UN Sustainable Development Goals - SUM: Sustainability Management Wiki

Authors: Carlos Antonio Charles Ambriz, Fiona Dietz, Alena Romanova, Regina Aulenkamp
Last updated: December 6, 2022

1 Definition and Relevance

1.1 Definition

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) comprise 17 goals aiming for sustainable development for everyone and in all countries and were adopted by the United Nations in 2015 through the Agenda 2030.¹

Five P’s serve as a guiding principle for the so-called global goals: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership. This guiding principle summarizes the main areas of focus: the end of poverty, the protection of the planet, and the guarantee of peace and prosperity for everyone by 2030. Thereby, the SDGs address all three pillars of sustainability: economic, environmental, and social. The SDGs are interdependent and complementary, meaning that action toward one goal or area simultaneously influences other goals or areas.²^,³

A cornerstone for the progress toward sustainable development is to recognize the weakest and most vulnerable and to leave no one behind.¹^,²^,⁴ However, the SDGs are addressed to everyone including governments, international institutions, local authorities, civil society, the private sector, science, and all people from developed and less-developed countries.¹ This also emphasizes the importance of global partnerships and cooperation in all actions related to the SDGs.²

The SDGs are known to cover a broad and ambitious range of issues with the intention to provide consensus for all parties involved.⁵ The SDGs acknowledge national differences in development, capacities, realities, and challenges which makes them a milestone among other United Nations (UN) declarations of the last decades regarding sustainable development.⁶

As the SDGs were part of the UN declaration Agenda 2030, they are not legally binding.⁷ They are designed in a way that each national government can set its own goals and means of incorporation that reflect both the high global ambitions and the own national circumstances.¹

1.2 Practical relevance of the Sustainable Development Goals

Investigating the practical relevance of the Sustainable Development Goals, the issues addressed and the stakeholders involved must be looked at. As the dimensions of both factors are wide and complex, the relevance cannot be defined in a simple manner.

Some of the most prominent goals in terms of environmentally sustainable development come from the Paris Agreement of 2015. The Agreement aims for a global fight against climate change and the adaptation to its effects and sets the goal to keep the global temperature rise below 1.5 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. In addition, the Agreement aims to increase the resilience of all countries against threats and new circumstances caused by climate change.⁸

It is indispensable to reach the 1.5 degrees goal to limit climate change and prevent reaching critical tipping points and the SDGs are in line with the Paris Agreement in this regard. Regarding the immense threat of global warming, it should be of severe interest for everyone to mitigate climate change, and implementing the SDGs effectively and successfully is one manner of doing so. Resilience will be increasingly important for populations, governments, and the private sector as well, as everyone relies on the availability of healthy resources and must be able to adapt to extreme weather, droughts, and other threats caused by climate change.⁸

Although some goals may indicate relevance for only certain countries and stakeholders, Agenda 2030 emphasizes that each goal can and should be aligned to country and stakeholder-specific contexts and circumstances. Hence, the SDGs are relevant for all stakeholders and need to be implemented accordingly.¹

An overarching principle reaffirming the practical relevance of the SDGs is the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR). CBDR describes the fact that industrial countries have produced and consumed in a non-sustainable manner for decades and thus have a higher responsibility to promote sustainable development than developing countries might have.⁹

Looking at the private sector, businesses can have several positive outcomes when internalizing the SDGs into their corporate strategies and practices. First of all, the call for sustainable development is growing and companies ignoring that are at risk of being heavily criticized or, depending on the field of business, even losing their source of income. Moreover, sustainable development creates the chance to access new market opportunities, to produce more efficiently, be an attractive employer, and be able to attract and keep good personnel. Implementing sustainable practices also strengthens a positive reputation internally and externally. The SDGs provide a framework that is widely known thus their implementation is globally recognized.⁵^,¹⁰

As mentioned before, defining the practical relevance of the SDGs for every stakeholder involved is highly context-specific caused by the diversity of stakeholders and issues addressed. Every stakeholder faces different circumstances, problems, levels of development, and possibilities. However, everyone profits from sustainable development in some way or another which makes the Agenda 2030 and the SDGs relevant for everyone.

2 Background

2.1 Historical background

The overarching goal for Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals is the achievement of sustainable development in all three dimensions – social, economic, and environmental. The end of poverty is seen as the most substantial global challenge and as an essential requirement for sustainable development. As written in the Agenda 2030, leaving no one behind and reaching “the furthest behind first”¹ is another underlying principle.¹

These goals have been included in UN declarations before but the focus was usually limited to only one area of sustainable development and the pillars were not addressed in a balanced matter. Examples of that are the Kyoto Protocol with its goals to combat climate change and the mainly social-oriented Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) which served as a major foundation for the SDGs. To develop a holistic approach to sustainable development, the SDGs are based on several preceding UN declarations and events.⁹

The first major event in the progress toward sustainable development was the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. During this conference, climate change was announced as a serious global challenge for the first time and Agenda 21 was adopted. It was the first declaration in which the signing countries recognized their different levels of responsibility for the conservation of ecosystems originating from non-sustainable production and consumption matters of the more developed countries. This is also known as the previously mentioned principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR).⁹^,¹¹

In the following years, human rights became the most important topic in the global context, and diverse approaches to address those development challenges evolved. While political frameworks by the UN concentrated on welfare, neoliberal concepts also gained popularity. Out of this debate, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were developed and adopted in 2000 at the Millennium Summit. ⁹

The MDGs comprise eight goals in the areas of poverty alleviation and social development, mainly aimed at developing countries.⁵^,⁹ They lay out some values-based and achievable goals and many of the key targets were met. However, they relied mostly on averages hence achievements in one area or region did not equal achievements for all and national success still came with a high level of inequalities within some countries.⁴,⁹,¹²

At the beginning of the 2000s, some global developments reduced the relevance of the MDGs. Countries such as Brazil, India, and South Korea developed in a way that made the differentiation between industrial and developing countries unrealistic. At the same time, the gaps in development levels within countries but also between countries and regions increased and concerns grew about the growing pressure on the health of ecosystems, accelerating climate change and other ecological problems. These effects were additionally intensified by the global financial crisis in 2008 and global demographic trends of growing and longer-living population and urbanization.⁹ As a consequence of these processes, governments at the Rio+20 summit in 2012 decided that the Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals should be developed to build on the MDGs, additionally including issues such as the management of natural resources, effective institutions, and governance, etc.⁶^,¹³

