2023 Sustainable Development Report

SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
REPORT 2023
Implementing the SDG Stimulus
Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data
Implementing the SDG Stimulus. Sustainable Development Report 2023
© Jeffrey D. Sachs, Guillaume Lafortune, Grayson Fuller and Eamon Drumm, 2023
ISBN: 978-0-903200-12-7 (paperback)

ISBN: 978-0-903200-13-4 (pdf )
Published by Dublin University Press Dublin, Ireland, 2023
www.dublinuniversitypress.com
Design: Pica Publishing, New York, London, Paris
Printed by Ingenidoc in Rouen, France.
The rights of Jeffrey D. Sachs, Guillaume Lafortune, Grayson Fuller and Eamon Drumm to be
identified as the authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright and
Related Rights Act, 2000 (Ireland) and as defined by the U.S. Copyright Office.
This work is in copyright. It is subject to statutory exceptions and to the provisions of relevant
licensing agreements; with the exception of the Creative Commons version, the link for which
is provided below, no reproduction of any part of this work may take place without the written
permission of the authors.
An open access online version of this work is published at https://doi.org/10.25546/102924 under

a Creative Commons Open Access license CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0. This license requires that re-users give
credit to the creators. It allows re-users to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in
any medium or format, for non-commercial purposes only. If others modify or adapt the material,
they must license the modified material under identical terms. To view a copy of this license,
visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0. When citing this work, please include a
reference to the DOI https://doi.org/10.25546/102924.
All versions of this work may contain content reproduced under license from third parties.
Permission to reproduce this third-party content must be obtained from these third parties directly.
Dublin University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or
third-party internet websites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content
on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
REPORT 2023
Implementing the SDG Stimulus
Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards
By Jeffrey D. Sachs, Guillaume Lafortune, Grayson Fuller

and Eamon Drumm
Acknowledgements
The Sustainable Development Report (SDR) reviews progress made each year on the Sustainable Development Goals since their
adoption by the 193 UN Member States in 2015. Midpoint on the way to 2030, this year’s edition takes stock of progress so
far and discusses priorities to restore and accelerate SDG progress. More specifically, this year’s edition focuses on the need to
scale up development finance and reform the global financial architecture to support the SDGs. The SDR 2023 is published
on the eve of the 2023 Paris Summit for a New Global Financial Pact and ahead of other major international summits this year,
including the UN High-Level Political Forum in July and the SDG Summit at Heads of States Level in September, the September
G20 Meeting under Indian Presidency, and the December COP28 in Dubai. The SDR 2023 also aims to provide significant
contributions in the lead-up to the 2024 Summit of the Future, to enhance cooperation on critical challenges and address gaps
in global governance.
The report was prepared by the SDSN’s newly created SDG Transformation Center and coordinated by Guillaume Lafortune in
cooperation with Jeffrey D. Sachs. Lead writers are Jeffrey D. Sachs, Guillaume Lafortune, Grayson Fuller, and Eamon Drumm.
Members of the Leadership Council of the SDSN led the preparation of Part 1. “How to Achieve the SDGs: the SDSN Framework”.
The statistical work was led by Grayson Fuller, in collaboration with Leslie Bermont-Diaz and Samory Touré and under the
supervision of Guillaume Lafortune. The interactive website and data visualization that accompanies this report was developed
by Max Gruber and Ruben Andino. Other major contributors to the data and analyses in this year’s report include Juliana Bartels,
Grant Cameron, María Cortés Puch, Olivia Lee Cosio, Salma Dahir, Juliette Douillet, Guilherme Iablonovski, Christian Kroll, Alyson
Marks, Isabella Massa, Maryam Rabiee, Casteline Tilus, Emma Torres, and Patrick Paul Walsh. We also thank Minister Romuald
Wadagni from Benin, Simona Marinescu and Peter Schmidt for their contributions.
The SDR 2023 combines data and analyses produced by international organizations, civil society organizations, and research
centers. We thank all of these for their contributions and collaboration in producing the report, including during the annual
public consultation process that took place between April 17th and April 26th, 2023.
We also thank the regional and national SDSN networks, the SDSN secretariat, and experts and government officials who
responded to the SDSN 2023 Survey of Government Efforts for the SDGs and provided comments and feedback at various stages.
Lauren Barredo, María Cortés Puch, Andrija Erac, Alyson Marks, Sonja Neve, and Ryan Swaney provided communication support
for the launch of the report. We thank Dublin University Press and Roberto Rossi of Pica Publishing for preparing the report for
publication. We welcome feedback on the publication and data that may help to strengthen future iterations of this work.
Please notify us of any publications that use the SDG Index and Dashboards data or the Sustainable Development Report, and
share your publication with us at info@sdgindex.org.
An interactive online dashboard and all data used in this report can be accessed at: www.sdgtransformationcenter.org and
www.sdgindex.org
June 2023
Published by Dublin University Press
Please cite this report as:
Sachs, J.D., Lafortune, G., Fuller, G., Drumm, E. (2023). Implementing the SDG Stimulus. Sustainable Development
Report 2023. Paris: SDSN, Dublin: Dublin University Press, 2023. 10.25546/102924
This report has been prepared with the extensive advice and consultation of the SDSN Leadership Council members. Members
of the Leadership Council serve in their personal capacities; the opinions expressed in this report may not reflect the positions
or policies of their host institutions. Members are not necessarily in agreement on every detail of this report.
The views expressed in this report do not reflect the views of any organization, agency, or programme of the United Nations.
Design, layout and copyediting by Pica Publishing Ltd – www.pica-publishing.com

