IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i7p4305-d787180.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Sustainable Development Goals—Sensible Initiative or Just Nonsense? An Investigation of Norwegian Citizens’ Knowledge and Attitudes

Author

Listed:
  • Kjersti Fløttum

    (Department of Foreign Languages, University of Bergen, 5020 Bergen, Norway)

  • Dorothy Jane Dankel

    (Department of Biological Sciences, University of Bergen, 5020 Bergen, Norway
    SINTEF Ocean, 5006 Bergen, Norway)

  • Jon Kåre Skiple

    (Norwegian Research Centre, 5008 Bergen, Norway)

Abstract

We explore what associations Norwegian citizens have with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through an analysis of their knowledge of and attitudes towards these goals. To achieve this, we combine three methodological approaches: (1) structural topic modelling (STM) providing topic prevalence, (2) manual content analysis including exploration of attitudes, and (3) analysis of how individuals’ background characteristics relate to expressions of negative or positive sentiments towards SDGs. The data consist of 4046 answers to an open-ended question, formulated as follows: What comes to mind when you read or hear the expression ‘UN Sustainability Development Goals? ’, fielded during the autumn of 2020, through a survey at the Norwegian Citizen Panel/DIGSSCORE. Major findings: The most prevalent topics associated with the SDGs are poverty, climate/environment, resources, future generations and consumption. The analysis indicates that the Norwegian awareness-raising campaigns have been relatively successful. However, the manual analysis shows that the SDG is an unknown concept for 12% of the respondents, and that 10% hold a negative view. Nine percent of the respondents hold a positive view of the goals. In addition, their attitudes differ clearly according to various background variables (gender, age, political preference). The findings are important for further efforts to spread knowledge of, and raise interest in, the SDGs, at different levels (government, regional and local contexts).