The idea was to take all three pillars of sustainability into account and to address all countries of the world which transformed all countries into developing countries. In July 2012, a High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda was established and presented the first proposals for the new development agenda a few months later. The 27 members of the panel requested global partnerships and the change to an agenda made for everyone and defining responsibilities for industrial, emerging, and developing countries. In addition to the High-Level Panel, numerous consultations of civil society were applied and the 30-member Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals (OWG) was established. The OWG and the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing (ICESDF) set the base for the Agenda 2030 that was adopted in 2015. Other important documents adopted in 2015 were the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on Financing for Development and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, setting the framework for global policies on sustainable development for the upcoming decades.⁶^,⁹^,¹¹

‘Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’ comprises a preamble including the five P’s as guiding principle, a declaration, the Sustainable Development Goals and targets, a chapter about means of implementation, and a proposal for the follow-up and review of the goals and targets. The preamble sets the dimensions for the Agenda and explains the five overarching targets: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership. The declaration emphasizes that all countries are addressed and touched by the Agenda and reaffirms some principles from previous UN declarations such as the CBDR principle. The SDGs and targets are explained in the third part of the Agenda and will be presented in detail in the following chapter. Something new compared to the MDGs is the chapter on means of implementation and global partnerships. It mainly summarizes the Addis Ababa Action Agenda that acts as support for global partnerships and policies and comprises means of financing. The last part of the Agenda 2030 proposes means on the review and follow-up of the progress towards achieving the SDGs at the national, regional, and global levels.¹^,⁹

2.2 Presentation of SDGs & targets

The SDGs exist of 17 goals. Every goal comprises various targets and indicators which serve the concrete formulation of implementation measures and data-based measurement of this ambitious set of goals. In total, 169 targets and 232 unique indicators are comprised in the SDG framework. A complete listing of all goals, targets, and indicators can be viewed on https://sdgs.un.org/ and would exceed the capacities of this Wiki entry.

The following list gives a summary of the SDGs and their main objectives¹⁴:

SDG 1	No Poverty: End poverty in all its forms everywhere
SDG 2	Zero Hunger: End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture
SDG 3	Good Health and Well-being: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
SDG 4	Quality Education: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
SDG 5	Gender Equality: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
SDG 6	Clean Water and Sanitation: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
SDG 7	Affordable and Clean Energy: Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all
SDG 8	Decent Work and Economic Growth: Promote sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all
SDG 9	Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization, and foster innovation
SDG 10	Reduced Inequality: Reduce inequality within and among countries
SDG 11	Sustainable Cities and Communities: Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable
SDG 12	Responsible Consumption and Production: Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
SDG 13	Climate Action: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
SDG 14	Life Below Water: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas, and marine resources for sustainable development
SDG 15	Life on Land: Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
SDG 16	Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions: Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all, and build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels
SDG 17	Partnerships to achieve the Goals: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development

Table 1: 17 SDGs, own illustration based on website https://sdgs.un.org/goals

The SDGs are not listed in order of importance but are interdependent and complementary to each other. SDG 17 is a vital cornerstone for SDG implementation and represents an overarching goal covering all other goals like an umbrella.¹⁵

3 Practical implementation

The previous chapters have already outlined the concept and objectives of the SDGs. The question arises of how this conceptual framework can be translated into practical implementation. Within this chapter, crucial actors are identified regarding responsibility and impact. Moreover, processes and tools to translate the SDGs into concrete actions are outlined. At the end of this chapter, best practice examples are provided and lessons learned will be briefly summarized.

3.1 Actors: Who is responsible for implementation?

The implementation of the SDGs is not limited to specific actors. The key stakeholder groups are national and subnational governments, businesses, science and technology, civil society, NGOs, financial institutions, development partnerships, and UN country teams.¹⁶^,¹⁷ Stakeholders can be classified as enablers or practitioners of SDG implementation.

Although all stakeholders are encouraged to implement the SDGs, the primary responsibility for achieving the goals lies with national governments.¹⁶ National governments are responsible for aligning national strategies with the SDGs thus creating the strategic and legal framework to structurally enable the SDG implementation. Therefore, governments serve as enablers and initiators.¹⁸ At the global level, the SDG accountability system is led by the United Nations High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF).¹⁹ However, despite global outcomes, implementation will largely be local.²⁰

Finance and Science & Technology have a dual function. Finance can act as a practitioner as well as an enabler by enabling the financing of sustainable development.¹⁶ Science & Technology can drive change by creating factual knowledge, playing a key role in building consensus, creating innovative solutions, and providing important advice for policy- and decision-making.¹⁶^,¹⁷^,²¹^,²²

One of the most important practitioners are large companies and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) due to their significant economic, environmental, and social impacts.²³ However, to achieve a successful, impactful transformation, it is necessary for all stakeholders to work in partnerships and to develop holistic innovative solutions and measurements.

This requires:

overcoming sectoral pillars,
bridging the gap between research and practice,
improving the interface between policy, science, and society,
incorporating existing know-how and
developing further expertise and capacities
in an interdisciplinary, collective, and inclusive manner.¹⁶^,¹⁷^,²²^,²⁴

Moreover, effective multi-stakeholder engagement needs clearly defined responsibilities and must recognize that the stakeholders’ underlying motivations are very diverse and may even contradict each other. Hence, synergies and possible trade-offs need to be identified and exploited for the greater benefit of the SDGs.¹⁶

3.2 Process and tools

It can be said at the outset: there is no specific process or one-size-fits-all solution, as SDG implementation is highly context-specific.¹⁷ It depends on national laws and regulations, priorities and circumstances, as well as sector-specific and entity-specific opportunities, tools, capacities, strengths, and resources.¹⁶^,¹⁷

Implementation approaches can be top-down, bottom-up, or collaborative. However, referring to the importance of multi-stakeholder partnerships, achieving the SDGs requires an alignment of bottom-up and top-down approaches and cooperative action.²⁵^,²⁶

Implementation faces the problem of the complexity of the SDG framework. The SDGs interact within and with each other through synergies and trade-offs.¹⁷ It is necessary to understand these interrelationships to enable coherent and effective decision-making. To drive sustainable transformation, not only individual SDGs but the holistic framework must be addressed.²⁶^,²⁷ The literature agrees that all forms of implementation have common needs: to create a shared understanding, to improve data, to reach a consensus on appropriate actions, and to continuously inform, communicate and improve.²⁷ One of the most important cornerstones for the implementation of the SDGs is reliable, timely, disaggregated, high-quality data generation, reporting, monitoring, and evaluation.¹⁶^,²⁸

3.2.1 Tools, guidelines, and networks

The results above show that the process of implementing the SDGs and related approaches can vary greatly and that measures and actions can take all kinds of forms and shapes. In terms of implementation at the national level, the UNDESA even states that “a ‘blueprint’ approach […] is neither possible nor desirable.”²⁹ Only a collection of helpful and supportive guidelines, toolkits, and networks exists to support the translation of the framework into practice. The following examples give a limited overview of the diverse possibilities on how to tackle SDG implementation.

