Are SDGs suitable for China’s sustainable development assessment? An application and amendment of the SDGs Indicators in China

Zhu, Jin; Sun, Xinzhang; He, Zheng; Zhao, Mingyue

doi:10.1080/10042857.2018.1544753

Cited by 21 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The measurement of sustainability and the associated metrics have been discussed in the literature ((Chen, Gao, Li, & Song, 2020; Liu, Rong, & Teng, 2019; Mirghaderi, 2020; Savitz & Gavriletea, 2019; Zhu, Sun, He, & Zhao, 2019). There are plenty of studies dealing with sustainable agriculture and agricultural sustainability (Buttel, 2003; Constance, 2010; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2010; Johnson, 2006; Ogaji, 2005; Pretty, 2005a; Rivera‐Ferre, Ortega‐Cerdà, & Baumgärtner, 2013; Scherr & McNeely, 2008; Swift, Izac, & van Noordwijk, 2004; Tilman, Cassman, Matson, Naylor, & Polasky, 2002; Trewevas, 2002; Uphoff, 2002; Velten, Leventon, Jager, & Newig, 2015) however, there is a gap in scientific literature in addressing all interlinked issues of sustainable development and agricultural sustainability and developing solid framework for sustainability assessment of agriculture in holistic, harmonized way by addressing clear linkages with SDGs and other challenges of sustainable development.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agricultural sustainability assessment framework integrating sustainable development goals and interlinked priorities of environmental, climate and agriculture policies

Štreimikis

Baležentis

2020

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The agricultural sustainability issues are widely addressed in scientific literature and various reports by international organizations. However, there is lack of harmonized approach in addressing agricultural sustainability issues as different policies are targeting different sustainability issues in agriculture. This article analyses sustainable agriculture development and agriculture sustainability concepts and sustainability assessment approaches and tools developed for agriculture sector. Based on systematic critical literature review, this article develops the new indicators framework for sustainability assessment in agriculture which allows us to achieve harmonization of sustainable development, climate and agricultural policies in European Union (EU). The proposed indicators framework allows us to address the main sustainability issues of agriculture by linking them with sustainable development goals, environmental, climate and rural development policy priorities in EU. The main contribution of this article is linking rural policy goals with sustainable development, climate change mitigation and environmental policy goals by providing agricultural sustainability assessment framework allowing us to track these linkages through indicators system.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agricultural sustainability assessment framework integrating sustainable development goals and interlinked priorities of environmental, climate and agriculture policies

Štreimikis

Baležentis

2020

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After analyzing the attributes of indicators (positive (higher value of an indicator reflects better sustainable development performance), moderate (value close to a moderate value reflect better sustainable development performance), and negative (lower values reflect better sustainable development performance)), we normalize the data using linear extreme values (Zhu et al, 2019) (Equation ).

y_{italicijk} = \{\begin{matrix} \frac{x_{italicijk} - x_{i}^{\min}}{x_{i}^{\max} - x_{i}^{\min}}, if the indicator i is positive \\ \frac{x_{i}^{\max} - x_{italicijk}}{x_{i}^{\max} - x_{i}^{\min}}, if the indicator i is negative \\ \{\begin{matrix} 1 - \frac{x_{q} - x_{italicijk}}{\max (x_{q} - x_{i}^{\min}, x_{i}^{\max} - x_{q})}, x_{italicijk} < x_{q} \\ 1 - \frac{x_{italicijk} - x_{q}}{\max (x_{q} - x_{i}^{\min}, x_{i}^{\max} - x_{q})}, x_{italicijk} > x_{q} \\ 1, x_{italicij} = x_{q} \end{matrix}, if the indicator i is moderate \end{matrix} .

In Equation (),

y_{ijk}

is the value of indicator

i

for country

j

in the year

k

after normalization;

x_{ijk}

represents the value of the indicator

i

for the country

j

in the year

…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Perspective 2: the Gap Between Current And Ideal Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

A multi‐perspective composite assessment framework for prioritizing targets of sustainable development goals

Huan

Wang

Burgman

et al. 2022

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 targets proposed in 2015 are wide ranging and achieving them before 2030 may require extraordinarily high costs. Prioritizing a more manageable and logical sequence of SDGs targets based on national conditions is critical to reduce the complexity of SDGs, lower costs, ensure transitions are efficient, and accelerate implementation. Researchers have proposed a range of methods to rank the prioritizations of SDGs from different perspectives. Unfortunately, prioritizations of SDGs arising from different methods are not entirely consistent due to the limitations of each method. Therefore, an integrated methodological framework is required to reconcile these inconsistencies. To fill this research gap, we synthesized several methods to create a new composite assessment framework to prioritize SDGs targets. The framework consists of assessment models from three perspectives, including the impact of targets in a network composed of the interactions between targets, the gap between the targets' current and ideal performances, and the urgency of improving participation by government and society in achieving the targets. We then tested the effectiveness of this assessment framework empirically by ranking prioritizations for six targets of SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation) in Southeast Asia. Empirical results show that target 6.5 has the highest priority, followed by targets 6.4 and 6.6, while the lowest ranking target is 6.1. Finally, we outlined the advantages and limitations of each assessment method to assist stakeholders in using and broadening this composite assessment framework in the future.

show abstract

“…Three indications show the category of the SCU concept: (1) togetherness, (2) agreement, and (3) interest and need [14]. Then the category of SDGs is seen from the 17 global goal indicators from (1) No Poverty to (17) Partnerships to achieve the Goal [18].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Village: Service, Togetherness, and SDGs

Irwansyah

2021

IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital village is a development project with a digital platform. Digital transformation based on village potential is carried out to provide better services to the public. By using the capability maturity model (CMM), social contractual utilitarianism (SCU), and sustainable development goals (SDG), the research analyzes the content both quantitatively and qualitatively in public documents about digital villages in Indonesia. Public documents produced by the central, regional, media, and public governments stored on a website are extracted through the NVivo application and then categorized and analyzed with the categories of CMM, SCU, and SDG, tested for reliability via intercoder reliability and validity through trustworthiness. This study found (1) standard models related to government services to the public, (2) togetherness, and (3) the achievement of SDGs, especially the 8th goal, namely decent work, and economic growth. This study showed that the digital village enhances the government services to improve village economic growth and quality of education.

show abstract

Are SDGs suitable for China’s sustainable development assessment? An application and amendment of the SDGs Indicators in China

Cited by 21 publications

References 1 publication

Agricultural sustainability assessment framework integrating sustainable development goals and interlinked priorities of environmental, climate and agriculture policies

Agricultural sustainability assessment framework integrating sustainable development goals and interlinked priorities of environmental, climate and agriculture policies

A multi‐perspective composite assessment framework for prioritizing targets of sustainable development goals

Digital Village: Service, Togetherness, and SDGs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About