 7 and 11, and 10. Spatial relationships for 2020 SDG scores showed that relationships between SDGs are not permanent but change with time. Spatial rela- tionships for SDG 1 and other SDGs for 2020 increased from 6 to 7 with a break in relationships with SDGs 5, 12 and 17, and new relationships with SDGs 3, 6, 7 and 13 were established. SDG 1 showed relationships with SDGs 4, 6, 7 and 9 which encompassed all countries in Africa. While the relationships for SDG 2 with SDGs 16 and 17 in 2016 were broken in 2020, a new relationship was established for SDGs 2 and 13.
Abstract: Challenges faced by African countries in achieving the goals of sustainable development are similar and transboundary. Previous analysis of Africa’s progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has largely been non-spatial, reducing the ability to find spatial relationships between countries and SDGs to help cooperation and proffer country-specific interventions. This study adopted techniques of exploratory and inferential spatial statistics to assess the successes of African countries from 2016 to 2020 in achieving the goals of sustainable development. Also, the study sought to understand how the spatial synergies and trade-offs between SDGs vary per country and time. The results revealed that spatial hotspots of countries with high SDGs scores were mostly confined to northern African countries with significant coldspots within central and eastern Africa and few patches in western and southern Africa for 2016. In 2020, the number of countries forming hotspots reduced, with Central African countries as significant cold spots. Five main spatial relationships: positive linear, negative linear, concave, convex and undefined complex, were found among countries and the SDGs. However, these spatial relationships were fluid as they changed over time and with different levels of influence from 2016 to 2020. The study concludes that generic solutions and policies by development agencies, governments, development finance instiutions and other impact investors will not be enough in achieving the SDGs because of the spatial heterogeneity of the continent. Tailored and country-specific policies based on results of spatial statistics matter.

Ospina-Forero_2020
2020
Estimating networks of sustainable development goals
Ospina-Forero L., Castañeda G., Guerrero O.A.
Method type: Mixed (Data analysis; Modelling)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: Egypt; Indonesia; Mexico; Turkey
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: We build a dataset where we reach a compromise between maximizing the length of the sampling period, the number of indicators, the SDGs covered, and the number of countries in the sample. In particular, we prioritize the number of indicators and years because our motivation for estimating SDGs is to map a complex web of structural-dependencies between numerous policy issues. Our sample for this study consists of four countries from different continents: Egypt (EGY), Indonesia (IDN), Mexico (MEX), and Turkey (TUR). We analyze the relationships between 87 development indicators (covering 16 of the 17 SDGs) during the 1995–2014 period for each country in an independent fashion. With this general picture of the data, we proceed to present the estimated networks. We do this in a twofold fashion. First, we show aggregate results at the level of the SDGs. That is, we study the total number of incoming and outgoing edges (and their weights) in each SDG. This allows gaining insights into the structure of synergies and trade-offs between SDGs at the level of each country. Second, we introduce and compute formal metrics to compare the topologies of the estimated SDG networks, with a special emphasis on comparing the networks produced for the same country through different methods. This provides a more rigorous understanding of the implications of using different frameworks.
Key results: See paper.
Abstract: An increasing number of researchers and practitioners advocate for a systemic understanding of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through interdependency networks. Ironically, the burgeoning network-estimation literature seems neglected by this community. We provide an introduction to the most suitable estimation methods for SDG networks. Building a dataset with 87 development indicators in four countries over 20 years, we perform a comparative study of these methods. We find important differences in the estimated network structures as well as in synergies and trade-offs between SDGs. Finally, we provide some guidelines on the potentials and limitations of estimating SDG networks for policy advice. © 2020 The Author(s)

Parikh_2021
2021
Synergies and trade-offs between sanitation and the sustainable development goals
Parikh, Priti, Loan Diep, Pascale Hofmann, Julia Tomei, Luiza Campos, T. Teh, Yacob Mulugetta, Ben Milligan, and Monica Lakhanpaul.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: sanitation (6.2)
Method description: Using a structured process, the identification of linkages, i.e. call for action, synergies and trade-offs, was initially carried out through a blended approach whereby interdisciplinary pairs used their expertise and knowledge complemented by targeted literature searches to create an interdisciplinary evidence base. Following the method of Fuso Nerini et al. [9], the authors considered at least one piece of published evidence per Target as verification of a synergy or a trade-off. In Step A, the authors explored and identified a linkage between sanitation and a Target to assess how improvements in sanitation would affect the Target in question. For Steps B and C, the team looked at reciprocal synergies and trade-offs between sanitation and all SDG targets. In all three steps, the published evidence considered was limited to academic studies and grey literature (e.g. UN reports) published in English.
Key results: As sanitation initiatives often fail to target the most marginalised communities, the high-cost burden of inadequate sanitation and poor hygiene these groups subsequently experience make a direct case for investment in sanitation to support SDG1 (‘No Poverty’) and SDG10 (‘Reduced Inequalities’). While our study revealed multiple linkages between sanitation and SDG5 (‘Gender Equality’), in practice, gender-inclusive sanitation has yet to be achieved at scale. Sanitation can support SDG5 as well as SDG16 (‘Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions’) regarding the need for safety, for example, through the development of female-friendly toilets, especially where women and girls are exposed to harassment (Targets 5.2, 16.1). SDG4 (‘Quality Education’), also presents linkages with sanitation through Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) and education (at school and elsewhere) (Target 4.3, 4.5) where action on both sides can positively reinforce the other. There are also possible synergies with all SDG6 Targets, for example, in the way treatment and safe disposal of human faeces and urine safeguards water systems. Sanitation development objectives are closely aligned with the food and energy sectors – SDG2 (‘Zero Hunger’) and SDG7 (‘Affordable and Clean Energy’. SDG9 (‘Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure’) also recognises the value of resource-efficient systems and emphasises the need for developing and upgrading sanitation infrastructure that enables the valorisation of excreta in closed-loop systems (Targets 9.1, 9.4, 9.a). Also, on wastewater management, there are four targets under SDG12 (‘Consumption and Production’) calling for change in sanitation infrastructure to re-use waste and thereby reduce pressure on natural resources (Target 12.2, 12.4–6). Links between sanitation and SDG13 (‘Climate Action’) include infrastructural change. Our study confirms the fundamental role that sanitation has to play in supporting progress towards SDG11 (‘Sustainable Cities and Communities’) and SDG8 (‘Decent Work and Economic Growth’) as a basic service underpinning societal development. Sanitation has a crucial role to play in protecting environmental resources and relates to SDG14 (‘Life Below Water’) and SDG15 (‘Life On Land’). There are multiple ways through which sanitation relates to the strengthening of institutional mechanisms (SDG17 ‘Partnerships for the Goals’) that can support the achievement of the rest of the SDG Targets.
Abstract: To better leverage opportunities arising out of sustainable and inclusive management of sanitation services there is a need for robust and comprehensive evidence of the wide-ranging benefits that sanitation can deliver. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide a comprehensive framework for sustainable development broken down into 169 interconnected Targets which are articulated under 17 Goals. Based on a methodology developed at University College London (UCL), this study identifies linkages between sanitation and the 169 Targets corroborated by published evidence. We show that there are synergies between sanitation and all 17 Goals and 130 (77%) of the Targets, and trade-offs for 28 (17%) of the Targets. We identified 83 Targets (49%) that call for action in the sanitation sector. The results demonstrate the far-reaching benefits that can be unlocked from investment in sanitation, which extend beyond health and spread across sectors. The evidence base for the 17 Goals establishes links that can inform cross-sectoral action, collaborations and investment across governance levels for integrated sanitation solutions. The research provides different stakeholders with a framework that can be applied to context-specific cases and projects. We propose a range of recommendations to policy makers, practitioners and researchers who seek to take this study further to help achieve the SDGs.