Guidelines

The SDG Guide, developed by the Sustainable Development Solution Network (SDSN), seeks to bridge the gap in the translation of SDGs into internally relevant indicators by proposing guiding principles. The SDG Guide defines the following important steps for the translation:

become aware of status quo/Business-as-Usual (BAU) and understand relevant key dimensions,
identify shortcomings and corresponding priorities for sustainable change, and
develop long-term strategies and plans.¹⁶

This requires assessments and financing analysis.¹⁶^,³⁰

In addition to the SDG Guide, other guidelines exist to help stakeholders translate the SDG framework into implementation measures and strategies, such as

the Global Sustainability Development Report (GSDR) which defines critical entry points and key pathways for sustainable transformative change and points to the importance of science in the context of implementation¹⁷,
the ‘Policy Brief’, which primarily addresses policy-making and stresses removing barriers and promoting multi-stakeholder engagement³¹,
the ‘Guidance on National Strategy’ pursues the same goal, also stressing the importance of participatory processes, resource development, and the vital criteria of monitoring and evaluation³²,
and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), which defined KPIs for companies to measure their performance and contributions.³³

Networks and institutions

One of the most important institutions in the context of implementing the SDGs and tracking national progress and accountability is the High-Level Political Forum with the Voluntary National Reviews (VNR). National implementation approaches are shared by the VNR, through which lessons learned and best practices can be exploited, (common) issues can be identified and global progress toward SDG achievement can be tracked and compared.³⁴ The reported data on the implementation progress is available for the public on the SDG Dashboards.³⁵

Another helpful network is the Sustainable Development Solutions Network. SDSNs is an international network of problem solvers that includes technological and scientific expertise and focuses on knowledge mobilization and identification of integrated development pathways to support stakeholders with the implementation.³⁶

Toolkits

SDG Indicators: The SDG indicators represent one of the most important implementation tools. The SDG indicators serve as reference points for defining individual goals and determining measures. The technique of indicator-based assessment is classified in the literature as an evidence-based approach.³⁰^,³⁷^,³⁸

VNR tool database: The VNR website offers a database of tools developed by different institutions, networks, or companies that address different key issues in the implementation of the SDGs, such as analyzing tools, tools for engagement, tools for assessing status quo, or tools for data management. Tools exist in different forms, ranging from web-based, reports, repositories, e-learning or training to tailored support providers.³⁹

UNSD tool database: UNSD provides an online toolkit for SDG monitoring and reporting for UN country teams through which guidelines, manuals, e-learning, and reporting platforms can be accessed.⁴⁰

In conclusion, tools are highly context-specific and differ on many levels. In their paper, Stafford-Smith et al. cluster the means of implementation into seven categories, while Allen et al. analyzed expert literature, guidelines, and toolkits and classified approaches and tools into implementation steps and evidence- and science-based techniques.³⁰,⁴¹ Following table summarizes the classifications of Stafford-Smith and Allen et al. as an overview of the dimensions of SDG implementation.

Categories of implementation	Initial implementation steps	Evidence-/Science-based techniques
Finance	Governance & coordination mechanisms	systematic target gap analysis
Technology	Multi-stakeholder consultation	nexus approach and clustering
Capacity	SDG mapping & alignment	data gap analysis
Trade	Prioritization of targets	indicator-based assessment
Policy	(Re-)creating strategies, roadmaps, and action plans	benchmarking
Partnerships	Assessing interlinkages, synergies & trade-offs	systems thinking and analysis
Data	Policy evaluation & design	quantitative & spatial modeling
	Monitoring & review	scenarios, forecasting, and backcasting
		financial and needs assessments
		multi-criteria analysis

Table 2: Dimensions of SDG implementation, own illustration based on Stafford-Smith (2017) and Allen et al. (2018)

This collection of means of implementation, steps, and approaches can be seen as a rough overview of available methods for implementation. However, a complete list of available concrete tools is not possible due to their range and specificity.

3.3 Implementation focus: Firm-level

The private sector plays an important role in the realization of the SDGs. The UN Secretary-General emphasized that companies are not only responsible to support governments and other partners in rolling out the SDGs but should also internalize the SDGs into their corporate strategies and practices and transparently report about their commitments.⁴²

Consulting company PwC stresses that companies will not enter into commitments without expecting certain concessions like specific licenses to operate and to be informed about new policy developments to be able to prepare accordingly.⁴³ Moreover, a survey conducted by PwC in 2015 showed, that only 10% of corporate respondents perceived businesses as the main responsible actors for SDG implementation. Most of them claimed that governments had the greatest power for achieving the SDGs and should be accountable. This finding stresses the lack of understanding the crucial responsibility of companies with regard to SDG implementation, although more than 70% of citizens answered in the same study that they would prefer products and services of organizations that integrate the SDGs into their business.²³

The question arise how firms can internalize the SDGs. One famous guideline is the SDG Compass which introduces a basic method to translate the SDGs into management objectives.

The SDG Compass was developed by the GRI, the UN Global Compact, and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and aims to explain how the SDGs influence businesses, how to internalize sustainability into corporate strategies, and how to report accordingly. According to the SDG Compass, firms can benefit from the SDGs’ implementation through new business opportunities, added value to corporate sustainability, better relationships with stakeholders as well as their impactful contribution to societies and markets, and consistent communication about their performance.⁴⁴

The SDG Compass implies that companies accept their responsibility towards the SDGs, acknowledge relevant legislation, and respect international standards and human rights. As a guide for businesses, the SDG Compass introduces a five-step process:

Understanding the SDGs. The SDG Compass explains the SDGs and how they may be used in the business context.
Defining priorities. Companies should map their value chain, identify positive and negative impacts as well as risk reduction possibilities and prioritize accordingly.
Setting goals. Companies should define the scope of goals by setting KPIs and determining baselines and desired targets.
Integration. Companies should internalize the SDGs within their strategy and all operations and engage in multi-stakeholder partnerships across the value chain.
Reporting and Communication. Companies should make their sustainability performance visible and communicate actively about their SDG contributions.