Contents
Executive Summary vi
Part 1. How to Achieve the SDGs: The SDSN Framework 1
Part 2. The SDG Index and Dashboards 23

2.1 SDG Status at the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda 23
2.2 Leave no one behind 27
2.3 International spillovers and policy coherence 31
2.4 SDG Dashboards by income groups and major world regions 34
References44
Part 3. Government Efforts and Commitments

to the SDGs 47
3.1 Political leadership and institutional coordination: results from
the 2023 SDSN survey of government efforts for the SDGs 47
3.2 SDG integration into sectoral policies and pathways: scorecards
for the Six SDG Transformations 54
3.3 Support for multilateralism under the Charter of the United Nations 61
3.4 Government effort and commitments for the SDGs: overall scores 70
References 73
Part 4. Lessons Learned and Next Steps 77

4.1 The SDG Index: a tool for guiding SDG action and strengthening
accountability 77
4.2 Have the SDGs increased data cooperation and innovation? 86
4.3 Conclusions and next steps 88
References 90
Annex. Methods Summary and Data Tables 92

A.1 Interpreting the SDG Index and Dashboards results 92
A.2 Changes to the 2023 edition and limitations 93
A.3 Methodology (overview) 95
References 119
Part 5. Country Profiles 122
Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus iii

List of Figures
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 SDG Index world average: pre-pandemic trend and trend needed to achieve the SDGs by 2030 5
Figure 1.2 Observed and projected gaps in SDG Index score between HICs and LICs (in percentage points) 6
Figure 1.3 Projected global warming under alternative policy scenarios 7
Figure 2.1 World SDG Dashboards at the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda 24
Figure 2.2 Status on individual SDG targets at the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda 24
Figure 2.3 The 2023 SDG Index: score and rank 25
Figure 2.4 SDG Index World Average, 2010-2022 28
Figure 2.5 SDG Index Low-Income Countries’ Average, 2010-2022 28
Figure 2.6 Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (PPP, %) in LICs 29
Figure 2.7 Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%), in LICs 29
Figure 2.8 Subjective Well-Being, in HICs and LICs 29
Figure 2.9 Unemployment Rate, in HICs and LICs 30
Figure 2.10 Observed and projected gaps in SDG Index score between HICs and LICs 30
Figure 2.11 Countries where 50% or more of the rural population has no access to all-season roads,
and comparison with HICs and World average (%) 31
Figure 2.12 SDG Index scores versus International Spillover Index scores, by income level 32
Figure 2.13 Illustration of environmental impacts embodied in international trade 33
Figure 2.14 GHG emissions embodied in the final consumption of textiles and clothing 34
Figure 2.15 Correlation between 2023 SDG Index Score and Narrow SDG Index (17 “headline” indicators) 35
Figure 2.16 2023 SDG dashboards by region and income group (levels and trends) 36
Figure 2.17 2023 SDG dashboards for OECD countries (levels and trends) 37
Figure 2.18 2023 SDG dashboards for East and South Asia (levels and trends) 38
Figure 2.19 2023 SDG dashboards for Eastern Europe and Central Asia (levels and trends) 39
Figure 2.20 2023 SDG dashboards for Latin America and the Caribbean (levels and trends) 40
Figure 2.21 2023 SDG dashboards for the Middle East and North Africa (levels and trends) 41
Figure 2.22 2023 SDG dashboards for Oceania (levels and trends) 41
Figure 2.23 2023 SDG dashboards for sub-Saharan Africa (levels and trends) 42
Figure 2.24 2023 SDG dashboards for Small Island Developing States (SIDS) (levels and trends) 43
Figure 3.1 A conceptual framework to evaluate government efforts and commitment to the SDGs 48
Figure 3.2 Submissions of voluntary national reviews (number of submitters, 2023) and submissions
per year since 2016 52
Figure 3.3 Designated lead unit for SDG coordination at the central/federal level of government
to implement the SDGs (2023) 53
Figure 3.4 Integration of the SDGs into key policy processes by income groups 53
Figure 3.5 Percentage of local and regional governments using selected SDG policies and actions 60
Figure 3.6 UN treaties ratified by Member States (%), 1946–2022 64
Figure 3.7 Use of unilateral coercive measures (UCMs), number (1950–2021) 66
Figure 3.8 Membership in selected UN organizations, 2022 67
Figure 3.9 Participation in conflicts and militarization, 2022 68
Figure 3.10 Official Development Assistance (ODA) as share of GNI, 2018–2022 69
Figure 3.11 Conceptual Framework for Evaluating Government Efforts and Commitments to
Implement the SDGs and Indicators Retained to Compute the Overall Score for 2023 70
iv Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