Pham-Truffert_2020
2020
Interactions among Sustainable Development Goals: Knowledge for identifying multipliers and virtuous cycles
Pham-Truffert M., Metz F., Fischer M., Rueff H., Messerli P.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: Developed to be interconnected by design, the 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs) and their 169 targets have attracted a growing scientific community committed to exploring the systemic interactions inherent to the 2030 Agenda. Understanding which SDGs influence one another (positively or negatively) is critical to prioritize and implement policies that maximize synergies between goals while navigating trade-offs. In this way, the need for informed decision-making urgently requires knowledge of context-specific SDG interactions. Drawing on an extensive literature review (including scientific reports and scholarly articles), we collected, synthesized, and analyzed data about negative and positive interactions among SDG goals and targets. Based on this unique dataset, our analysis focused on three key elements of the resulting network of SDG interactions: First, we identified the most dominant SDGs in the network. Second, we identified systemic multipliers, defined as nodes with higher weighted amounts of outgoing than incoming influence. Third, we identified critical sub-networks of strongly interconnected SDG targets, highlighting possible virtuous cycles that could serve as concrete entry points to realize the 2030 Agenda. Building on our results, a collaborative effort to add and refine data on behalf of an open-knowledge platform could provide a solid basis for further analysis and enhanced usability in concrete contexts. © 2020 ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Philippidis_2020
2020
Snakes and ladders: World development pathways’ synergies and trade-offs through the lens of the Sustainable Development Goals
Philippidis G., Shutes L., M'Barek R., Ronzon T., Tabeau A., van Meijl H.
Method type: Mixed (Expert judgement; Modelling)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 15
Thematical focus: 13
Abstract: This paper takes three global visions of world development to 2050 and quantifies their implications for sustainable progress employing the metrics of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDG outcomes are structured through the interconnectivities of the three ‘wedding cake’ layers of ‘economy’, ‘society’ and ‘biosphere’, as posited by the Stockholm Resilience Centre. The key policy contribution is to quantify the resulting SDG synergies and trade-offs, whilst also decomposing and calculating the part-worth of the market drivers which contribute to these outcomes. The paper employs a global economic simulation model that combines rational market behaviour with environmental constraints (MAGNET) and is further extended with an SDG metrics module. A ‘non-sustainable’ world reveals trade-offs between economy and biosphere SDGs, with population growth of particular concern to a safe planetary operating space in the world's poorest regions. Sustainable visions could reduce natural resource pressures and emissions and meet energy requirements at potentially limited economic cost. Notwithstanding, these futures do not address income inequalities and potentially increase food security concerns for the most vulnerable members of society. Consequently, developed region led international cooperation and in-kind income transfers to developing countries, constitutes a necessary prerequisite to help remedy the SDG trade-offs exhibited within the more sustainable global pathways. © 2020 The Authors

Pingali_2022
2022
Hunger and environmental goals for Asia: Synergies and trade-offs among the SDGs
Pingali P., Plavšić M.
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: South Asia
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: Target 2.3
Method description: n.a. [Table 1 presents the inter-SDG impacts of doubling agricultural productivity for South Asia. Column A presents the overall impacts of progress towards SDG target 2.3 on other SDG goals, under current South Asian trends in technology, resource use and input use, income and economic growth, food consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, i.e., “business as usual ”scenario. Data which support this study were: long- term national GHG emissions from different agriculture-related sources, use of fertilizers and pesticides, irrigation magnitude and sources, use of high yield varieties, changes in economic growth measured by GDP and poverty rate, changes in dietary patterns. Additionally, we took into consideration population and size of countries in South Asia, as we assessed an overall impact. Column B presents the impacts of progress in other SDGs on achieving the target 2.3 of doubling agri- cultural productivity under scenario that other SDGs are being met by 2030. This paper presents the direction of anticipated impact, rather than the magnitude of the impact. ]
Key results: The pursuit of doubling agricultural productivity, SDG target 2.3, under a “business as usual ”scenario of high input staple crop-centric production systems, can lead to significant negative externalities & impede progress on the environmental and climate-related SDG targets (SDGs 3, 6, 11, 12, 13, 15). On the other hand, promoting production system diversity, enhanced input use efficiency, and an emphasis on conservation and regeneration can result in significant positive externalities while staying on track with respect to the zero-hunger goal (SDG 2). At the same time, it is im- important to identify synergies between improved energy, resource management practices and more sustainable food and agricultural systems. Even where operationalization of SDGs is done independently and at the sector level, if each target can be achieved while minimizing negative externalities, then one should expect tradeoffs overall to be minimized. A policy environment that provides the incentives for adopting better practices, such as the removal of agricultural subsidies which promote resource-inefficient and nature-degrading practices, is crucial for overall success. Investments in better data and metrics for tracking progress on SDG targets and quantifying impacts across targets are crucial for ensuring that progress is being made with minimum externality costs.
Abstract: Rapid progress in hunger reduction in Asia has come at the cost of environmental degradation, while pursuing environmental conservation goals risk slowing further progress on hunger. Operationalizing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) shows us the complexity of achieving multiple societal goals simultaneously. The lack of coordination across sector-specific agencies responsible for various SDGs has aggravated the problem. This paper presents the challenge of seeking a nexus across the SDGs with particular reference to the SDG target 2.3., “Doubling productivity and Incomes”. A detailed assessment, with respect to South Asia, of the synergies and tradeoffs between SDG 2.3 and the other SDG targets is provided. High payoff interventions and policies for maximizing the positive linkages and minimizing the negative linkages with SDG 2.3 are discussed. © 2022 The Authors

Pradhan_2017
2017
A Systematic Study of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Interactions
Pradhan P., Costa L., Rybski D., Lucht W., Kropp J.P.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Indicator level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: 227 countries
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: Sustainable development goals (SDGs) have set the 2030 agenda to transform our world by tackling multiple challenges humankind is facing to ensure well-being, economic prosperity, and environmental protection. In contrast to conventional development agendas focusing on a restricted set of dimensions, the SDGs provide a holistic and multidimensional view on development. Hence, interactions among the SDGs may cause diverging results. To analyze the SDG interactions we systematize the identification of synergies and trade-offs using official SDG indicator data for 227 countries. A significant positive correlation between a pair of SDG indicators is classified as a synergy while a significant negative correlation is classified as a trade-off. We rank synergies and trade-offs between SDGs pairs on global and country scales in order to identify the most frequent SDG interactions. For a given SDG, positive correlations between indicator pairs were found to outweigh the negative ones in most countries. Among SDGs the positive and negative correlations between indicator pairs allowed for the identification of particular global patterns. SDG 1 (No poverty) has synergetic relationship with most of the other goals, whereas SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production) is the goal most commonly associated with trade-offs. The attainment of the SDG agenda will greatly depend on whether the identified synergies among the goals can be leveraged. In addition, the highlighted trade-offs, which constitute obstacles in achieving the SDGs, need to be negotiated and made structurally nonobstructive by deeper changes in the current strategies. © 2017 The Authors.