Additionally, many helpful business indicators, as well as supporting tools, are available on the website of the SDG Compass https://sdgcompass.org/. The SDG Compass (2015) stresses that focus is put on large multinational enterprises due to their impact possibilities, but all other organizations are “encouraged to use it as a source of inspiration and adapt as necessary”.⁴⁴ However, the SDG Compass lacks concrete guidance for small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs). Diffused information about business tools (for assessment, reporting, and compliance) seem to be too complicated and not suitable for SMEs, as they require more user-friendly toolkits. Moreover, some business indicators are oriented towards big enterprises and hence are not applicable or even unmeasurable for SMEs. Small companies are more oriented on internal drivers like value generation or economic benefits than compliance and stakeholder management.⁴³

Although the SDG Compass aims at a holistic approach it has some crucial drawbacks concerning its wide-scale application stimulating researchers to look for better actionable models for businesses on how to translate SDGs into action.⁴³

Another tool that may be used on a firm level for the visualization of strategic goals and measurement of performance is the sustainability balanced scorecard (SBSC). This tool is suitable for SMEs as well due to its simple application, flexible content design, and low demands in terms of resources.⁴⁵ The SBSC was developed as an extension of the common balanced scorecard (BSC). The BSC was developed by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton in the 1990s and gives a multidimensional overview of objectives, measures, targets, and initiatives concerning four performance perspectives: financial, customers, internal processes, and learning and growth. In the SBSC, environmental, social, and ethical goals are explicitly added to the framework of the BSC. The SBSC gives a holistic overview and long-term perspective, bridging the gap between operations and strategy.⁴⁶ It represents a customizable concept that can take specific organizational conditions into account.

For constructing an SBSC, it is necessary to formulate a clear vision and mission first. Some practical case studies claim that a successful implementation of SBSC depends on supporting factors such as the involvement of top management and employees from different levels.⁴⁷ The SBSC is widely used because it can connect sustainability with main business areas and does not require any previous integration of a sustainability strategy. Literature stresses the potential of this tool for managers based on two main reasons:

It allows management to address goals in all three dimensions of sustainability and offers a single integrated view of goals and measurements.⁴⁶
The process of creating an SBSC brings firms additional benefits: firms get a holistic view of their sustainability achievements and can identify new directions for actions, which makes the SBSC a helpful tool for strategy formulation.⁴⁷

In conclusion, there are no universal or perfect instruments that could help all companies to translate the SDGs into actions easily. Making steps towards sustainability is a highly challenging journey, which demands many efforts and poses barriers. For many modern companies, the question does not remain if they want to act with respect to economic, social, and environmental responsibility, but rather, how to do it.⁴⁸

3.4 Best practices & lessons learned

The UNDESA published a Good Practice compilation in 2019 and 2022 and collected a total of 513 Good Practices examples (as of 25 August 2022).⁴⁹^,⁵⁰ The compilation shows that most Good Practices submissions came from non-governmental organizations (24%), united nations/multi-lateral bodies (21%), and the private sector (15%).⁵⁰ The main goals addressed in Good Practices are SDG 17 (211), 4 (198), 8 (185), 11 (185), and 1 (173) (first and second call data merged).⁵¹

Screening the Good Practices publication showed that often similar underlying methods were used to reach stakeholders and implement projects and common success factors and challenges could be identified. The following table gives a summary of the findings:

Good methods & approaches	Success Factors	Challenges
– Know-how transfer & capacity building – Creating multi-stakeholder benefits – Matching supply-demand – Creating network effects – Improving existing systems & structures – Building on local know-how & resources – Promoting people’s engagement – Prioritization of social impact before economic and ecological impact‘ – No regrets approach: no insurmountable downside/minimal risks	Data-driven & evidence-based – Communication & awareness & transparency – Low cost – Simple & accessibleSustained funding – Legitimacy – Strong public-private relationship – Sensitivity to local circumstances – Adaptability & replicability of tools/methods – Empowerment, Inclusion & Independence – Not reliant on monetary injections but on people’s breakthrough & systemic change	Create consensus & overcome skepticism – Clear roles & responsibilities among stakeholders involved – Quality maintenance & longevity of practices – Monitoring COVID-19 & other global crises – Limited funding & resources – Disrupted supply chainsWeak (generation) capacity – Limited (physical, technical, financial) access – Gap between data needs – data availability – Achieving legitimacy

Table 3: Success Factors & Challenges of SDG Good Practices, own illustration

Based on the screening, the following lessons learned can be drawn from Good Practice Examples:

People are often aware of the problem but cannot see or understand the underlying reasons which stress the importance of raising awareness and capacity development.
Adaptability and replicability of Best Practices are key for greater impact.
Addressing acute problems and trying to reach systemic change must go hand in hand.
It is not needed to directly have the perfect solution, but rather starting and continuously improving is more important.

4 Drivers and barriers

4.1 Drivers and barriers of sustainability regarding the SDGs

Stakeholders primarily engage with the SDGs to respond to institutional pressures and to reinforce organizational legitimacy rather than to significantly improve CSR and sustainability practices and performance⁵². This type of reputational management has often been associated with greenwashing.⁵³^,⁵⁴ Regarding the SDGs, a specific term was coined, namely ‘bluewashing’, referring to the blue UN flag. Bluewashing describes a smokescreen of practices used for purposes of public relations.⁵⁵

Many companies do not put a primary focus on key SDGs. In many cases, stakeholders try to exploit existing or interpreted links between the SDGs and corporate practices for public relations purposes (e.g., using respective SDG icons in their reports), but with no explicit prioritization of achieving the SDGs.⁵⁶ Thus, the SDGs rather represent a ‘bluewashing’ strategy for companies instead of a true purpose and corporate motivation.

During the elaboration of the SDGs, the concept of sustainability and sustainable development brings together social, economic, and environmental determinants that can encourage and attract stakeholders to their convenience, as well as the opposite case that can be a barrier to act against today’s urgent needs towards the most excluded and most affected.⁵⁷ In this case a barrier to sustainability is that the SDGs have notably failed to articulate a compelling vision of sustainability.

