Defining a sustainable development target space for 2030 and 2050

Abstract

With the establishment of the sustainable development goals (SDGs), countries worldwide agreed to a prosperous, socially inclusive, and environmentally sustainable future for all. This ambition, however, exposes a critical gap in science-based insights, namely on how to achieve the 17 SDGs simultaneously. Quantitative goal-seeking scenario studies could help explore the needed systems' transformations. This requires a clear definition of the "target space." The 169 targets and 232 indicators used for monitoring SDG implementation cannot be used for this; they are too many, too broad, unstructured, and sometimes not formulated quantitatively. Here, we propose a streamlined set of science-based indicators and associated target values that are quantifiable and actionable to make scenario analysis meaningful, relevant, and simple enough to be transparent and communicable. The 36 targets are based on the SDGs, existing multilateral agreements, literature, and expert assessment. They include 2050 as a longer-term reference point. This target space can guide researchers in developing new sustainable development pathways. ll

Early systems change necessary for catalyzing long-term sustainability in a post-2030 agenda

“…Any research focusing on a quantitative analysis of longer-term pathways also requires transparent and well-defined formulation of indicators and their desired targets to reveal the gaps and guide actions to fill the gaps. 8 Drawing on recent scientific data and consistent with the 2030 Agenda, our study was novel and complemented recent similar efforts 7,8 in systematically defining a balanced suite of socioeconomic and environmental indicators and setting explicit quantitative targets with increasing ambition levels throughout the 21st century. We used the targets for eval- This longer-term analysis in SDG target space was, however, limited in some respects and therefore requires future development.…”

“…Although the current 2030 Agenda has 169 targets and 232 indicators, many are complex, and some lack the specificity to support quantitative projections. 8 We therefore defined 36 complementary sustainability indicators and set quantitative targets related to eight SDGs that were within the scope of our modeling but were also diverse enough to cover most of the key areas of sustainable development related to people (SDGs 3 and 4), prosperity (SDG 8), sustainable resource management (SDGs 2, 7, and 12), and planet integrity (SDGs 13 and 15), as defined by van Vuuren et al 8 (see Discussion and conclusions for strengths and limitations of selected SDGs).…”

“…Second, our study was also limited by the scope of our model. Although FeliX's global systems were diverse enough to cover most of the key areas of sustainable development 8 pertaining to 36 indicators, they did not cover all systems (e.g., transport, finance, and healthcare), did not span the entire list of 17 SDGs (e.g., those related to well-governed and peaceful societies, which are hard to quantify), or systems change in all possible entry points 35 (e.g., urban and peri-urban development and environmental aspects related to air, soil, and water pollution, which are not included in the FeliX model). Future research can extend the model scope to explicitly represent the missing sectors, better test the implications of sector-specific measures (e.g., subsidies and other incentives to accelerate energy transition), and explore their direct contribution to SDG progress.…”

“…The SDG framework includes 17 goals and 231 indicators to measure progress towards 169 targets, but they are too broad and complex to support quantitative assessment. 8 Therefore, we operationalized the SDGs in FeliX by selecting a subset of indicators, setting science-based targets for the selected indicators, and measuring progress toward targets as below. Indicator selection A list of 36 SDG-related indicators was selected from the United Nations Statistical Commission (UNSC) and other sources (e.g., Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD], World Health Organization [WHO], United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], and World Bank) based on three criteria (Figure 3).…”

“…1 Progress to date toward the SDGs has been limited. 2,3 With less than 8 years to go, the scientific community has taken significant steps toward understanding and planning for the SDGs through different approaches, such as future pathway modeling, [4][5][6][7] science-based target setting, 8 and SDG interaction analysis. [9][10][11] SDGs have also been studied at global, 6,12 national, 13,14 and local scales.…”