Requejo-Castro_2020
2020
Data-driven Bayesian network modelling to explore the relationships between SDG 6 and the 2030 Agenda
Requejo-Castro D., Giné-Garriga R., Pérez-Foguet A.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Indicator level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: 179 countries
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Thematical focus: SDG 6
Abstract: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are presented as integrated and indivisible. Therefore, for monitoring purposes, conventional indicator-based frameworks need to be combined with approaches that capture and describe the links and interdependencies between the Goals and their targets. In this study, we propose a data-driven Bayesian network (BN) approach to identify and interpret SDGs interlinkages. We focus our analysis on the interlinkages of SDG 6, related to water and sanitation, across the whole 2030 Agenda, using SDG global available data corresponding to 179 countries, 16 goals, 28 targets and 44 indicators. To analyze and validate the BN results, we first demonstrate the robustness of the BN approach in identifying indicator relationships (i.e. consistent results throughout different country sample sizes). Second, we show the coherency of the results by comparing them with an exhaustive study developed by UN-Water. As an added value, our data-driven approach provides further interlinkages, which are contrasted against the existing literature. We conclude that the approach adopted is useful to accommodate a thorough analysis and interpretation of the complexities and interdependencies of the SDGs. © 2019 Elsevier B.V.

Rulisa_2022
2022
When Local Trade-Offs between SDGs Turn Out to Be Wealth-Dependent: Interaction between Expanding Rice Cultivation and Eradicating Malaria in Rwanda
Rulisa A., van Kempen L., Koch D.-J.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Data analysis)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: National; Subnational
Geograph context: Rwanda; sub-district of Ruhusa
SDGs considered: 2, 3, 10*
Thematical focus: Targets 2.3, 3.3
Method description: First, the SDG literature is consulted to map the interaction channels between the SDG targets under study in generic terms (Figure 1, based on ICSSU, 2017). We then introduce the case study in Rwanda and customize the generic framework accordingly, resulting in Figure 2 (Interlinkages for Rwanda). The paper then proceeds to trace selected channels with survey data collected in Ruhuha, a sub-district where malaria is endemic and rice cultivation is a prominent livelihood activity. The analysis (descriptive statistics and Spearman’s correlation, regression) systematically compares households dependent on rice cultivation to those depending on other livelihoods. Apart from malaria incidence, child stunting serves as a second outcome of interest, given the food security rationale behind rice intensification.
Key results: This paper analyzed the impact of a specific trade-off between SDG2 and SDG3, that is, the impact of the expansion of rice cultivation on public health in Rwanda, through a distributional lens. Comparing impacts across wealth strata reveals that the negative externality of increased malaria exposure falls disproportionally on the poorest section of the non-rice producing local population in Ruhuha. An important qualifier is that exposure is highest among rice-farming households themselves, who are typically located at the higher end of the local income distribution. However, this is unlikely to undo the overall inequalityenhancing nature of the trade-off, as rice farmers make up a relatively small portion of the population (less than five percent), and additionally, they appear to reap nutritional benefits from increased rice production. After overcoming an initial disadvantage, under-five children in rice-cultivating households outperform their counterparts in non-rice households on height-for-age. Overall, therefore, the wealth dependence of malaria incidence likely becomes more entrenched, despite the anomaly that the rice-farming group presents.
Abstract: Interactions between SDGs are increasingly mapped and mediating factors that determine whether existing synergies or trade-offs can be identified. However, if and how the wealth status of the concerned population shapes whether SDG interaction constitutes a vicious or virtuous circle is largely overlooked. This article focuses on interaction between SDG2 (nutrition) and SDG3 (health), in particular, the relationship between rice production intensification and the fight against malaria, and thus the role of wealth in explaining the trade-off. This study employed a large-scale survey of rural households (n = 3968) in eastern Rwanda, conducted at a time when a rapid expansion of rice fields co-existed with a strong resurgence of malaria. Logistic regression shows that rice-cultivating households faced significant higher malaria risk, as proxied by fever incidence, confirming the negative externality of agricultural intensification on public health through offering a habitat for vector-borne diseases. Even though rice-cultivating households tend to be higher up the local wealth distribution than those outside the rice sector, its distributional effects are generally biased against the poor. Poorer households outside the rice sector hardly share in the benefits from increased rice production but suffer the consequences in terms of increased malaria risk. The case thus draws attention to the importance of using a distributional lens when analyzing interaction between SDGs locally. © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

Santika_2019
2019
From goals to joules: A quantitative approach of interlinkages between energy and the Sustainable Development Goals
Santika W.G., Anisuzzaman M., Bahri P.A., Shafiullah G.M., Rupf G.V., Urmee T.
Method type: Mixed (Semantic analysis; Literature review; Expert judgement; Modelling)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: Energy demand
Key results: [NB: key results for the paper, not the interlinkages analysis]. The analysis of interlinkages between energy and SDG targets revealed a complex interaction involving synergies and trade-offs. The developed a process to estimate the additional energy demand to be anticipated and its consequences to the energy supply side in comparison to the baseline scenario, While three targets would contribute to the reduction in energy demand (2.4, 7.3, 12.5), the net demand has been found to be positive. This study suggests that policymakers can no longer work in silos and develop energy plans based on assumptions from the energy sector only and try to achieve SDG 7, but they also need to incorporate the additional energy demand that would be necessary to accomplish other SDGs. Each country has different starting points and priorities that make the implementation of the SDGs in local and national development planning unique for that country.
Abstract: Energy is a key enabler in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as energy plays the pivotal role in ending poverty and hunger, providing healthcare, education, and water, as well as sustaining economic growth and protecting the environment. Consequently, since the SDGs are executable only at local and national levels, mainstreaming the SDGs into local/national development planning will put pressure on the country's energy sector. Considering the broad scope of the SDGs, countries will prioritize different SDG targets based on their urgencies, resources, and capabilities. However, energy linkages with the SDGs and their targets are complex, with direct and indirect connections, synergies, and trade-offs. More importantly, there is a lack of capacity among policymakers to be able to develop an SDGs-responsive energy plan, as there is no guidance on how the impact of linkages can be translated into local/national energy planning. This study aims to examine the complexity of the interconnections between energy and the SDGs, as well as give examples of how these linkages can be quantified. Twenty-five SDG targets with direct links to energy are identified in this study, and a map of the multidimensional interaction between them are presented. The study also provides examples of quantification of the targets/indicators into their energy requirements. The results of the study will help energy planners and policymakers forecast energy demand more accurately for energy planning and policies under the SDGs regime. © 2018 Elsevier Ltd

