Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 334

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Is the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) index an adequate framework to measure the progress of the 2030 Agenda?

Diaz‐Sarachaga, Jose Manuel, Jato‐Espino, Daniel, Castro‐Fresno, Daniel·2018·Sustainable Development
DOI 10.1002/sd.1735
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Under the consideration of different measures adopted by most United Nations (UN) members, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) included in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development aim to address the main challenges related to social, economic and environmental issues. Numerous single indicators have been established to monitor progress toward sustainable development; however, the need for benchmarking the degree of sustainability of countries triggered the creation of the SDG Index, which originally compiled 77 indicators and has evolved to 99 at present. This research analyzes the suitability of applying this composite index for assessing the fulfillment of the 2030 Agenda. The lack of information resulted in 60% of the SDG indicators being disregarded in the SDG Index. The scores obtained through the application of this index clustered UN countries according to specific geographic areas, highlighting the need for developing regional SDG Indices to emphasize the achievement of lower‐performing goals.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/sd.1735

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 334

Metadata

Authors
Diaz‐Sarachaga, J. M., Jato‐Espino, D., & Castro‐Fresno, D.
Venue
Sustainable Development
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-03-15
Volume
26
Issue
6
Pages
663-671
ISSN
  • 0968-0802 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1719
DOI
10.1002/sd.1735
OpenAlex
W2793675911
Cited by
334
References
13
FWCI
39.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.