According to Horton (2014), the SDGs must concentrate on the human systems that we have (or have not) created; our civilizations, our economic and political regimes, and our prospects for peace and social stability. It is claimed that the determinants of sustainability are those that can define resilience, the capacity to adapt, the vision, and the ability to recover, reconstitute, and reconstruct within the societies. Defining, measuring, and tracking these determinants is needed, thus allowing us to measure the strength of civilizations; their solidarity and wealth, their degrees of inequality and corruption, their susceptibility to conflict, and the quality of their deliberative institutions.⁵⁷

4.2 Drivers of and barriers to SDGs in the firm’s environment

4.2.1 Drivers

For any organization, strong internal drivers must exist to make progress toward sustainability. One important driver may come from showing organizational decision-makers the tangible benefits of an organizational commitment to sustainable development. By showing the financial and non-financial returns that organizations can capture when moving towards sustainability, decision-makers can be motivated to make positive changes. According to Willard (2012), these can be categorized into the following seven returns for businesses:

Increased revenue and market share,
Reduced energy expenses,
Reduced waste expenses,
Reduced materials and water expenses,
Increased employee productivity,
Reduced hiring and attrition expenses and
Reduced risks.⁵⁹

Pressures can also be a trigger for action e.g. if employees agree the firm should have sustainable management and the motivations for social and environmental responsibility that come from the owners/managers of the firm. The internal benefits of a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) approach could increase employee motivation, and legislative compliance and could yield competitive advantages and could increase.⁶⁰

Companies may also adopt innovative ways to be part of economic movements that align with the SDGs. An example is the practice of the de-growth model that aligns with the targets of SDGs 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), and 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). According to Setioningtyas et al. (2022), the de-growth model does not stop a company from growing and can be applied without sacrificing profitability. De-growth rather focuses on efficient and innovative changes. Changes in processes can help to reduce waste, decrease the amount of energy used, and incorporate new energy sources. Moreover, changes in products can help to produce goods that last longer and decrease the energy used in the process. These actions illustrate a picture of responsible consumption and production which are aligned with the targets of SDG 12.⁶¹

The political situation of the firm’s environment also plays an important role in the implementation of SDGs. Fiscal policy schemes, like tax, government expenditure, and environmental policies, can initiate and stimulate stakeholders to act towards responsibility in consumption and production addressing SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production).⁶¹

Green consumerism is one of the environmental economic strategies used to reduce the adverse environmental impacts caused by human and economic activity. The ‘green’ perspective is perceived not only from the consumer’s standpoint but also from the supplier’s perspective. On the supply side, it is well-known that companies are under a lot of pressure to ‘go green’. This green movement is correlated with the targets of SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production)⁶¹. Improving the quality of life in the communities of operation and establishing good, long‐standing relationships with suppliers are determinant drivers for organizations that have a holistic view of their operations. A benefit from the socially responsible approach could be the improvement of the firm’s image and reputation, which consequently could improve profitability.⁶⁰

Despite the interest in environmental-related goals, according to the research conducted by Mio, et al. (2020) on the business perspective according to the SDGs, the main goal of interest is SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure. It dedicates attention to the role of companies and claims “activities, innovations, and investments are deemed essential drivers of sustainable job creation, economic growth, and productivity”.⁶²

The following table summarizes the major drivers for firms:

External Drivers	Internal drivers
– Respond to institutional pressures – Reinforce organizational legitimacy – Increase customers satisfaction and competitive advantages – Compliance with fiscal policy schemes – Fulfill the green expectation for customers and suppliers – Attract partnership – Engaging with the community	– Establish a link between the SDGs and corporate results, activities, and indicators – Reduce waste, decrease the amount of energy used, and incorporate new energy sources – Increase employee motivation – Encourage different economic models – Provide procedures for the health and safety of employees – Innovation as a competitive advantage – Financial benefits

Table 4: Drivers for SDG implementation in the firm’s environment, own illustration.

4.2.2 Barriers

Adopting and monitoring the SDGs within a company requires decision-making frameworks. This can be done using a holistic framework that compiles economic, social, and environmental data, as offered by SEEA. Despite the multiple benefits of using this framework, it faces the issue that not all decision-makers fully understand the importance of the changing values of environmental assets and widely accept them in the main economic policy areas.⁶¹ This translates into policies that neither benefit environmental assets nor encourage companies to benefit from environmental conservation and restoration. However, becoming a ‘greener’ company requires a lot of effort due to broad and complex requirements that need to be fulfilled. An example is the code of rules that must be fulfilled by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These requirements are highly demanding and especially small or young companies may fail to fulfill them due to a lack of expertise, resources, funding, and technology.⁶¹

Barriers are more prevalent for SMEs than for large-scale corporations. The main barriers are the lack of resources, the high initial capital cost in implementing sustainability measures, and lack of expertise.⁶³ SMEs often do not have the abilities nor capacities to focus on these aspects, as their primary focus rather lies on surviving in their challenging and changing environment.

For large corporations, a frequent barrier represents the lack of common understanding throughout the corporation. Often there is no clear consensus on what ‘corporate sustainability’ means in practice nor what a business’s contribution to sustainable development might entail.

The SDGs assume that business is increasingly becoming sustainable. However, the harsh reality shows that there is an abysmal implementation deficit.⁴ Even though commitment may be real, implementation and perseverance still represent great challenges for many. Like implementation, regulations have not kept pace with advances in thinking around businesses’ responsibilities. Regulations are often constrained by national boundaries in a way that businesses are not. Governments are still inclined to view new regulations on private sector activities as a barrier to attracting new investment, just as the instinctive reflex from business associations is to lobby against further regulations.⁴ As long as commitments are only voluntary, the implementation of the SDGs will remain a bottom-line priority for multinational companies.

Furthermore, companies located in developing countries face difficult circumstances and a challenging environment to innovate toward sustainable development.

The following table summarizes the major barriers for the firms:

External Barriers

Internal Barriers

– Lack of understanding by policymakers of the environmental assets value
– Monopolization in the green market- Incapability of de-growth in developing countries
– Lack of a common understanding of core terms
– Lack of opportunities for business in developing countries

– Lack of funding for data compilation in the different reports
– Take additional supportive actions through their core business, philanthropy, collective action
– Difficulties in establishing a consistent approach to SDG priorities
– Lack of training in sustainability matters.
– SDGs do not substantially modify corporate approaches to sustainability
– Lack of expertise, resources, funding, and technology
– High initial capital cost in implementing sustainability measures

Table 5: Barriers to SDGs in the firm’s environment, own illustration

4.3 Discussion

For a small but growing number of companies, the social and environmental dimensions of sustainability lie at the heart of their business model. For others, they are an opportunity to strengthen their brand, drive efficiency savings or improve community relations. However, for many, they still represent a burden necessitated by reputational considerations. For the rest, sustainability concerns remain largely irrelevant. Unless strategies to implement the SDGs establish a framework that sets out clear expectations for all companies, the concept of sustainability will remain confusing.⁴ In an ideal world, companies would fully understand the impact of their activities and would contribute to each of the SDGs, however, lack of clarity and consensus as well as the complexity of the SDG framework hinder commitment to the SDGs.