Scherer_2018
2018
Trade-offs between social and environmental Sustainable Development Goals
Scherer L., Behrens P., de Koning A., Heijungs R., Sprecher B., Tukker A.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: 166 nations of the world
SDGs considered: 1, 6, 10, 13, 15
Thematical focus: SDGs 1, 10
Abstract: The UN's 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aim to improve the lives of people, increase prosperity, and protect the planet. Given the large number of goals, interactions are inevitable. We analyse the interaction between two social goals (related to SDG1 Poverty and SDG10 Inequality) and three environmental goals (related to SDG13 Carbon, SDG15 Land, and SDG6 Water). We use a trade-linked, consumption-based approach to assess interactions in 166 nations, each subdivided into four income groups. We find that pursuing social goals is, generally, associated with higher environmental impacts. However, interactions differ greatly among countries and depend on the specific goals. In both interactions, carbon experiences smaller changes than land and water. Although efforts by high- and low-income groups are needed, the rich have a greater leverage to reduce humanity's footprints. Given the importance of both social and environmental sustainability, it is crucial that quantitative interactions between SDGs be well understood so that, where needed, integrative policies can be developed. © 2018 The Authors

Singh_2018
2018
A rapid assessment of co-benefits and trade-offs among Sustainable Development Goals
Singh G.G., Cisneros-Montemayor A.M., Swartz W., Cheung W., Guy J.A., Kenny T.-A., McOwen C.J., Asch R., Geffert J.L., Wabnitz C.C.C., Sumaila R., Hanich Q., Ota Y.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Thematical focus: SDG 14
Abstract: Achieving the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) results in many ecological, social, and economic consequences that are inter-related. Understanding relationships between sustainability goals and determining their interactions can help prioritize effective and efficient policy options. This paper presents a framework that integrates existing knowledge from literature and expert opinions to rapidly assess the relationships between one SDG goal and another. Specifically, given the important role of the oceans in the world's social-ecological systems, this study focuses on how SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and the targets within that goal, contributes to other SDG goals. This framework differentiates relationships based on compatibility (co-benefit, trade-off, neutral), the optional nature of achieving one goal in attaining another, and whether these relationships are context dependent. The results from applying this framework indicate that oceans SDG targets are related to all other SDG goals, with two ocean targets (of seven in total) most related across all other SDG goals. Firstly, the ocean SDG target to increase economic benefits to Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and least developed countries for sustainable marine uses has positive relationships across all SDGs. Secondly, the ocean SDG target to eliminate overfishing, illegal and destructive fishing practices is a necessary pre-condition for achieving the largest number of other SDG targets. This study highlights the importance of the oceans in achieving sustainable development. The rapid assessment framework can be applied to other SDGs to comprehensively map out the subset of targets that are also pivotal in achieving sustainable development. © 2017 The Authors

Singha_2021
2021
Satellite evidence on the trade-offs of the food-water–air quality nexus over the breadbasket of India
Mrinal Singha, Jinwei Dong, Quansheng Ge, Graciela Metternicht, Sangeeta Sarmah, Geli Zhang, Russell Doughty, Sharachchandra Lele, Chandrashekhar Biradar, Sha Zhou, Xiangming Xiao
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Subnational
Geograph context: northwest India (Punjab and Haryana)
SDGs considered: 2, 3, 6, 11
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: Satellite-based framework and correlative analyses of time series measurements to identify interactions among changes in paddy rice planting areas, groundwater depletion, agricultural burning, and air pollution. The annual paddy rice maps between 2001 and 2018 were generated using the phenology and pixel-based algorithm from MODIS data at a 500-m spatial resolution. (see paper for more on data analysis and satellite images).
Key results: The expansion of the paddy rice planting area has improved India’s food security (SDG 2) but has negatively impacted groundwater storage (SDG 6) and regional air quality (SDG 3 and 11), affecting millions of people via water shortage and hazardous air quality. Our results confirm that the GW Act of 2009 reduced the overexploitation of groundwater, but it hampered progress on other SDG targets for air quality and the improvement of human health.

Stevenson_2021
2021
A hybrid approach to identifying and assessing interactions between climate action (SDG13) policies and a range of SDGs in a UK context
Samuel Stevenson, Alexandra Collins, Neil Jennings, Alexandre C. Köberle, Felix Laumann, Anthony A. Laverty, Paolo Vineis, Jeremy Woods & Ajay Gambhir
Method type: Mixed (Semantic analysis; Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: UK
SDGs considered: 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15
Thematical focus: 13
Abstract: In 2015 the United Nations drafted the Paris Agreement and established the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for all nations. A question of increasing relevance is the extent to which the pursuit of climate action (SDG 13) interacts both positively and negatively with other SDGs. We tackle this question through a two-pronged approach: a novel, automated keyword search to identify linkages between SDGs and UK climate-relevant policies; and a detailed expert survey to evaluate these linkages through specific examples. We consider a particular subset of SDGs relating to health, economic growth, affordable and clean energy and sustainable cities and communities. Overall, we find that of the 89 UK climate-relevant policies assessed, most are particularly interlinked with the delivery of SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and that certain UK policies, like the Industrial Strategy and 25-Year Environment Plan, interlink with a wide range of SDGs. Focusing on these climate-relevant policies is therefore likely to deliver a wide range of synergies across SDGs 3 (Good Health and Well-being), 7, 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), 11, 14 (Life Below Water) and 15 (Life on Land). The expert survey demonstrates that in addition to the range of mostly synergistic interlinkages identified in the keyword search, there are also important potential trade-offs to consider. Our analysis provides an important new toolkit for the research and policy communities to consider interactions between SDGs, which can be employed across a range of national and international contexts.

