Systematic prioritisation of SDGs: Machine learning approach

Abstract The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) framework is recognised throughout the world as a significant global agreement that has been adopted by all UN members. These goals represent a solution to sustainability problems dealing with nations’ economies, the natural environment and societies. However, making progress towards achieving these goals has not been as effective as originally intended. One of the major concerns is whether the SDGs will be achieved globally by 2030. Given the current damage wrought internationally by the COVID-19 pandemic, what is required is a coordinated global effort to achieve the SDGs. In this uncertain time, an era of corona virus outbreaks, when countries’ resources are finite and the deadline is fast approaching, prioritisation is necessary to allocate resources effectively. Several attempts have been made to prioritise SDGs by quantifying synergies. However, systematic methods to identify the magnitude of how to enhance the SDG index by improving individual SDGs is lacking. The objective of this paper is to identify synergetic SDGs using Boosted Regression Trees model which is a machine learning and data mining technique. In this study, contributions of all SDGs to form the SDG index are identified and a “what-if” analysis is conducted to understand the significance of goal scores. Findings show that SDG3, “Good health and well-being”, SDG4, “Quality education”, and SDG7, “Affordable and clean energy”, are the most synergetic goals, when their scores are >60%. The findings of this research will help decision-makers implement effective strategies and allocate resources by prioritising synergetic goals.

[1]  Anita Breuer,et al.  Translating Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Interdependencies into Policy Advice , 2019, Sustainability.

[2]  J Elith,et al.  A working guide to boosted regression trees. , 2008, The Journal of animal ecology.

[3]  John W. McArthur,et al.  Change of Pace: Accelerations and Advances During the Millennium Development Goal Era , 2017 .

[4]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Classification and Regression Trees , 1984 .

[5]  Jerome H Friedman,et al.  Multiple additive regression trees with application in epidemiology , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[6]  W. Cheung,et al.  A rapid assessment of co-benefits and trade-offs among Sustainable Development Goals , 2017, Marine Policy.

[7]  D. Griggs,et al.  Policy: Map the interactions between Sustainable Development Goals , 2016, Nature.

[8]  M. Nilsson,et al.  A Nexus Approach to the Post-2015 Agenda: Formulating Integrated Water, Energy, and Food SDGs , 2014 .

[9]  William Stafford Noble,et al.  A cross-validation scheme for machine learning algorithms in shotgun proteomics , 2012, BMC Bioinformatics.

[10]  D. Blanc,et al.  Exploring Links Between Education and Sustainable Development Goals Through the Lens of UN Flagship Reports , 2016 .

[11]  Graciela Metternicht,et al.  Prioritising SDG targets: assessing baselines, gaps and interlinkages , 2018, Sustainability Science.

[12]  R. Jandl,et al.  The Nexus between the Austrian Forestry Sector and the Sustainable Development Goals: A Review of the Interlinkages , 2019, Forests.

[13]  Paul Howe The triple nexus: A potential approach to supporting the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals? , 2019 .

[14]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Statistical Modeling: The Two Cultures (with comments and a rejoinder by the author) , 2001 .

[15]  Graciela Metternicht,et al.  Indicator-based assessments of progress towards the sustainable development goals (SDGs): a case study from the Arab region , 2017, Sustainability Science.

[16]  Henrik Carlsen,et al.  Towards systemic and contextual priority setting for implementing the 2030 Agenda , 2017, Sustainability Science.

[17]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Statistical Modeling: The Two Cultures (with comments and a rejoinder by the author) , 2001, Statistical Science.

[18]  D. Lusseau,et al.  Income-based variation in Sustainable Development Goal interaction networks , 2019, Nature Sustainability.

[19]  David L. Dollar,et al.  Growth is Good for the Poor , 2001 .

[20]  D. Rybski,et al.  A Systematic Study of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Interactions , 2017 .

[21]  Yong-Ping Zhao,et al.  Fast cross validation for regularized extreme learning machine , 2014 .

[22]  Mario Biggeri,et al.  Tracking the SDGs in an ‘integrated’ manner: A proposal for a new index to capture synergies and trade-offs between and within goals , 2019, World Development.

[23]  Matteo Pedercini,et al.  Policy coherence to achieve the SDGs: using integrated simulation models to assess effective policies , 2017, Sustainability Science.

[24]  Jong Hae Kim Multicollinearity and misleading statistical results , 2019, Korean journal of anesthesiology.

[25]  N. Nakicenovic,et al.  Six Transformations to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals , 2019, Nature Sustainability.

[26]  James M Radner,et al.  Expanding the evidence base to drive more productive early childhood investment , 2017, The Lancet.

[27]  Davide La Torre,et al.  Multi-criteria model for sustainable development using goal programming applied to the United Arab Emirates , 2015 .

[28]  E. Barbier,et al.  Sustainable development goal indicators: Analyzing trade-offs and complementarities , 2019, World Development.

[29]  Youngjae Lee,et al.  Government spending and sustainable economic growth: based on first- and second-level COFOG data , 2020, Public Money & Management.

[30]  Classifying Sustainable Development Goal trajectories: A country-level methodology for identifying which issues and people are getting left behind , 2019, World development.