Sustainability practices facilitate many potential benefits for firms like employee motivation, competitive advantage, reputation, profitability, customer satisfaction, and improved compliance with regulation. However, firms may also be negatively influenced by perceived barriers to sustainability practices like cost, time requirements, and fear of losing competitiveness. To increase the sustainability of a firm, decision-makers should focus on the positive sustainability outcomes (benefits), rather than being restrained by the potential difficulties (perceived barriers).⁶¹ To harvest the strong commitment of the private sector, it is necessary to consider the complexity of a firm’s environment. Systematic developments and changes are necessary to set clear guidelines to enable concrete commitment to the SDGs durably and reliably, for SMEs as well as large corporations.

References

1
UN General Assembly. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. (2015).
2
Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung. Agenda 2030: Die globalen Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung BMZ https://www.bmz.de/de/agenda-2030 (2022).
3
United Nations Development Programme. The SDGs in Action UNDP https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals (2022).
4
Institute for Human Rights and Business. State of Play – Business and the Sustainable Development Goals: Mind the Gap – Challenges for Implementation. (2015).
5
Jones, P. & Wynn, M.. The Sustainable Development Goals: Industry Sector Approaches (Routledge, 2019).
6
Directorate-General for Environment. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the SDGs European Commission https://ec.europa.eu/environment/sustainable-development/SDGs/index_en.htm (2022).
7
Bertelsmann Stiftung. Warum SDGs für Unternehmen wichtig sind Bertelsmann Stiftung https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/de/unsere-projekte/abgeschlossene-projekte/verantwortungsvolles-unternehmertum-und-soziale-innovationen/projektnachrichten/warum-sdgs-fuer-unternehmen-wichtig-sind (2022).
8
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Key aspects of the Paris Agreement UNFCC https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement/key-aspects-of-the-paris-agreement (2022).
9
Global Policy Forum & terre des hommes. Die Agenda 2030: Globale Zukunftsziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung. (2017).
10
Rodriguez, I.. Die Relevanz der Nachhaltigkeitsziele (SDGs) für Unternehmen seventeen goals magazin https://www.17goalsmagazin.de/sdg-17-ziele-in-unternehmen/ (2021).
11
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). Making It Your Business: Engaging with the Sustainable Development Goals. (2015).
12
Fehling, M., Nelson, B. D. & Venkatapuram, S.. Limitations of the Millennium Development Goals: a literature review. Global Public Health 8:10, 1109-1122 (2013).
13
Forum Umwelt & Entwicklung. Was sind die SDGs? 2030 Watch https://www.2030watch.de/was-sind-die-sdgs-1 (2022).
14
United Nations. The 17 goals. https://sdgs.un.org/goals (2022).
15
Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable Development Goals. Open Working Group Proposal for Sustainable Development Goals. (2014).
16
Sustainable Development Solution Network. Getting Started with the Sustainable Development Goals. (2015).
17
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Global Sustainable Development Report: The Future is Now – Science for achieving sustainable development. (2019).
18
Kuenkel, P., Kühn, E., Stucker, D. & Williamson, D.F. Leading Transformative Change Collectively: A Practitioner Guide to Realizing the SDGs. (2021).
19
Breuer, A. & Leininger, J. Horizontal Accountability for SDG Implementation: A Comparative Cross-National Analysis of Emerging National Accountability Regimes. Sustainability 13, 7002 (2021).
20
Smith, M.S. et al. Advancing sustainability science for the SDGs. Sustainability Science 13, 1483–1487 (2018).
21
International Council for Science. A Guide to SDG Interactions: From Science to Implementation. (2017).
22
Christ, K.L. & Burritt, R.L. Implementation of sustainable development goal: The role for business academics. Australian Journal of Management 44, 571-593. (2019).
23
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). Making It Your Business: Engaging with the Sustainable Development Goals. (2015).
24
Norström, A.V. et al. Three necessary conditions for establishing effective Sustainable Development Goals in the Anthropocene. Ecology and Society 19, 8. (2014).
25
Espey, J. Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to the SDG Monitoring Challenge. in Promoting the Sustainable Development Goals in North American Cities: Case Studies & Best Practices in the Science of Sustainability Indicators (eds. Abraham, D.B. & Iyer, S.D.) 87-96 (Springer Nature Switzerland, 2021).
26
Jiménez-Aceituno, A., Peterson, G.D., Norström, A.V., Wong, G.Y. & Downing, A.S. Local lens for SDG implementation: lessons from bottom-up approaches in Africa. Sustainability Science 15, 729-743. (2020).
27
Sustainable Europe Research Institute (SERI). Towards SDG implementation: The role of global resource policy and resource targets. (2016).
28
United Nations. The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2022. (2022).
29
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Sustainable Development: National strategies and SDG integration. https://sdgs.un.org/topics/national-sustainable-development-strategies (2022).
30
Allen, C., Metternicht, G. & Wiedmann, T. Initial progress in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): a review of evidence from countries. Sustainability Science 13, 1453-1467. (2018).
31
United Nations University. Policy Brief: Accelerating 2030 Agenda Integration: Aligning National Development Plans with the Sustainable Development Goals. (2021).
32
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Guidance in Preparing a National Sustainable Development Strategy: Managing Sustainable Development in the New Millenium. (2002).
33
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). Business reporting on the SDGs: Integrating the SDGs into Corporate Reporting: A Practical Guide. (2019).
34
United Nations. High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development: Home https://hlpf.un.org/home (2022).
35
iTech Mission. SDGs Global Dashboard https://www.sdgsdashboard.org/ (2022).
36
Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). About Us https://www.unsdsn.org/about-us (2022).
37
Campagnolo, L., Carraro, C., Eboli, F. & Farnia, L.L. Assessing SDGs: a new methodology to measure sustainability. (2016).
38
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Measuring distance to the SDGs targets: a pilot assessment of where OECD countries stand. (2016).
39
United Nations. High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development: Tools Supporting Voluntary National Review Processes https://hlpf.un.org/tools (2022).
40
United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD). SDG Monitoring and Reporting Toolkit for UN Country Teams https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/unct-toolkit/SDG-localization-and-implementation/ (2022).
41
Stafford-Smith, M. et al. Integration: the key to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability Science 12, 911-919. (2017).
42
Ki-Moon, B. Secretary-general’s remarks at “making 2015 a historic year” dinner [as prepared for delivery]. http://www.un.org/sg/statements/index.asp?nid=8355 (2015).
43
Verboven, H. & Vanherck, L. Sustainability management of SMEs and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. uwf 24, 165–178. (2016).
44
Global Reporting Initiative, UN Global Compact & WBCSD. SDG Compass: The guide for business action on the SDGs. (2015).
45
Arnold, W., Freimann, J. & Kurz, R. Grundlagen und Bausteine einer Sustainable Balanced Scorecard (SBS): Überlegungen zur Entwicklung einer SBS für mittelständische Unternehmen. in Werkstattreihe Betriebliche Umweltpolitik (eds. Freimann, J.) (Springer, 2001).
46
Figge, F., Hahn, T., Schaltegger, S. & Wagner, M. The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard – linking sustainability management to business strategy. Bus. Strat. Env. 11 (5), 269‒284. (2002).
47
Falle, S., Rauter, R., Engert, S. & Baumgartner, R. Sustainability Management with the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard in SMEs: Findings from an Austrian Case Study. Sustainability (8), 1–16. (2016).
48
Baumgartner, R.J. Managing corporate sustainability and CSR: a conceptual framework combining values, strategies, and instruments contributing to sustainable development. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 21 (5), 258-271. (2014).
49
50
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. SDG Good Practices: A compilation of success stories and lessons learned in SDG implementation: Second Edition. (2022).
51
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. SDG Good Practices, Success Stories and Lessons Learned in the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda. (2022)./mfn]