Su_2022
2022
The role of context in identifying linkages between SDG 2 (food) and SDG 6 (water)
Su H., Krol M.S., Hogeboom R.J.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; data analysis; semantic analysis)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: various countries and their aggregation
SDGs considered: 2, 6
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: We applied text analysis to Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) to identify SDG linkages within their country-specific context. Since we focused on the linkages between food (SDG 2) and water (SDG 6), each VNR was searched with particular attention for (i) sections on SDG 2 and SDG 6; (ii) sections with the terms “synthesis”, “highlight”, “introduction”, “national background”, “national context”, “lessons learned”, “national challenges”, “summary” or related terms in its heading; and (iii) paragraphs that contain the term “water”. After an initial reading, potentially indicative sections were highlighted from which SDG linkages could be identified. One linkage of a pair of targets may be mentioned twice or more by one country about multiple aspects, and these aspects were recorded during text analysis. For linkages counting, each linkage in one country was counted a maximum of once. Considering the identifying uncertainties, the direction of linkages were recorded and counted based on policy intention but not included during the comparison. / We synthesized SDG linkages from four existing studies that all used qualitative methods to identify linkages: ESCAP (2016), Griggs et al. (2017), Parikh et al. (2020), and UNWater (2016). / We employed a correlation analysis to the identified linkages through quantitative means. For our quantitative analysis, we performed a correlation analysis on the UN’s SDG database. This database covers 60 subindicators for all 16 targets of SDG 2 and SDG 6 across 257 countries or regions around the world from 1995 to 2019,
Key results: We identified 221 country-specific linkages across 25 SDG target pairs using text analysis on 195 VNRs from 85 countries, from both developing and developed countries. Most linkages concern a synergy rather than a trade-off, as out of the 221 country-specific linkages, 209 (94.6%) indicate a synergy and 12 (5.4%) a trade-off. We also observed an upward trend from 2016 to 2020 in the number of linkages identified from VNRs. mainly came from SDGs 2.1, 2.2, 2.5, 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. With the available data, we identified 3147 linkages at the sub-indicator level; 726 linkages are first classified negative based on the sign of the correlation coefficient, 780 positive, and 1641 non-classified.
Abstract: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nation’s Agenda 2030 are formulated to promote the development of integrated, multisectoral policies that explicitly consider linkages across SDGs. Although multiple recent studies have tried to identify linkages across SDGs, the role of contextual factors in identifying SDG linkages is neither well described nor understood. For the case of SDG 2 and SDG 6, this study aims to (i) identify linkages—at country and SDG target level—through the application of various quantitative and qualitative identification methods, and (ii) explore contextual factors to explain the differences across identified linkages. Hereto, we first conducted a text analysis of 195 Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) reported by 159 countries from 2016 to 2020. Next, we synthesized linkages reported by previous qualitative studies and conducted a quantitative (correlation) analysis on the UN’s SDG database. Last, we compared identified linkages across methods, paying special attention to the role of context. From the text analysis, we identified 221 country-specific linkages between 25 SDG target pairs and observed that countries increasingly report SDG linkages in their VNRs over time. Comparing text analysis, existing qualitative studies, and our quantitative correlation analysis, we found substantial differences between the number and nature of linkages identified. These differences can be explained in part by methodological considerations, but to a significant extent also by contextual factors, such as project design, technology application, phase of interventions, and project scale. We conclude by discussing the strengths and limitations of the methods involved, and suggestions for future studies. © 2022, The Author(s).

Taka_2021
2021
The potential of water security in leveraging Agenda 2030
Taka M., Ahopelto L., Fallon A., Heino M., Kallio M., Kinnunen P., Niva V., Varis O.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement; Data analysis)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 6
Abstract: Understanding interlinkages among UN's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is pivotal for the success of Agenda 2030. Here, we use water, a key sustainability resource, to advance SDG science by (1) assessing the synergies and trade-offs of improved water security on achieving the SDGs, (2) examining all the SDGs simultaneously, and (3) using a statistical analysis approach to synthesize the main interconnections. Our results show that water security positively contributed to all SDGs, especially SDG3 (good health) and SDG2 (zero hunger). Negative linkages (9% of all identified linkages) were potentially underrepresented and hampered critical assessment of water's links to the SDGs. The method may be used for other natural resources and their potential in supporting SDG implementation. Finally, more attention must be paid to the potential mutual benefits, and particularly the trade-offs, associated with SDG linkages. The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are an ensemble of 17 overarching goals ranging from human health to protecting aquatic life. Understanding their interlinkages is pivotal for achieving sustainable development, which is hindered by studies focusing only on few goals. We use water, a key resource, to advance knowledge of the synergies and trade-offs. We examine how improved water security affects the success of other SDGs, when all the goals are examined simultaneously. Our statistical analysis approach shows that water security positively contributed to all the SDGs, especially good health and zero hunger. Only 9% of the linkages in the literature were negative, indicating that they possibly are underrepresented or the positive ones are overrepresented. The method is also suitable for other natural resources to identify their potential in sustainability. For sustainability attempts, more attention should be paid to mutual benefits and especially to the trade-offs among SDGs. We provide a statistical assessment of the interlinkages among SDGs by examining how improved water security contributes to all SDGs. This comprehensive assessment is pivotal in supporting integrated SDG implementation. Improved water security had a positive effect to at least one SDG in 91% of the publications. Our approach is suitable for other resources to identify their interconnections and correlations with direction of the relationship for achieving sustainable development. © 2021 Elsevier Inc.

Tosun_2017
2017
Governing the Interlinkages between the Sustainable Development Goals: Approaches to Attain Policy Integration
Tosun J., Leininger J.
Method type: Semantic analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal, target, indicator level
Geograph scale: n.a.
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
Thematical focus: n.a.
Key results: Climate change with 9 interlinkages is closely followed by agri-food and energy with 8 goals. Fewer connections can be observed for health (6 connections) and water (5). With regards to the types of interlinkages established by the SDGs, Table 3 also indicates which targets/goals are linked to one another in an intersectoral (I) and a multisectoral (M) way. While overall the intersectoral interlinkages clearly dominate, it is worth pointing out that in the thematic areas of water and climate governance, the multisectoral approach appears to be more important.
Abstract: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of 2015 form a universal and integrated policy agenda to be realized over the next 15 years. One of the targets is the attainment of policy coherence for sustainable development, which requires the individual goals to become interlinked. This article's main research interest lies in assessing how national governments and their competent ministries interpret and strive to implement the target of policy coherence for sustainable development. Drawing on the Voluntary National Reviews submitted in 2016 and 2017 by six countries, this study shows that at the national level, the links among the different goals and the idea of policy integration are subject to divergent interpretations. The differences observed do not stem from the interlinkages of the SDGs as defined by the United Nations, neither do they result from different levels of income or degree of political centralization. Instead, the respective domestic policy-making processes are likely to explain the implementation strategies adopted by the individual states. For example, the implementation approach adopted by the government of Turkey suggests that path-dependency is critical, whereas the Colombian approach consists of defining new policy measures and institutional arrangements.

UN Women_2018
2018
Why gender equality matters across all SDGs: An excerpt of “Turning promises into action: Gender equality in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”
UN Women
Method type: Literature review
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal, target, indicator level
Geograph scale: Multinational
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 5
Method description: Spotlight approach, selecting one indicator per goal to illustrate progress, gaps and challenges to date. The chapter uses a spotlight approach, selecting one indicator per goal to illustrate progress, gaps and challenges to date. In addition to official indicators, the chapter uses supplemental data and indicators for goals that lack meaningful gender-specific indicators or where data for such indicators are currently unavailable or inadequate. These supplemental indicators were selected based on an open consultation with civil society organizations and inputs from other international experts (see Box 3.1).
Key results: Not present but, from the paper "Unless progress on gender equality is accelerated, the global community will not only fail to achieve SDG 5, it will also forgo the catalytic effect that gender equality can have for the achievement of the 2030 Agenda more broadly. The review shows that across countries and regions, women and girls face tremendous structural barriers that impact all aspects of their lives. Eliminating gender-specific constraints, as well as other forms of discrimination with which they intersect, is hence critical."