List of Figures, Tables and Boxes
Figure 4.1 Map of Brazzaville, Republic of Congo, and Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo,
showcasing the scale at which calculations are performed (100 m2 grid). 79
Figure 4.2 Diagram of a motorable road with the two-kilometer buffer applied, identifying rural
populations living within and outside the buffer area 80
Figure 4.3 Example of the method as applied in rural Democratic Republic of the Congo 80
Figure 4.4 Statistical Performance Indicators (SPI): Overall Score, 2016-2022 87
Figure A.1 The Four-arrow system for denoting SDG trends 99
Figure A.2 Graphic representation of the methodology for SDG trends 99
List of Tables
Table 1.1 Global Population, Investment, and GDP by World Bank Income Category 14
Table 1.2 Credit Ratings by Income Category 14
Table 2.1 Top five countries in terms of SDG targets achieved or on track, and those
with the greatest percentage of targets showing a reversal in progress 24
Table 3.1 National government efforts to implement the SDGs, survey results 49
Table 3.2 Scorecard – Transformation 1: Universal quality education and
innovation-based economy 56
Table 3.2 Scorecard – Transformation 1: Universal quality education and innovation-based
economy56
Table 3.3 Scorecard – Transformation 2: Universal health coverage 57
Table 3.4 Scorecard – Transformation 3: Zero-carbon energy systems 59
Table 3.5 Scorecard – Transformation 6: Transformation to universal digital access and services 62
Table 3.6 Measuring government SDG efforts and commitments: scores, ranks and
performance by pillar 72
Table A.1 New indicators and modifications 93
Table A.2 Major indicator and data gaps for the SDGs 94
Table A.3 Countries excluded from the 2023 SDG Index due to insufficient data 96
Table A.4 Indicators included in the Sustainable Development Report 2023 101
Table A.5 Indicator thresholds and justifications for optimal values 111
Table A.6 Indicators used for SDG Trends and period for trend estimation 116
List of Boxes
Box 2.1 The SDG Index and Dashboards 23
Box 2.2 Explaining the SDG Index with a handful of key indicators 35
Box 3.1 The OECD, SDSN and the European Committee of the Regions survey of city and
regional SDG policies in a time of crisis 60
Box 4.1 GIS for the SDGs: Assessing pedestrian accessibility in urban areas 81
Box 4.2 GIS for the SDGs: Assessing accessibility to all-season roads in rural areas 82
Box 4.3 The long-standing partnership between the European Economic and Social
Committee (EESC) and the SDSN to advance policies and data for the SDGs in the EU 83
Box 4.4 SDG Index and Dashboards: global, regional, and subnational editions (2016–2023) 85
Box 4.5 Cooperation between SDSN and the Government of the Republic of Benin in the context
of the issuance of the first African SDG Bond 86
Box 4.6 Partnership between SDSN and UN Resident Coordinators in SIDS 87
Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus v

Executive Summary
At the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda, all of the SDGs are seriously off track. From 2015 to 2019, the world
made some progress on the SDGs, although this was already vastly insufficient to achieve the goals. Since the
outbreak of the pandemic in 2020 and other simultaneous crises, SDG progress has stalled globally. In most high-
income countries (HICs), automatic stabilizers, emergency expenditure, and recovery plans mitigated the impacts
of these multiple crises on socioeconomic outcomes. Only limited progress is being made on the environmental
and biodiversity goals, including SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), SDG 13 (Climate Action),
SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and SDG 15 (Life on Land), even in countries that are largely to blame for the climate and
biodiversity crises. The disruptions caused by these multiple crises has aggravated fiscal-space issues in low-income
countries (LICs) and in lower-middle income countries (LMICs), leading to a reversal in progress on several goals and
indicators. Despite this alarming development, the SDGs are still achievable. None of their objectives are beyond our
reach. The world is off track, but that is all the more reason to double down on the SDGs.
At their core, the SDGs are an investment agenda: it is critical that UN Member States adopt and implement
the SDG Stimulus and support a comprehensive reform of the global financial architecture. To achieve the
SDGs the world must both alter its current investment patterns and increase the overall volume of investments.
The Stimulus’ urgent objective is to address the chronic shortfall of international SDG financing confronting the
LICs and LMICs, and to ramp up financing flows by at least US$500 billion by 2025. This year’s report also highlights
six priorities to reform the complex system of public and private finance that channels the world’s savings to its
investments – what is known as the Global Financial Architecture:
1. Greatly increase funding to national and subnational governments and private businesses, especially in LICs
and LMICs, to carry out needed SDG investments.
2. Revise the credit rating system and debt sustainability metrics to facilitate long-term sustainable development.
3. Revise liquidity structures for LICs and LMICs, especially regarding sovereign debts, to forestall self-fulfilling
banking and balance-of-payments crises;
4. Create ambitious, internationally-agreed upon criteria for sustainable finance that are mandatory for all public
financial institutions.
5. Align private business investment flows with the SDGs, through improved national planning, regulation,
reporting, and oversight.
6. Reform current institutional frameworks and develop new mechanisms to improve the quality and speed of
deployment of international cooperation, and monitor progress in an open and timely manner.
All countries, poorer and richer alike, should use the half-way momentum to self-critically review and revise
their national SDG strategies and commit to strengthening multilateralism. National governments must
ensure both domestic implementation of the SDGs, including the reduction of negative spillovers, and international
implementation – by building a global governance and financial architecture that delivers the SDGs. Building
on SDSN’s global survey of government efforts and commitment to the SDGs and third-party data, we highlight
major differences across countries, including G20 countries, in their SDG strategies and commitment. Achieving
the SDGs requires global cooperation guided by the United Nations Charter. In 2022, the United Nations Secretary-
General appointed a High-Level Advisory Board (HLAB) on effective multilateralism, with a mandate to develop a
list of concrete, actionable recommendations to improve international cooperation and advance the 2030 Agenda
for Sustainable Development. We introduce in the report this year a pilot index of countries commitment to and
support of multilateralism under the UN Charter.
vi Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

