Global SDGs Assessments: Helping or Confusing Indicators?

Svatava Janoušková, Tomáš Hák and Bedřich Moldan
Additional contact information
Svatava Janoušková: Faculty of Science, Charles University, Albertov 6, 128 43 Prague, Czech Republic
Tomáš Hák: Environment Center, Charles University, José Martího 2/407, 162 00 Prague, Czech Republic
Bedřich Moldan: Environment Center, Charles University, José Martího 2/407, 162 00 Prague, Czech Republic

Sustainability, 2018, vol. 10, issue 5, 1-14

Abstract: On 1 January 2016, the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development—adopted by world leaders in 2015—came into force. They build on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and call for action by all countries to promote prosperity while protecting the planet. Since the SDGs are not legally binding, governments are expected to take ownership and establish national frameworks for the achievement of the 17 Goals. Countries thus have the primary responsibility for follow-up and review of the progress made in implementing the Goals, which will require quality, accessible and timely data collection. This will be instrumental for both regional and global follow-up analyses and assessments—several such major global assessments have already appeared. It might be supposed that the SDGs framework, including indicators, is conceptually and methodologically well-designed and tested in order to function reliably and provide guidance for such assessments. However, while it seems that the current structure of the SDGs has provided a firm policy framework, the Goals and targets have been mostly operationalized by indicators. We demonstrate and argue that without a procedurally well-designed, conceptual indicator framework for selecting and/or designing indicators, the results of SDGs assessments may be ambiguous and confusing.

Keywords: sustainable development goals; Agenda 2030; global indicator framework; sustainability indicators; SDGs (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (35)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/5/1540/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/5/1540/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:5:p:1540-:d:145966

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().