One example of Good Practice of a global multi-stakeholder partnership aiming at the SDGs 1, 2, and 3 are the Community-Based Animal Health Workers (CAHWs) that deliver animal health services in hard-to-reach livestock production systems with a focus on local know-how transfer and training. The practice contributes to the protection of key livelihood assets and securing the income of vulnerable populations. It is a Good Practice example as it leads to capacity development, improves existing structures, builds on local resources, and is easily available, accessible, affordable, and replicable.⁴⁹United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. First Edition: SDG Good Practices: A compilation of success stories and lessons learned in SDG implementation. (2020).
52
Boiral, O. (2013). Sustainability reports as simulacra? A counter-account of A and A+ GRI reports. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26 (7), 1036–1071. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2012-00998
53
Boiral, O., Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., & Testa, F. (2017). SA8000 as CSR-washing? The role of stakeholder pressures. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(1), 57–70.
54
Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., Boiral, O., & Díaz de Junguitu, A. (2020). Environmental management certification and environmental performance: Greening or greenwashing? Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(6), 2829–2841.
55
Berliner, D., & Prakash, A. (2015). “Bluewashing” the firm? Voluntary regulations, program design, and member compliance with the United Nations global compact. Policy Studies Journal, 43(1), 115–138.
56
Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., Urbieta, L., & Boiral, O. (2022). Organizations’ engagement with sustainable development goals: From cherry-picking to SDG-washing? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(2), 316–328. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2202
57
Horton, R. Offline: Why the Sustainable Development Goals will fail. The Lancet 383, 2196 (2014).
59
Willard, B. The New Sustainability Advantage: seven business case benefits of a triple bottom line. (2012).
60
Cantele S, Zardini A. What drives small and medium enterprises toward sustainability? Role of interactions between pressures, barriers, and benefits. Corp Soc Resp Env Ma. 2020; 27:126–136. https://doi.org/10.1002/ csr.1778.
61
Setioningtyas, W.P.; Illés, C.B.; Dunay, A.; Hadi, A.; Wibowo, T.S. Environmental Economics, and the SDGs: A Review of Their Relationships and Barriers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7513. https:// doi.org/10.3390/su14127513.
62
Mio C, Panfilo S, Blundo B. Sustainable development goals and the strategic role of business: A systematic literature review. Bus Strat Env. 2020; 29:3220–3245. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2568
63
Álvarez Jaramillo J, Zartha Sossa JW, Orozco Mendoza GL. Barriers to sustainability for small and medium enterprises in the framework of sustainable development—Literature review. Bus Strat Env. 2019;28:512–524. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2261