Executive Summary
Further investment is needed in statistical capacity and data literacy to support long-term pathways for key
SDG transformations. At the halfway mark to 2030, there remains a great deal of work to be done to improve the
data and methods underlying the SDG indicator framework. Evidence suggests that since 2016 there has been only
limited progress and convergence in countries’ statistical capacity, including LICs and LMICs, and that international
funding for data and statistics fell between 2019 and 2021. Also, in an information-rich and post-truth environment,
citizens and decision-makers need knowledge and tools to transform data and science into evidence, actions, and
long-term policies. According to major international studies, few teenagers can differentiate between a fact and an
opinion. As underlined during the United Nations World Data Forum 2023 and in the 27 April Hangzhou Declaration,
investing in statistical capacity, science, and data literacy are important priorities for achieving the SDGs.
The SDSN and its global network will double-down on efforts to implement the SDGs by 2030 and beyond.
The SDSN was created in 2012, soon after the Rio+20 Summit, to mobilize the world’s universities, think tanks,
and national laboratories on behalf of the SDGs. SDSN’s mission was fourfold: (i) scholarly research, (ii) educational
innovation and partnerships, (iii) convening power, and (iv) outreach to the public. We are proud of our efforts
since 2012 in these four areas. The SDSN is now a global network of more than 1,900 member organizations, mainly
universities, organized in 53 national and regional chapters. Via science-based pathways and analytics, the SDSN
supports discussions on SDG implementation at the global, regional, and national levels. These are available on the
newly set up, open-access, SDG Transformation Center Portal. All UN Member States and UN agencies can count on
the continued efforts and energies of the SDSN around the world to support all governments, businesses, and civil
society in embracing and aligning with the SDGs on sustainable development.
Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus vii

Acronyms and Abbreviations
AI Artificial Intelligence
CAPI Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing
CEPEI Centro de Pensamiento Estratégico Internacional
CSA Central Statistics Agency (Ethiopia)
CTGAP Cape Town Global Action Plan for Sustainable Development Data
CTGAP Global Action Plan for Sustainable Development Data
DAC Development Assistance Committee of the OECD
DANE National Administrative Department of Statistics (Colombia)
DSSI Debt Service Suspension Initiative
EO Earth observation
EU European Union
FABLE Food, Agriculture, Biodiversity, Land-Use, and Energy Consortium
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FELD Food, Environment, Land and Development Action Tracker
G20 Group of Twenty (intergovernmental forum comprising 19 countries and the European Union)
G7 Group of Seven (intergovernmental forum comprising Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan,
GDP Gross domestic product
GeoGlAM Group on Earth Observations Global Agricultural Monitoring Initiative
GIS Geographic information system
HIC High-income-country
HLAB High-Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization
ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability
ICS International Continence Society
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
ILO International Labour Organisation
ILO International Labour Organization
IMF International Monetary Fund
IMF International Monetary Fund
IMO International Maritime Organization
ITU and the International Telecommunication Union
LAC Latin American countries
LIC Low-income country
LMIC Lower-middle-income country
LSMS Living Standards Measurement Study
MDB Multilateral Development Bank
MENA Middle East and North Africa
viii Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

Acronyms and Abbreviations
MRIO Multi-regional input-output

NBS National Bureau of Statistics
NGO Non-governmental organisation
NSO National Statistic Office
ODA Official Development Assistance
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
SDG Sustainable Development Goal
SDR Sustainable Development Report
SDSN Sustainable Development Solutions Network
SIDS Small Island Developing States
STATIN Statistical Institute of Jamaica
TReNDS Thematic Research Network on Data and Statistics
UCLG United Cit ies and Local Governments
UHC Universal Health Coverage
UMIC Upper-middle-income country
UN DESA Department of Economic and Social Affairs
UN The United Nations
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization
United Nations-HABITAT United Nations Human Settlements Programme
UNWTO World Tourism Organization
UPU Universal Postal Union
VNR Voluntary National Review
WBG World Bank Group
WFP World Food Programme ().
WHO World Health Organisation
WHO World Health Organization
WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization
WMO World Meteorological Organization
WTO World Trade Organization
Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus ix

