The DOI matches its Crossref record.
National pathways to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A comparative review of scenario modelling tools
Open accessAbstract
Abstract The recently-adopted global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will have significant implications for national development planning in both developed and developing countries in the post-2015 period to 2030. Integrated, nationally-owned SDG strategies will be at the centre of national efforts to implement the new sustainable development agenda. The long-run processes and systems perspective that are inherent in the SDGs present complex analytical problems for policymakers and analysts. Scenario analysis and quantitative modelling will be important analytical tools to support national sustainable development planning, and there is an increasingly sophisticated suite of models available to decision makers. This paper reviews and assesses a broad range of different quantitative models that have the potential to support national development planning for the SDGs. The study develops a typology and inventory of 80 different models, and then reviews the comparative strengths, weaknesses and general utility of different models through an initial screening and subsequent multi-criteria analysis of short-listed models. Current gaps in model capabilities are highlighted in the context of providing analytical support for national development planning for the SDGs. While some existing models are particularly relevant, it is unlikely that an ideal model can analyse all SDG targets and variables of interest within a single modelling framework. Top-down ‘macro framework’ models are likely to be more useful for undertaking system-level or economy-wide scenario analysis driven by the national long-term goals and targets, and for exploring trade-offs and synergies among sectors. Bottom-up sectoral models will be able to support far more detailed option-level impact analysis of concrete interventions, technologies and investments. Combining both approaches within an analytical framework will provide a robust approach for analysis and decision-making. The results highlight a range of potential gaps in current modelling capabilities, and provide some new tools to assist with model selection.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
The role of renewable energy in the global energy transformation
Gielen, D., Boshell, F., Saygin, D., Bazilian, M. D., Wagner, N., & Gorini, R. (2019) · Energy Strategy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.esr.2019.01.006 · Cited by 4,973
National baselines for the Sustainable Development Goals assessed in the SDG Index and Dashboards
Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Teksoz, K., Durand-Delacre, D., & Sachs, J. D. (2017) · Nature Geoscience · doi:10.1038/ngeo2985 · Cited by 616
Finding pathways to national-scale land-sector sustainability
Gao, L., & Bryan, B. A. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature21694 · Cited by 455
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and their implementation
Morton, S., Pencheon, D., & Squires, N. (2017) · British Medical Bulletin · doi:10.1093/bmb/ldx031 · Cited by 367
Influence of political leaders on sustainable development goals–insights from twitter
Grover, P., Kar, A. K., Gupta, S., & Modgil, S. (2021) · Journal of Enterprise Information Management · doi:10.1108/jeim-07-2020-0304 · Cited by 50
Metadata
- Authors
- Allen, C., Metternicht, G., & Wiedmann, T.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-12
- Volume
- 66
- Pages
- 199-207
- ISSN
- 1462-9011 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2530450567
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 45.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: National pathways to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A comparative review of scenario modelling tools. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.09.008
- The paper
- Allen, C., Metternicht, G., & Wiedmann, T. (2016). National pathways to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A comparative review of scenario modelling tools. Environmental Science & Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.09.008
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.