Disparities in sustainable development goals compliance and their association with country risk

The Sustainable Development Report (SDR) provides comprehensive global rankings based on countries’ performance and efforts toward the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, the spillover effects reflecting how one country’s actions influence others remain underexplored, especially regarding their interplay with SDGs performance. This paper delves into the cross‐border adverse impacts on the environment and society arising from these spillovers, examining their correlation with SDGs rankings within the context of the North‐South divide and foreign direct investment (FDI). The analysis reveals a pronounced association between higher SDGs scores and amplified negative spillover effects. While this trend is predominant among advanced Northern countries, certain developing Southern nations also exhibit similar tendencies, potentially obstructing the SDGs of more vulnerable states. This paper argues that many countries achieve their SDGs by exploiting the ecological and social resources of others, suggesting a deviation from genuine sustainability and the core ethos of the 2030 Agenda: “Leave No One Behind.” To provide a clearer perspective on countries’ developmental trajectories, this paper proposes conceptual metrics and utilizes data visualization to re‐assess sustainability progression over time. It also introduces four developmental tendencies: exploitative, degraded, waning, and sustainable development. The findings emphasize that countries aiming to transition from exploitative or degraded development to sustainability must address consumerism, prioritize SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and counteract the degradation of SDG 13 (Climate Action). Crucially, a competitive mindset and a lack of international collaboration will hinder SDGs, underscoring the pressing need for collective action on environmental and social justice and equity.

Section: Conceptual Metrics For Clarifying Countries' Developmental D...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Who wins and who loses in global SDGs rankings? Clarifying the influence of the North‐South divide and foreign direct investment on spillover effects

Chen

2023

The influential ambit of optimal corporate social responsibility investments on the cost of capital in Chinese private firms

Zhu,

Khan,

Khan

2024

Private firms in China are contributing immensely to the country's economic growth. However, increasing the capital cost of private firms in China is a big challenge that needs to be addressed. This study intends to examine the role of optimal corporate social responsibility (CSR) investment while lowering the cost of equity capital and debt capital in Chinese private firms. In addition, this research study reveals the moderating role of state‐owned shares in the association between CSR and private firms' capital costs. By taking a sample of Chinese private firms from 2011 to 2021, this study employs the CSR optimization method. The findings show that CSR optimization tends to reduce the cost of equity capital and debt capital in Chinese private firms. Further investigation shows that over‐investment in CSR increases the cost of capital. Moreover, an increase in state‐owned shares strengthens the negative relationship between the cost of debt capital and optimal CSR investments. The present study's findings are helpful for Chinese firms to undertake optimal CSR investment.

Navigating sustainability: Unveiling the interconnected dynamics of ESG factors and SDGs in BRICS‐11

Işık,

Ongan,

Islam

et al. 2024

In this study, we investigate the impacts of ESG (environmental, social, and governance) factors on sustainable development goals (SDGs) for BRICS‐11 countries. The AMG, FMOLS, DOLS, and ARDL models are applied. While we found negative impacts of environmental factors (ENVf) on SDGs for Argentina, Ethiopia, and China, we found positive impacts of social factors (SOCf) on SDGs for South Africa and Argentina. Additionally, while we found positive impacts of governance factors (GOVNf) on SDGs for Ethiopia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, we found negative impacts for the United Arab Emirates. No significant relationships were found between ENVf, SOCf, and GOVNf on SDGs for Brazil, Russia, India, and Egypt. These findings highlight the nuanced impacts of ESG factors on SDGs, providing valuable insights for policymakers and emphasizing the need for country‐specific sustainable development strategies. The negative environmental impact on SDGs in Argentina, Ethiopia, and China suggests that environmental degradation may hinder sustainable development, underscoring the importance of balancing economic growth and environmental sustainability. This result can also be interpreted through the Pollution Haven Hypothesis, which posits that developing countries may attract more foreign investments in pollution‐intensive industries due to their less stringent environmental regulations.