1
How to Achieve the SDGs:

The SDSN Framework
Part 1
How to Achieve the SDGs: The SDSN Framework
By Members of the SDSN Leadership Council
Members of the SDSN Leadership Council

H.E. Reem Al Hashimy Dr. Pavel Kabat Ms. Mari Pangestu
Dr. Sultan Al Jaber Mr. Niclas Kjellström-Matseke H.E. George Papandreou
Dr. Anthony Annett Dr. Israel Klabin Mr. Antonio Pedro
H.E. Mr. Shaukat Aziz Mr. Adolf Kloke-Lesch Mr. Paul Polman
Ms. Chandrika Bahadur Dr. Siva Kumari Mr. Stefano Quintarelli
Mr. Peter Bakker Mr. Markos Kyprianou Ms. Sabina Ratti
Mr. Sam Barratt Dr. Upmanu Lall Dr. Srinath Reddy
Dr. Eugenie Birch Dr. Felipe Larraín Dr. Aromar Revi
Ms. Irina Bokova Lord Richard Layard Dr. Teresa Ribera
Ms. Micheline Calmy-Rey Dr. Frannie Léautier Dr. Angelo Riccaboni
Dr. Joshua Castellino Dr. Klaus Leisinger Dr. Johan Rockström
Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Dr. Jeffrey Cheah Dr. Justin Yifu Lin Rabbi David Rosen
Prof. Kieth Rethy Chhem Dr. Gordon Liu Dr. Joanna Rubinstein
Ms. Jacqueline Corbelli Mr. Siamak Loni Dr. Jeffrey Sachs
Mr. Ramu Damodaran Mr. Mai Lu Monsignor Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo
Mr. Jack Dangermond Dr. Jane Lubchenco HH Muhammad Sanusi II
Ms. Bineta Diop Mrs. Graça Machel Dr. Elly Schlein
Mr. David Donoghue Dr. Julia Marton-Lefèvre Dr. Guido Schmidt-Traub
Mr. Hendrik du Toit Dr. Ramesh Mashelkar Dr. Andrew Steer
Mr. Jan Egeland Dr. Vladimir Mau Dr. John Thwaites
H.E. Metropolitan Emmanuel Dr. Mariana Mazzucato Dr. Lena Treschow-Torell
Ms. Patricia Espinosa H.E. Miguel Ángel Moratinos Cuyaubé Dr. Laurence Tubiana
H.E. Leonel Fernández Reyna Ms. Sam Mostyn Mr. Ted Turner
Dr. Xiaolan Fu Ms. Claude Nahon Dr. Albert van Jaarsveld
Dr. Stuart Gibb Mr. Eddie Ndopu Dr. William Vendley
Dr. Ken Giller Dr. Rebecca Nelson Dr. Virgilio Viana
Ms. Jennifer Gross Dr. Joanna Newman Dr. Martin Visbeck
Sir Andrew Haines Dr. Amadou Niang Mr. Forest Whitaker
H.E. Tarja Halonen Ms. Michelle Nunn Dr. Lan Xue
Dr. James Hansen Ms. Cherie Nursalim Dr. Hirokazu Yoshikawa
Mr. Olli-Pekka Heinonen Mr. Joaquim Oliveira Martins Dr. Hania Zlotnick
Dr. Naoko Ishii Mr. Luiz Eduardo Osorio
Mr. Vuk Jeremić Ms. Roza Otunbayeva
Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus 1

Part 1. How to Achieve the SDGs: The SDSN Framework
Overview 2. Enhancement of relief for countries facing debt