UNEP_2021
2021
Measuring Progress: Environment and the SDGs
UNEP
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement; Data analysis)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Indicator level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: 193 UN Member States
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: Drivers of change
Key results: see chapter 8 of the report.

UNESCAP_2016
2016
Analytical Framework for Integration of Water and Sanitation SDGs and Targets Using Systems Thinking Approach
UNESCAP
Method type: Expert judgement
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Global; Multinational
Geograph context: Global and Asia-Pacific region
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 6
Key results: Almost all interlinkages found are synergies (341/348); in addition, 2 trade-offs and 5 mixed. The most interlinked SDG 6 targets are: 6.6, 6.3, 6.1.

UNESCAP_2017
2017
Integrated approaches for Sustainable Development Goals planning: The case of Goal 6 on water and sanitation
UNESCAP
Method type: Expert judgement
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Global; National
Geograph context: Sri Lanka, Tajikistan and Fiji
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 6

UN-Water_2016
2016
Water and Sanitation Interlinkages across the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
UN-Water
Method type: Expert judgement
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: Multinational
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Thematical focus: SDG 6
Method description: The reports presents interlinkages between SDG 6 targets and other SDGs targets (except means of implementation). The description of the interlinkages is organised through 3 focuses: Social dimension, Economic dimension, Environmental dimension. The interlinkages results are summarised in the Annex table. The report categorises interlinkages as "Main synergies" (Links that are likely to be mainly positive in that they may be mutually reinforcing or have positive interdependencies) or "Potential conflicts" (Links that usually still have positive aspects, but there exists a potential conflict in one or both directions unless policies, plans and implementation address the constraints and trade-offs.).

van Soest_2019
2019
Analysing interactions among Sustainable Development Goals withIntegrated Assessment Models
Van Soest, H.L., Van Vuuren, D.P., Hilaire, J., Minx, J.C., Harmsen, M.J., Krey, V., Popp, A., Riahi, K. and Luderer, G.
Method type: Mixed (Semantic analysis; Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: From global to local
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: To achieve all Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030, it is necessary to understand how theyinteract with each other. Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) represent many humaneenvironmentinteractions and can inform policymakers about the synergies and trade-offs involved in meeting mul-tiple goals simultaneously. We analyse how IAMs, originally developed to study interactions amongenergy, the economy, climate, and land, can contribute to a wider analysis of the SDGs in order to informintegrated policies. We compare the key interactions identified among the SDGs in an expert survey, withtheir current and planned representation in models as identified in a survey among modellers. We alsouse text mining to reveal past practices by extracting the themes discussed in the IAM literature, linkingthem to the SDGs, and identifying the interactions among them, thus corroborating our previous results.This combination of methods allowed us to discuss the role of modelling in informing policy coherenceand stimulate discussions on future research. The analysis shows that IAMs cover the SDGs related toclimate because of their design. It also shows that most IAMs cover several other areas that are related toresource use and the Earth system as well. Some other dimensions of the 2030 Agenda are also covered,but socio-political and equality goals, and others related to human development and governance, are notwell represented. Some of these are difficult to capture in models. Therefore, it is necessary to facilitate abetter representation of heterogeneity (greater geographical and sectoral detail) by using different typesof models (e.g. national and global) and linking different disciplines (especially social sciences) together.Planned developments include increased coverage of human development goals and contribute to policycoherence

Vera_2022
2022
Land use for bioenergy: Synergies and trade-offs between sustainable development goals.
Vera, I., Wicke, B., Lamers, P., Cowie, A., Repo, A., Heukels, B.,... & van der Hilst, F.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Multinational
SDGs considered: 2, 3, 6, 8, 13, 15
Thematical focus: GHG emissions reduction thanks to land use for dedicated energy crops (SDG 13)
Method description: Synergies and trade-offs are analyzed through a pairwise comparison between GHG emission savings and effects in other SDGs. Studies that explicitly define and quantify GHG emission savings, and those that implicitly assume these savings were included. Asynergy was considered when in addition to mitigating GHG emissions, land use for dedicated energy crops results in a positive effect on another SDG. The review was conducted in two stages, (1) synergies and trade-offs were identified, and (2) the context-specific conditions of these connections were characterized. For this first stage, a multi-step approach was followed in which first the sustainability effects presented in each study and their direction (positive or negative) were identified. Second, these sustainability effects were classified according to the SDGs. This was based on previously defined linkages between sustainability indicators for bioenergy (here taken from the Global Bioenergy Partnership, (GBEP)) and the SDG. Third, based on the SDG classification and the direction of the relation, it was established whether the connection between GHG emission reduction (SDG 13) and other SDGs was a synergy or a trade-off. Fourth, the number of “observed” synergies and trade-offs present in the literature sample were counted. For the second stage of the review, the scope of the analysis was narrowed to the environmental SDGs and included SDG indicators
Key results: Overall, an almost equal number of synergies and trade-offs were found between GHG emission reduction and SDGs 2 (Zero hunger), 3 (Good health and well-being), 6 (Clean water and sanitation), 8 (Decent work and economic growth), 13 (Climate action-other indicators), 14 (Life below water) and 15 (Life on land). However, more synergies were found related to SDGs 3, 13, 14 and 15, while more trade-offs were found related to SDGs 2, 6 and 8. Most synergies related to environmental SDGs were observed when perennial crops (SRC and perennial grasses) were produced on arable, pasture or marginal land in a ‘cool temperate moist’ climate zone and ‘high activity clay’ soils. Utilizing marginal land to produce perennial crops is a key strategy as it can avoid trade-offs with other land-based services such as food, feed, and fiber production (SDG 2). To minimize trade-offs, the findings suggest that it is of paramount importance to consider context-specific conditions, with priority given in the order of first land use transitions and second feedstock types, while both parameters need to be considered in line with local biophysical conditions to contribute to multiple SDGs
Abstract: Bioenergy aims to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and contribute to meeting global climate change mitigation targets. Nevertheless, several sustainability concerns are associated with bioenergy, especially related to the impacts of using land for dedicated energy crop production. Cultivating energy crops can result in synergies or trade-offs between GHG emission reductions and other sustainability effects depending on context-specific conditions. Using the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) framework, the main synergies and trade-offs associated with land use for dedicated energy crop production were identified. Furthermore, the context-specific conditions (i.e., biomass feedstock, previous land use, climate, soil type and agricultural management) which affect those synergies and trade-offs were also identified. The most recent literature was reviewed and a pairwise comparison between GHG emission reduction (SDG 13) and other SDGs was carried out. A total of 427 observations were classified as either synergy (170), trade-off (176), or no effect (81). Most synergies with environmentally-related SDGs, such as water quality and biodiversity conservation, were observed when perennial crops were produced on arable land, pasture or marginal land in the ‘cool temperate moist’ climate zone and ‘high activity clay’ soils. Most trade-offs were related to food security and water availability. Previous land use and feedstock type are more impactful in determining synergies and trade-offs than climatic zone and soil type. This study highlights the importance of considering context-specific conditions in evaluating synergies and trade-offs and their relevance for developing appropriate policies and practices to meet worldwide demand for bioenergy in a sustainable manner.