1
UN General Assembly. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. (2015).
2
Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung. Agenda 2030: Die globalen Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung BMZ https://www.bmz.de/de/agenda-2030 (2022).
3
United Nations Development Programme. The SDGs in Action UNDP https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals (2022).
4
Institute for Human Rights and Business. State of Play – Business and the Sustainable Development Goals: Mind the Gap – Challenges for Implementation. (2015).
5
Jones, P. & Wynn, M.. The Sustainable Development Goals: Industry Sector Approaches (Routledge, 2019).
6
Directorate-General for Environment. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the SDGs European Commission https://ec.europa.eu/environment/sustainable-development/SDGs/index_en.htm (2022).
7
Bertelsmann Stiftung. Warum SDGs für Unternehmen wichtig sind Bertelsmann Stiftung https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/de/unsere-projekte/abgeschlossene-projekte/verantwortungsvolles-unternehmertum-und-soziale-innovationen/projektnachrichten/warum-sdgs-fuer-unternehmen-wichtig-sind (2022).
8
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Key aspects of the Paris Agreement UNFCC https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement/key-aspects-of-the-paris-agreement (2022).
9
Global Policy Forum & terre des hommes. Die Agenda 2030: Globale Zukunftsziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung. (2017).
10
Rodriguez, I.. Die Relevanz der Nachhaltigkeitsziele (SDGs) für Unternehmen seventeen goals magazin https://www.17goalsmagazin.de/sdg-17-ziele-in-unternehmen/ (2021).
11
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). Making It Your Business: Engaging with the Sustainable Development Goals. (2015).
12
Fehling, M., Nelson, B. D. & Venkatapuram, S.. Limitations of the Millennium Development Goals: a literature review. Global Public Health 8:10, 1109-1122 (2013).
13
Forum Umwelt & Entwicklung. Was sind die SDGs? 2030 Watch https://www.2030watch.de/was-sind-die-sdgs-1 (2022).
14
United Nations. The 17 goals. https://sdgs.un.org/goals (2022).
15
Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable Development Goals. Open Working Group Proposal for Sustainable Development Goals. (2014).
16
Sustainable Development Solution Network. Getting Started with the Sustainable Development Goals. (2015).
17
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Global Sustainable Development Report: The Future is Now – Science for achieving sustainable development. (2019).
18
Kuenkel, P., Kühn, E., Stucker, D. & Williamson, D.F. Leading Transformative Change Collectively: A Practitioner Guide to Realizing the SDGs. (2021).
19
Breuer, A. & Leininger, J. Horizontal Accountability for SDG Implementation: A Comparative Cross-National Analysis of Emerging National Accountability Regimes. Sustainability 13, 7002 (2021).
20
Smith, M.S. et al. Advancing sustainability science for the SDGs. Sustainability Science 13, 1483–1487 (2018).
21
International Council for Science. A Guide to SDG Interactions: From Science to Implementation. (2017).
22
Christ, K.L. & Burritt, R.L. Implementation of sustainable development goal: The role for business academics. Australian Journal of Management 44, 571-593. (2019).
23
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). Making It Your Business: Engaging with the Sustainable Development Goals. (2015).
24
Norström, A.V. et al. Three necessary conditions for establishing effective Sustainable Development Goals in the Anthropocene. Ecology and Society 19, 8. (2014).
25
Espey, J. Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to the SDG Monitoring Challenge. in Promoting the Sustainable Development Goals in North American Cities: Case Studies & Best Practices in the Science of Sustainability Indicators (eds. Abraham, D.B. & Iyer, S.D.) 87-96 (Springer Nature Switzerland, 2021).
26
Jiménez-Aceituno, A., Peterson, G.D., Norström, A.V., Wong, G.Y. & Downing, A.S. Local lens for SDG implementation: lessons from bottom-up approaches in Africa. Sustainability Science 15, 729-743. (2020).
27
Sustainable Europe Research Institute (SERI). Towards SDG implementation: The role of global resource policy and resource targets. (2016).
28
United Nations. The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2022. (2022).
29
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Sustainable Development: National strategies and SDG integration. https://sdgs.un.org/topics/national-sustainable-development-strategies (2022).
30
Allen, C., Metternicht, G. & Wiedmann, T. Initial progress in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): a review of evidence from countries. Sustainability Science 13, 1453-1467. (2018).
31
United Nations University. Policy Brief: Accelerating 2030 Agenda Integration: Aligning National Development Plans with the Sustainable Development Goals. (2021).
32
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Guidance in Preparing a National Sustainable Development Strategy: Managing Sustainable Development in the New Millenium. (2002).
33
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). Business reporting on the SDGs: Integrating the SDGs into Corporate Reporting: A Practical Guide. (2019).
34
United Nations. High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development: Home https://hlpf.un.org/home (2022).
35
iTech Mission. SDGs Global Dashboard https://www.sdgsdashboard.org/ (2022).
36
Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). About Us https://www.unsdsn.org/about-us (2022).
37
Campagnolo, L., Carraro, C., Eboli, F. & Farnia, L.L. Assessing SDGs: a new methodology to measure sustainability. (2016).
38
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Measuring distance to the SDGs targets: a pilot assessment of where OECD countries stand. (2016).
39
United Nations. High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development: Tools Supporting Voluntary National Review Processes https://hlpf.un.org/tools (2022).
40
United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD). SDG Monitoring and Reporting Toolkit for UN Country Teams https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/unct-toolkit/SDG-localization-and-implementation/ (2022).
41
Stafford-Smith, M. et al. Integration: the key to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability Science 12, 911-919. (2017).
42
Ki-Moon, B. Secretary-general’s remarks at “making 2015 a historic year” dinner [as prepared for delivery]. http://www.un.org/sg/statements/index.asp?nid=8355 (2015).
43
Verboven, H. & Vanherck, L. Sustainability management of SMEs and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. uwf 24, 165–178. (2016).
44
Global Reporting Initiative, UN Global Compact & WBCSD. SDG Compass: The guide for business action on the SDGs. (2015).
45
Arnold, W., Freimann, J. & Kurz, R. Grundlagen und Bausteine einer Sustainable Balanced Scorecard (SBS): Überlegungen zur Entwicklung einer SBS für mittelständische Unternehmen. in Werkstattreihe Betriebliche Umweltpolitik (eds. Freimann, J.) (Springer, 2001).
46
Figge, F., Hahn, T., Schaltegger, S. & Wagner, M. The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard – linking sustainability management to business strategy. Bus. Strat. Env. 11 (5), 269‒284. (2002).
47
Falle, S., Rauter, R., Engert, S. & Baumgartner, R. Sustainability Management with the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard in SMEs: Findings from an Austrian Case Study. Sustainability (8), 1–16. (2016).
48
Baumgartner, R.J. Managing corporate sustainability and CSR: a conceptual framework combining values, strategies, and instruments contributing to sustainable development. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 21 (5), 258-271. (2014).
49
50
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. SDG Good Practices: A compilation of success stories and lessons learned in SDG implementation: Second Edition. (2022).
51
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. SDG Good Practices, Success Stories and Lessons Learned in the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda. (2022)./mfn]

One example of Good Practice of a global multi-stakeholder partnership aiming at the SDGs 1, 2, and 3 are the Community-Based Animal Health Workers (CAHWs) that deliver animal health services in hard-to-reach livestock production systems with a focus on local know-how transfer and training. The practice contributes to the protection of key livelihood assets and securing the income of vulnerable populations. It is a Good Practice example as it leads to capacity development, improves existing structures, builds on local resources, and is easily available, accessible, affordable, and replicable.⁴⁹United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. First Edition: SDG Good Practices: A compilation of success stories and lessons learned in SDG implementation. (2020).
52
Boiral, O. (2013). Sustainability reports as simulacra? A counter-account of A and A+ GRI reports. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26 (7), 1036–1071. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2012-00998
53
Boiral, O., Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., & Testa, F. (2017). SA8000 as CSR-washing? The role of stakeholder pressures. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(1), 57–70.
54
Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., Boiral, O., & Díaz de Junguitu, A. (2020). Environmental management certification and environmental performance: Greening or greenwashing? Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(6), 2829–2841.
55
Berliner, D., & Prakash, A. (2015). “Bluewashing” the firm? Voluntary regulations, program design, and member compliance with the United Nations global compact. Policy Studies Journal, 43(1), 115–138.
56
Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., Urbieta, L., & Boiral, O. (2022). Organizations’ engagement with sustainable development goals: From cherry-picking to SDG-washing? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(2), 316–328. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2202
57
Horton, R. Offline: Why the Sustainable Development Goals will fail. The Lancet 383, 2196 (2014).
59
Willard, B. The New Sustainability Advantage: seven business case benefits of a triple bottom line. (2012).
60
Cantele S, Zardini A. What drives small and medium enterprises toward sustainability? Role of interactions between pressures, barriers, and benefits. Corp Soc Resp Env Ma. 2020; 27:126–136. https://doi.org/10.1002/ csr.1778.
61
Setioningtyas, W.P.; Illés, C.B.; Dunay, A.; Hadi, A.; Wibowo, T.S. Environmental Economics, and the SDGs: A Review of Their Relationships and Barriers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7513. https:// doi.org/10.3390/su14127513.
62
Mio C, Panfilo S, Blundo B. Sustainable development goals and the strategic role of business: A systematic literature review. Bus Strat Env. 2020; 29:3220–3245. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2568
63
Álvarez Jaramillo J, Zartha Sossa JW, Orozco Mendoza GL. Barriers to sustainability for small and medium enterprises in the framework of sustainable development—Literature review. Bus Strat Env. 2019;28:512–524. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2261