distress;
This statement, issued by Members of the Leadership 3. Expansion of liquidity by the International Monetary
Council of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Fund (IMF) and major central banks;
Network (SDSN), builds on the work of the SDSN’s
4. Empowerment and expansion of the specialized global
Secretariat and its global programs, as well as the work of
funds; and
its 1,900 member institutions, spanning all world regions.
5. Expansion of private philanthropy with a focus on ultra-
The grim reality is that at the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda, high-net-worth individuals.
the SDGs are far off track. At the global level, averaging
across countries, not a single SDG is currently projected to II. UN Member States must endorse a deep and overdue
be met by 2030, with the poorest countries struggling the reform of the global financial architecture. SDSN
most. And global cooperation has ebbed as geopolitical identifies six priorities for this reform:
tensions have risen. In response to this situation, United
Nations Secretary-General António Guterres has urged 1. Greatly increased funding for national and
world leaders to come together at the 2023 SDG Summit subnational governments and private businesses in
in September to deliver a “Rescue Plan for People and the emerging economies, especially the low-income
Planet”.1 SDSN offers the following recommendations countries (LICs) and lower-middle-income countries
to accelerate progress over the remaining seven years (LMICs), to carry out needed SDG actions;
to 2030, and to set even more ambitious targets to be 2. Revision of the credit-rating system and debt-
achieved by 2050 under the SDG framework. sustainability metrics to facilitate long-term
sustainable development;
As the world’s nations prepare to meet in September to
review the progress the world has made so far towards 3. Revision of the liquidity structures for LICs and
achieving the SDGs, at the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda, LMICs, especially regarding sovereign debt, to
SDSN emphasizes six areas for immediate action. forestall self-fulfilling banking and balance-of-
payments crises;
I. Most urgently, UN Member States should adopt an 4. Creation of ambitious, internationally-agreed
SDG Stimulus, to close the massive financing gap criteria for sustainable finance that are mandatory
faced by many developing economies. As called for by for all public financial institutions in high-income
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres,2 countries (HICs), middle-income countries (MICs),
the SDG Stimulus plan has five main components: and LICs alike.
1. Increased funding from the multilateral develop- 5. Alignment of private business investment flows
ment banks (MDBs) and public development banks in all countries with the SDGs, through improved
(PDBs) to low- and middle-income countries, linked national planning, regulation, reporting, and
to investments in the SDGs; oversight.
6. A reform of current institutional frameworks and
development of new and innovative mechanisms
to improve the quality and speed of deployment of
1. General Assembly Economic and Social Council, Progress towards the
Sustainable Development Goals: Towards a Rescue Plan for People and international cooperation, and the monitoring of
Planet, Report of the Secretary-General, Special Edition, May 2023. progress in an open and timely manner.
https://hlpf.un.org/sites/default/files/2023-04/SDG%20Progress%20
Report%20Special%20Edition.pdf
2. United Nations Secretary-General’s SDG Stimulus to Deliver Agenda 2030,
Feb 2023. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/wp-content/
uploads/2023/02/SDG-Stimulus-to-Deliver-Agenda-2030.pdf
2 Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

1. The SDSN Framework
Overview
III. All UN Member States should adopt long-term IV. All UN Member States should present, at regular
sustainable development pathways that provide intervals, their national SDG frameworks in the form
a stepwise and medium- to long-term approach to of Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs). To date, 188
guide their sustainable development policies, not of the 193 UN Member States have already presented
only to 2030 but to 2050, with particular focus on VNRs. Five countries (Haiti, Myanmar, South Sudan,
gender equality, social inclusion, and the principal the United States, and Yemen) have yet to do so, and
of ‘leave no one behind’. We are facing a long-term should prepare to do so with urgency.
set of challenges: resolving them must be the global
priority for a generation to come. SDSN recommends V. All UN Member States should recommit to peaceful
that national pathways should include six key cooperation, in the service of the SDGs and all other
transformations:3 multilateral agreements. Current geopolitical tensions
are hindering SDG achievement and diverting
1. Universal quality education and innovation-based
financial and human resources away from sustainable
economy: a massive increase in investments in
development. Global spending on armaments,
quality education and in science and technology
estimated at US$2.2 trillion in 2022, dwarfs financing
innovation systems;
for the SDGs and climate change. SDSN calls on
2. Universal health access and coverage: an expansion all nations to renounce violence, live within the
of health coverage to ensure universal access to United Nations Charter, and settle conflicts through
both preventative and curative services; diplomacy, especially through the UN Security Council.
3. Zero-carbon energy systems: the transition by 2050

VI. UN Member States should commit to accelerating
of energy systems to net-zero emissions;
SDG progress to 2030, and to setting even more
4. Sustainable ecosystems, sustainable agriculture, and ambitious SDG targets to 2050, incorporating the
climate resilience: the transition to sustainable land recent Kunming-Montreal Biodiversity Framework and
use, healthy diets, and resilience to ongoing climate the High Seas Treaty.
change;
5. Sustainable cities: urban infrastructure and services The report that follows offers SDSN’s update on the state
to ensure productive, safe, inclusive, and healthful of the SDGs at their mid-point, highlighting the growing
cities for a world that will be around 70 percent dangers of adverse environmental, social, and economic
urbanized in 2050; “tipping points” and identifying key ways that the global
community can and should accelerate SDG progress.
6. Transformation to universal digital access and
services: actions by governments at all levels to
ensure universal access to digital services including
online payments, finance, telemedicine, online
education, and others, while ensuring privacy and
online safety.
3. Sachs, J.D., Schmidt-Traub, G., Mazzucato, M. et al. Six Transformations

to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Nat Sustain 2, 805–814
(2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0352-9

Introduction The UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network

(SDSN) is dedicated to finding and amplifying practical
The SDGs are facing strong headwinds. Despite significant solutions to achieve the SDGs and closely-related
efforts in some places, national governments on all global goals (such as the Paris climate agreement and
continents have fallen short in integrating the SDGs the Kunming-Montreal Biodiversity Framework). We
into national policies and public investments. Moreover, emphasize that all these global goals are interrelated
societal polarization, populism, and growing geopolitical and must be achieved together. Members of the SDSN
conflict are hindering the global cooperation needed Leadership Council offer the following assessments and
to achieve the SDGs. Civil society, including academic recommendations to the UN Member States, the United
institutions, is becoming more constrained in the midst of Nations Agencies, international finance institutions,
intensifying political tensions. The international financial business, and civil society, based on more than a decade
architecture is failing to channel global savings to SDG of research, measurement, advising, and partnerships
investments at the needed pace and scale. across the world.
We emphasize that achieving the SDGs rests on five pillars