Vladimirova_2016
2016
Exploring links between education and sustainable development goals through the lens of UN Flagship Reports
Vladimirova, K. and Le Blanc, D
Method type: Mixed (Semantic analysis; Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Global
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: SDG 4
Abstract: Based on an exhaustive content analysis of 37 global reports, this paper examines how well links between education and other Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are represented in flagship publications of the United Nations system. Taken together, the reports identify links between education and all the SDGs, with the notable exception of SDG 14 on oceans. However, some goal areas have received much more attention than others. While some causal links are identified and highlighted as important, relevant constraints are sometimes not extensively discussed, and few concrete policy options to act on these links are provided. Going forward, it would be important to assess whether the messages contained in UN flagship reports adequately reflect the state of scientific knowledge and the lessons learnt from development programs that focus on education in relation to specific SDGs. The systematic analysis provided here can offer a basis for an integrated analysis of policy priorities for education as a whole.

Wang_2022
2022
Accounting for interactions between Sustainable Development Goals is essential for water pollution control in China
Wang M., Janssen A.B.G., Bazin J., Strokal M., Ma L., Kroeze C.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: China
SDGs considered: 6, 14
Thematical focus: water pollution
Method description: Interactions are assessed based on the existing literature and our expert judgments on water pollution in China using the seven-point-scale framework.
Key results: We find 82 synergies and 22 tradeoffs between SDGs 6 and 14 and SDGs 2, 11, 12, and 13. Potential tradeoffs can occur mainly between SDG 6 (or SDG 14) and those SDGs that aim to achieve food security with increasing agriculture (SDG 2) and expand housing and basic services in cities and communities (SDG 11). These tradeoffs can be counterbalanced by synergies, particularly through support for SDG 12, which fosters efforts toward increasing resource-use efficiency in all sectors.Interactions are also identified between SDGs for sustainable water management (SDGs 6 and 14) and the remaining SDGs (those other than SDGs 2, 11, 12, and 13). These interactions include 194 synergies and 10 tradeoffs. Several SDGs call for social (SDG 4, 5, and 10), financial (SDG 8), technical (SDGs 7 and 9) and institutional (SDG 16 and 17) support for sustainable lifestyles that enable society to reduce and control water pollution. Reducing water pollution may benefit poor individuals by reducing their exposure to environmental pollution (SDG 1), improving their health and well-being (SDG 3), and allowing for healthier ecosystems on land (SDG 15). Conversely, SDGs 1, 7, 9, and 15 can negatively affect SDGs 6 and 14 by causing water pollution indirectly through the atmospheric deposition of air pollutants from energy use (SDG 7) or industry (SDG 9). In addition, SDGs 1 and 15 may be negatively affected by the side effects of the targets of SDGs 6 and 14 on people’s income (SDG 1) or terrestrial ecosystems (SDG 15). For example, management options that limit agricultural production to improve water quality (SDGs 6 and 14) may lower the income of farmers, making it more difficult to achieve SDG 1. Reducing nutrient pollution in rivers (SDG 6) by recycling animal manure on land may lead to higher ammonia (NH3) emissions from agriculture, resulting in higher atmospheric nitrogen (N) deposition in terrestrial ecosystems (SDG 15).
Abstract: Meeting the United Nations’ (UN’s) 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has become a worldwide mission. How these SDGs interrelate, however, is not well known. We assess the interactions between SDGs for the case of water pollution by nutrients in China. The results show 319 interactions between SDGs for clean water (SDGs 6 and 14) and other SDGs, of which 286 are positive (synergies) and 33 are negative (tradeoffs) interactions. We analyze six scenarios in China accounting for the cobenefits of water pollution control using a large-scale water quality model. We consider scenarios that benefit from synergies and avoid tradeoffs. Our results show that effective pollution control requires accounting for the interactions between SDGs. For instance, combining improved nutrient management, efficient food consumption, and climate mitigation is effective for simultaneously meeting SDGs 6 and 14 as well as other SDGs for food, cities and climate. Our study serves as an example of assessing SDG interactions in environmental policies in China as well as in other regions of the world. © 2022, The Author(s).

Warchold_2021
2021
Variations in sustainable development goal interactions: Population, regional, and income disaggregation
Warchold A., Pradhan P., Kropp J.P.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal, target, indicator level
Geograph scale: Global
Geograph context: 247 countries
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: Gender, age, location, countries by income, regions
Abstract: To fulfill the 2030 Agenda, the complexity of sustainable development goal (SDG) interactions needs to be disentangled. However, this understanding is currently limited. We conduct a cross-sectional correlational analysis for 2016 to understand SDG interactions under the entire development spectrum. We apply several correlation methods to classify the interaction as synergy or trade-off and characterize them according to their monotony and linearity. Simultaneously, we analyze SDG interactions considering population, location, income, and regional groups. Our findings highlight that synergies always outweigh trade-offs and linear outweigh non-linear interactions. SDG 1, 5, and 6 are associated with linear synergies, SDG 3, and 7 with non-linear synergies. SDG interactions vary according to a country's income and region along with the gender, age, and location of its population. In summary, to achieve the 2030 Agenda the detected interactions and inequalities across countries need be tracked and leveraged to “leave no one behind.”. © 2020 The Authors. Sustainable Development published by ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Warchold_2022
2022
Building a unified sustainable development goal database: Why does sustainable development goal data selection matter?
Warchold A., Pradhan P., Thapa P., Putra M.P.I.F., Kropp J.P.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Global; Multinational
Geograph context: Global, income-groups countries, regions
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Method description: To assess how the selection of SDG data matters, we apply a temporal correlation analysis (statistical method introduced by Pradhan et al. (2017)) to investigate synergies and trade-offs within and across SDGs at the global, income, and regional scales, and evaluate the corresponding results. Further, this study provides the first framework to unify SDG databases (databases used: The UN, the WBG, and the BE-SDSN). Based on these analyses, we showed the strengths and limitations of each of the databases and similarities and differences among them. Additionally, we investigated variations among the databases by developing simple SDG networks (network analysis) to identify the most connected goals and targets based on the results from the correlation analyses. [check the paper for more info on databases, how they were unified and how they were analyzed).
Key results: Our network analysis offers new insights into how the most connected goals and targets vary according to the SDG data selection. We detect similarities in SDG interactions among databases globally (SDGs 3, 6, 7 for synergies; 8 for trade-offs and recurring trade-offs among SDG 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, and 15 in all four databases), at income and regional scales and across networks. Although synergies outweigh trade-offs, our analysis shows that most SDG interactions are not-classified, independent of the data selection. Further, we highlighted that, independent of the data selection, socially orientated SDG interactions are more synergistic, whereas economically orientated SDG interactions are impeding. Pradhan et al. (2017), Kroll et al. (2021), Dawes (2020), and Warchold et al. (2021) also stated that SDG 1–5 show incredibly synergistic interactions with other goals, whereas SDG 8, 12 has the most trade-offs. We highlighted differences in SDG interactions caused by the data selection while applying the same methodology. Moreover, environmentally oriented SDG exhibit contrary results depending on the data selection. The reason is the quite diverse indicator data for SDG 13, 14, and 15 among the databases. This aspect does not only apply to environmental-related SDGs but also, for example, to the ones covering sustainable consumption and production (SDG 12).
Abstract: The 2020s are an essential decade for achieving the 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). For this, SDG research needs to provide evidence that can be translated into concrete actions. However, studies use different SDG data, resulting in incomparable findings. Researchers primarily use SDG databases provided by the United Nations (UN), the World Bank Group (WBG), and the Bertelsmann Stiftung & Sustainable Development Solutions Network (BE-SDSN). We compile these databases into one unified SDG database and examine the effects of the data selection on our understanding of SDG interactions. Among the databases, we observed more different than similar SDG interactions. Differences in synergies and trade-offs mainly occur for SDGs that are environmentally oriented. Due to the increased data availability, the unified SDG database offers a more nuanced and reliable view of SDG interactions. Thus, the SDG data selection may lead to diverse findings, fostering actions that might neglect or exacerbate trade-offs. © 2022 The Authors. Sustainable Development published by ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Weitz_2018
2018
Towards systemic and contextual priority setting for implementing the 2030 Agenda
Weitz, N., Carlsen, H., Nilsson, M. and Skånberg, K.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Target level
Geograph scale: National
Geograph context: Sweden
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: n.a.
Abstract: How the sustainable development goals (SDGs) interact with each other has emerged as a key question in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, as it has potentially strong implications for prioritization of actions and their effectiveness. So far, analysis of interactions has been very basic, typically starting from one SDG, counting the number of interactions, and discussing synergies and trade-offs from the perspective of that issue area. This paper pushes the frontier of how interactions amongst SDG targets can be understood and taken into account in policy and planning. It presents an approach to assessing systemic and contextual interactions of SDG targets, using a typology for scoring interactions in a cross-impact matrix and using network analysis techniques to explore the data. By considering how a target interacts with another target and how that target in turn interacts with other targets, results provide a more robust basis for priority setting of SDG efforts. The analysis identifies which targets have the most and least positive influence on the network and thus guides, where efforts may be directed (and not); where strong positive and negative links sit, raising warning flags to areas requiring extra attention; and how targets that reinforce each others’ progress cluster, suggesting where important cross-sectoral collaboration between actors is merited. How interactions play out is context specific and the approach is tested on the case of Sweden to illustrate how priority setting, with the objective to enhance progress across all 17 SDGs, might change if systemic impacts are taken into consideration.