Suggested Citation

  • Kjersti Fløttum & Dorothy Jane Dankel & Jon Kåre Skiple, 2022. "The Sustainable Development Goals—Sensible Initiative or Just Nonsense? An Investigation of Norwegian Citizens’ Knowledge and Attitudes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:4305-:d:787180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/4305/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/4305/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ting Guan & Ke Meng & Wei Liu & Lan Xue, 2019. "Public Attitudes toward Sustainable Development Goals: Evidence from Five Chinese Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Liesbet Hooghe & Tobias Lenz & Gary Marks, 2019. "Contested world order: The delegitimation of international governance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 731-743, December.
    3. G. Rosendal, 2007. "Norway in UN environmental policies: ambitions and influence," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 439-455, December.
    4. Margaret Roberts & Brandon Stewart & Tingley, Dustin, 2014. "stm: R Package for Structural Topic Models," Working Paper 176291, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    5. Jo Crotty & Sarah Marie Hall, 2014. "Environmental Awareness and Sustainable Development in the Russian Federation," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(5), pages 311-320, September.
    6. Weiyan Xiong & Ka Ho Mok, 2020. "Sustainability Practices of Higher Education Institutions in Hong Kong: A Case Study of a Sustainable Campus Consortium," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, January.
    7. Michael Redclift, 2005. "Sustainable development (1987-2005): an oxymoron comes of age," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 212-227.
    8. Endre Tvinnereim & Kjersti Fløttum, 2015. "Explaining topic prevalence in answers to open-ended survey questions about climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 744-747, August.
    9. Paul G. Bain & Pieter M. Kroonenberg & Lars-Olof Johansson & Taciano L. Milfont & Charlie R. Crimston & Tim Kurz & Ekaterina Bushina & Carolina Calligaro & Christophe Demarque & Yanjun Guan & Joonha P, 2019. "Public views of the Sustainable Development Goals across countries," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 2(9), pages 819-825, September.
    10. Kjersti Granås Bardal & Mathias Brynildsen Reinar & Aase Kristine Lundberg & Maiken Bjørkan, 2021. "Factors Facilitating the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals in Regional and Local Planning—Experiences from Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ting Guan & Qian Zhang, 2023. "Value Orientations, Personal Norms, and Public Attitude toward SDGs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-19, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthias Winfried Kleespies & Paul Wilhelm Dierkes, 2022. "The importance of the Sustainable Development Goals to students of environmental and sustainability studies—a global survey in 41 countries," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, December.
    2. Dean Neu & Gregory D. Saxton & Abu S. Rahaman, 2022. "Social Accountability, Ethics, and the Occupy Wall Street Protests," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 17-31, September.
    3. Ezebilo, Eugene E. & Mattsson, Leif, 2010. "Socio-economic benefits of protected areas as perceived by local people around Cross River National Park, Nigeria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 189-193, March.
    4. Alexander Kentikelenis & Erik Voeten, 2021. "Legitimacy challenges to the liberal world order: Evidence from United Nations speeches, 1970–2018," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 721-754, October.
    5. Lutfi Nurcholis, 2021. "How to Improve Internationalization Strategy Based on Market Characteristics, Culture Understanding, and Knowledge Management: the Mediating Effect of Management Behavior," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 1717-1740, December.
    6. Luderer, Cynthia, 2023. "Portuguese Supermarkets and their Cooking Magazines: A Spread of Paradoxes Around the Sustainable Discourses," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 14(04), December.
    7. Millar, Neal & McLaughlin, Eoin & Börger, Tobias, 2019. "The Circular Economy: Swings and Roundabouts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 11-19.
    8. Agni Kalfagianni & Oran R. Young, 2022. "The politics of multilateral environmental agreements lessons from 20 years of INEA," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 245-262, June.
    9. Michael Redclift, 2018. "Sustainable Development in the Age of Contradictions," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 49(3), pages 695-707, May.
    10. Hametner, Markus, 2022. "Economics without ecology: How the SDGs fail to align socioeconomic development with environmental sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    11. Steinar Andresen & G. Kristin Rosendal & Jon Birger Skjærseth, 2018. "Regulating the invisible: interaction between the EU and Norway in managing nano-risks," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 513-528, August.
    12. Jari Lyytimäki & Ulla Rosenström, 2008. "Skeletons out of the closet: effectiveness of conceptual frameworks for communicating sustainable development indicators," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(5), pages 301-313.
    13. Suvera Boodhoo & Sanjana Brijball Parumasur, 2017. "Academics' Perceptions of the Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME) for Sustainable Development," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 9(2), pages 174-188.
    14. Regina Veckalne & Tatjana Tambovceva, 2022. "The Role of Digital Transformation in Education in Promoting Sustainable Development," Virtual Economics, The London Academy of Science and Business, vol. 5(4), pages 65-86, December.
    15. Florian Rabitz & Alin Olteanu & Jurgita Jurkevičienė & Agnė Budžytė, 2021. "A topic network analysis of the system turn in the environmental sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2107-2140, March.
    16. Krzysztof Kluza & Magdalena Zioło & Iwona Bąk & Anna Spoz, 2021. "Achieving Environmental Policy Objectives through the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goals. The Case for European Union Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, April.
    17. Samer Ajour El Zein & Carolina Consolacion-Segura & Ruben Huertas-Garcia, 2019. "The Role of Sustainability in Brand Equity Value in the Financial Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, December.
    18. Katharine Legun & Marion Sautier, 2018. "Sustainability programs and deliberative processes: assembling sustainable winegrowing in New Zealand," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(4), pages 837-852, December.
    19. Manuel Muñoz-Suárez & Natividad Guadalajara & José M. Osca, 2020. "A Comparative Analysis between Global University Rankings and Environmental Sustainability of Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-19, July.
    20. Camilla Salvatore & Silvia Biffignandi & Annamaria Bianchi, 2022. "Corporate Social Responsibility Activities Through Twitter: From Topic Model Analysis to Indexes Measuring Communication Characteristics," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1217-1248, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:4305-:d:787180. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.