of good governance: Dire shortfalls in meeting the SDGs
1. Preparing long-term SDG pathways to guide public The SDGs are seriously off track (Figure 1.1). SDG progress
policy; was already very slow in the five years to 2020. According
2. Ensuring SDG financing at the necessary scale and to the annual SDG Index, global achievement of the SDGs
timing; rose only slightly, from 64 percent in 2015 to 66 percent
in 2019 – far too slowly to meet the goals by 2030,
3. Promoting global cooperation and reducing and with highly uneven progress within and between
geopolitical conflict and tension; countries. Then with the onset of the pandemic, progress
4. Supporting innovation to broaden social inclusion and stopped. As of 2022, the global SDG Index is below 67%.
environmental sustainability; At current trends, based on simple projections, there is a
risk that the gap in SDG outcomes between HICs and LICs
5. Regular reporting on SDG progress and performance.
will be wider in 2030 (29 points) than it was in 2015 (28
points). This means that we are at risk of losing a decade
The SDGs are not only a public policy framework; they are of progress towards convergence globally (Figure 1.2).
an ethical imperative. They are grounded in the Universal The multiple geopolitical crises in the world today will no
Declaration of Human Rights, which celebrates its 75th doubt place further obstacles on the path to 2030. If we
anniversary this year. The SDGs are based on its core look at each of the 17 individual SDGs, not a single SDG is
premises; that “All human beings are born free and equal in projected to be met at the global level.
dignity and rights … and should act towards one another
in a spirit of brotherhood,” and that “it is essential to promote The world is also seriously off track to meet the Paris
the development of friendly relations between nations.” agreement climate targets and SDG 13 (Figure 1.3).
Global warming as of 2022 stood at 1.2°C, with warming
As the Universal Declaration makes clear, and the SDGs continuing at more than 0.3°C per decade.4 At this rate,
make explicit, social justice and sustainable development the likelihood of overshooting 1.5°C, even within a
require the full realization of the rights of all people. This decade, is very strong. According to the UNEP Emissions
includes equality of opportunities for girls and women Gap Report 2022, current policies put the world on track
(SDG 5), respect for the rights and voice of Indigenous
peoples around the world, and a much larger role for
4. Hansen, James et al. 2002. Earth’s Energy Imbalance and Climate
young people, who will face the consequences of our (in) Response Time. http:/www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2022/
actions throughout the 21st century. EarthEnergyImbalance.22December2022.pdf

Dire shortfalls in meeting the SDGs
Figure 1.1
SDG Index world average: pre-pandemic trend and trend needed to achieve the SDGs by 2030
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
World Average Pre-pandemic trend Trend needed to achieve the SDGs
Note: Pre-pandemic trend corresponds to the extrapolated annual growth rate over the period 2015–2019. See Part 2 for further details.
Source: Authors analysis
to reaching a disastrous 2.8°C warming by 2100.5 Current have been safeguarding and stewarding these resources
Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) targets, if for millennia are facing greater threats than ever.
implemented, would still lead to around 2.4°C warming
by 2100. Even taking the net-zero pledges of many Water scarcity affects more than 40% of the world’s
countries into account, best-case scenarios given current population. An estimated 1.8 billion people depend
pledges would lead to around 1.8°C warming by 2100. on drinking water contaminated by human waste.
Unsustainable water management practices, including
Biodiversity targets (SDG 15 and targets agreed under the chemical discharges into water supply systems for
CBD) are also at grave risk. All dimensions of biodiversity, irrigation, affect the functioning of ecosystems services.
including species abundance, species diversity, and
the functioning of ecosystems, are under threat. It has Global resource consumption assessments for rare
been announced that the current loss of species rate earth elements are critical. Although reserves of these
is 1,000–10,000 times more than the natural extinction elements do not exist in concentrated clusters – which
rate. A combination of land-use change (e.g., dramatic make them inefficient for mining – certain countries
increases of tropical deforestation), global warming, and are quite dominant in this field, producing 98% of the
pollution are driving more and more species, including world’s supply. As demand for rare earth elements is
entire families and orders of species, towards mass increasing tremendously, their scarcity is becoming
extinction. At the same time, Indigenous peoples who more evident.
Ocean goods and services (SDG 14 and the High Seas

5. UNEP. 2022. Emissions Gap Report. Available at https://www.unep.org/
resources/emissions-gap-report-2022.
Treaty) are at severe risk due to full- to over-exploitation

Figure 1.2
Observed and projected gaps in SDG Index score between HICs and LICs (in percentage points)
Gap in 2015
Gap in 2022
Projected gap by 2030

(current trend)

