Pursuing integrated research and decision-making to advance action on the sustainable development goals (SDGs) fundamentally depends on understanding interactions between the SDGs, both negative ones (“trade-offs”) and positive ones (“co-benefits”). This quest, triggered by the 2030 Agenda, has however pointed to a gap in current research and policy analysis regarding how to think systematically about interactions across the SDGs. This paper synthesizes experiences and insights from the application of a new conceptual framework for mapping and assessing SDG interactions using a defined typology and characterization approach. Drawing on results from a major international research study applied to the SDGs on health, energy and the ocean, it analyses how interactions depend on key factors such as geographical context, resource endowments, time horizon and governance. The paper discusses the future potential, barriers and opportunities for applying the approach in scientific research, in policy making and in bridging the two through a global SDG Interactions Knowledge Platform as a key mechanism for assembling, systematizing and aggregating knowledge on interactions.

View the article online for updates and enhancements. Recent citationsTargeted policies can compensate most of the increased sustainability risks in 1. 5 AbstractThe 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.

No abstract

Policymakers, practitioners and scientists working at the global, regional, national and local levels on implementing or supporting the implementation of the sdgs are the intended audience for this report. KEY FINDINGS The four sdgs analysed in detail in this report (sdg 2, sdg 3, sdg 7, sdg 14) are mostly synergistic with the other sdgs. Using a 7-point scale, a team of scientists evaluated the key target-level interactions between an 'entry goal' and all other goals, and attributed a score to these interactions based on their expert judgment and as justified through the scientific literature. The score most often allocated is +2 ('reinforcing'). The assessment identified 316 target-level interactions overall, of which 238 are positive, 66 are negative, and 12 are neutral.

The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is an independent scientific body focused on assessing the state of the world's ecosystem services and biodiversity. IPBES members agreed in 2017 that a review of the Platform's first work programme should be undertaken by an independent panel examining all aspects of IPBES' workincluding implementation of the four functions of IPBES; policies, operating principles and procedures; governance structure and arrangements; communication, stakeholder engagement and partnerships; and funding mechanisms. The review found that for IPBES to have its anticipated transformative impact: • All four functions of IPBES (i.e. assessment, knowledge generation, policy support, capacity building), with better communication, must be significantly strengthened, integrated and delivered together; • The policy aspects of IPBES work need to be strengthened and greater emphasis needs to be placed on the co-design and co-production of assessments; • A more strategic and collaborative approach to stakeholders is needed; and • IPBES must develop a more sustainable financial base. Given those changes, IPBES, as an embryonic boundary organization, can become the key influencing organization in the global landscape of biodiversity and ecosystem services organizations, helping thus to catalyze transformative change in the relationship between people and the rest of nature.