Weitz_2019
2019
SDGs and the environment in the EU: A systems view to improve coherence
Weitz, N., Carlsen, H., Skånberg, K., Dzebo, A. and Viaud, V.
Method type: Mixed (Literature review; Expert judgement)
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal and target level
Geograph scale: Multinational
Geograph context: EU
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: environmental SDGs

Zhang_2022
2022
Mapping the complexity of the food-energy-water nexus from the lens of Sustainable Development Goals in China
Zhang J., Wang S., Pradhan P., Zhao W., Fu B.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: Subnational
Geograph context: China
SDGs considered: 2, 6, 7, 8, 12, 15
Thematical focus: expanded WEF nexus
Method description: To quantify the two-way interactions between the six sectors in our expanded FEW nexus, we used the SDG indicator framework applicable to China at the provincial scale, which has been introduced by Zhang et al. (2022). Based on the panel data, which consists of the performance of food (SDG2), water (SDG6), energy (SDG7), economic (SDG8), consumption and production (SDG12), and forest (SDG15) sectors for 31 provinces in China from 2004 to 2018, we assessed the two-way interactions among these sectors using the Panel Vector Autoregressive (PVAR) model.
Key results: The results indicate that some sectors in the expanded FEW nexus are mutually causal, some sectors respond differently, and their responses change over time.
Abstract: The nexus approach offers an important heuristic tool for the sustainable management of resources by considering the links among different sectors. The food-energy-water (FEW) nexus corresponds to links among the three of seventeen United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), namely SDG2 (No Hungry), SDG6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), and SDG7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), and their interlinkages have a direct or indirect impact on other SDGs. However, there is still a lack of a systematic and quantitative analysis of how the nexus approach could promote achieving SDGs. Here, taking China as a case, we built an expanded FEW nexus framework from the lens of SDGs, which consists of six sectors, including food (SDG2), water (SDG6), energy (SDG7), economic (SDG8), consumption and production (SDG12), and forest (SDG15). We quantified the two-way interactions between the six sectors by the panel vector autoregressive (PVAR) model. Results indicate that sectors exhibit different response characteristics (positive or negative) in their interactions, and these responses could change over time. These results imply that changing the priorities of actions may be an effective measure to transform trade-offs into synergies. Moreover, the contribution of different sectors to each other varies considerably, with economic growth (SDG8) generally having a higher impact on changes in the FEW nexus than consumption and production patterns (SDG12). Our research suggests that strengthening the quantitative assessment of two-way interactions among the FEW nexus has crucial implications for leveraging nexus approaches effectively to achieve sustainable development for all. © 2022 Elsevier B.V.

Zhu_2022
2022
Trade-offs and synergies among air-pollution-related SDGs as well as interactions between air-pollution-related SDGs and other SDGs
Zhu J., Zhai Y., Feng S., Tan Y., Wei W.
Method type: Data analysis
Link to publication
Analytical scale: Goal level
Geograph scale: National; Subnational
Geograph context: China national, China provincial
SDGs considered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Thematical focus: 1, 3, 7, 11, 12 (air pollution-related SDGs)
Abstract: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development stipulates 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The implementation of this agenda will mobilize countries worldwide to incorporate the SDGs into their national development strategies. The agenda does not specify how these goals are interconnected, thus limiting their implementation. In addition, air quality affects human life and plays a vital role in achieving these SDGs. Clarifying the interconnections between SDGs related to air pollution and other SDGs will accelerate the implementation of air protection and SDGs while simultaneously promoting policy coherence. In this paper, we use the latest calculation of the SDGs in China to construct national and provincial panel data to investigate the trade-offs and synergies among Chinese air pollution-related SDGs. The findings are as follows. First, most air pollution-related SDGs have synergetic relationships, except for SDG12, which has a trade-off relationship with other air pollution-related SDGs. Second, the synergies between air pollution-related SDGs and other SDGs far outweigh the trade-offs. Third, rapidly developing areas are more likely to experience a trade-off between economic development and air pollution problems. Fourth, geographic advantages in reducing air pollution, such as being adjacent to the sea, may weaken the synergies among air pollution-related SDGs and their synergies with other SDGs. These findings indicate that most air-pollution-related SDGs and interactions between air-pollution-related SDGs and other SDGs have substantial synergy; that is, measures aimed at one goal are conducive to the advancement of other goals. However, SDG12 reflects a trade-off relationship between economic development, environmental protection, and resource utilization. © 2021 Elsevier Ltd