IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/sustdv/v26y2018i6p663-671.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) index an adequate framework to measure the progress of the 2030 Agenda?

Author

Listed:
  • Jose Manuel Diaz‐Sarachaga
  • Daniel Jato‐Espino
  • Daniel Castro‐Fresno

Abstract

Under the consideration of different measures adopted by most United Nations (UN) members, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) included in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development aim to address the main challenges related to social, economic and environmental issues. Numerous single indicators have been established to monitor progress toward sustainable development; however, the need for benchmarking the degree of sustainability of countries triggered the creation of the SDG Index, which originally compiled 77 indicators and has evolved to 99 at present. This research analyzes the suitability of applying this composite index for assessing the fulfillment of the 2030 Agenda. The lack of information resulted in 60% of the SDG indicators being disregarded in the SDG Index. The scores obtained through the application of this index clustered UN countries according to specific geographic areas, highlighting the need for developing regional SDG Indices to emphasize the achievement of lower‐performing goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Jose Manuel Diaz‐Sarachaga & Daniel Jato‐Espino & Daniel Castro‐Fresno, 2018. "Is the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) index an adequate framework to measure the progress of the 2030 Agenda?," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(6), pages 663-671, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:sustdv:v:26:y:2018:i:6:p:663-671
    DOI: 10.1002/sd.1735
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1735
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sd.1735?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:sustdv:v:26:y:2018:i:6:p:663-671. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1719 .

    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.