(pre-pandemic trend)
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Note: Projected gap by 2030 is based on extrapolation of annual growth rate on the SDG Index over the period 2019-2021.
Pre-pandemic projected gap is based on an extrapolation of SDG Index annual growth rates over the period 2015-2019.
of nearly 90% of global fish stocks.6 The crises facing The 2021 UN Food Systems Summit raised many urgent
our oceans are unabated, multidimensional, and concerns around improving the sustainability, affordability,
complex. These crises include the destruction of and quality of food across the world (SDG 2). Overall, the
fisheries through over-fishing and the deployment of Food Systems Summit highlighted the need for an inte-
destructive technologies (such as ocean trawling); the grated and global approach to addressing food systems
destruction of coastal wetland ecosystems; the mass challenges, including food security, rural development, the
pollution of estuaries through fluxes of nitrogen and reduction of food waste, transparency along the value chain,
phosphorus (causing eutrophication) and other chemical sustainable diets, and the fight against climate change.
pollutants; acidification of the oceans (with an increase
of 30% over the last 50 years due to rising atmospheric Providing quality education (SDG 4) for all children is
concentrations of CO27); pollution of the high seas perhaps the single most important key to achieving
(including plastic waste and microplastics in marine sustainable development in the long term. The UN
food chains); the slowdown of ocean circulation due to General Assembly’s Transforming Education Summit
climate change; explosions of invasive marine species held in September 2022 was a critical meeting to spur
due to increased shipping facilities; and rising sea levels national and global efforts to transform education to
(including the growing possibility of a rapid, multi-metre give all people the skills and knowledge to end poverty,
sea-level rise caused by the disintegration of parts of the protect the environment, and build peaceful and inclusive
Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets). Inland fisheries are societies.8 And yet, the truth remains that hundreds of
also experiencing similar challenges. millions of children are either out of school entirely or
receiving such an under-funded and under-resourced
education that they are failing to achieve basic literacy
6. The World Bank. 2017. Atlas of Sustainable Development Goals. and numeracy even after several years of education.
https://datatopics.worldbank.org/sdgatlas/archive/2017/SDG-14-life-
below-water.html
7. Smithsonian Institution. 2018. Ocean Acidification. https://ocean. 8. UN Transforming Education Summit, 2022, https://www.un.org/en/
si.edu/ocean-life/invertebrates/ocean-acidification transforming-education-summit

Planetary boundaries and geophysical tipping points
Planetary boundaries and One of the most ominous aspects of this rampant, and still
geophysical tipping points uncontrolled, heedlessness is the likelihood of reaching
multiple dire tipping points in the Earth’s physical systems.
Humanity is eroding the biological and physical Scientists have identified a large number of extremely
resilience of Earth’s physical systems by transgressing dangerous potential tipping points, with linkages and
environmental limits that endanger their functioning: the dependencies across the different planetary boundaries.
“planetary boundaries” that regulate the Earth system. Tipping points are characterized by a non-linear response
The latest scientific assessments indicate that six of the to gradual human forcings. Human-induced global
nine planetary boundaries have been breached. The warming could hit several tipping points that may in turn
scientific evidence points to global risks well beyond lead to further feedbacks (amplifications) of the warming.
climate change, including the loss of biodiversity For example, as the Earth warms, sea ice melts, reducing
and ecological functions, changes in natural land the reflectance of solar radiation back into space and
use configuration, overuse of both green and blue accelerating the warming. Similarly, melting permafrost
water, overloading of nitrogen and phosphorus, and in the Tundra could release massive stores of CO2 and
widespread chemical pollution. methane, leading to rapid further warming. Another
Figure 1.3
Projected global warming under alternative policy scenarios9
GtCO2e
70 Estimated global
2010 policies scenario warming over the
twenty-first century
60
50 Current policies scenario:

2.8°C (66% chance)
Unconditional NDC scenario:
2.6°C (66% chance)
40
Conditional NDC scenario:
2.4°C (66% chance)
30
Area of figure 4.2

2°C pathway
20 Unconditional NDC scenario with net-zero
targets: 1.8°C (66% chance)
Indicative emissions gap to 2°C and 1.5°C Conditional NDC scenario with net-zero
pathways for the conditional NDC scenario targets: 1.8°C (66% chance)
10
Indicative emissions gap to 2°C and 1.5°C 1.5°C pathway
pathways for the unconditional NDC scenario
0
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Source: UNEP, Emissions Gap Report 2022

tipping point would be the collapse of the world’s We see across societies that inequalities are rising.
rainforests due to warming (and associated drying) in the Environmental crises weigh most heavily on the poorest
Amazon, Congo, and other tropical regions, which would and most marginalized individuals. At the same time,
release a massive new load of CO2 into the atmosphere. technological advances such as artificial intelligence and
Others include slowing or stopping the global ocean robotics have the potential to eliminate many working-
(thermohaline) circulation, and significant loss of coral class and professional jobs. The COVID-19 pandemic also
reefs.10 Each of these potential tipping points would lead severely depleted trust in governments. Many societies,
to global disaster on an unprecedented scale. and not only the poorest ones, are facing increased crises
of governance, marked by political and social instability,
The interconnected environmental, social, and health general strikes, and a further loss of public confidence in
challenges can be characterized as a planetary health government. Although all governments are in principle
crisis, caused by human activities such as industrialization, committed to economic justice as enshrined in the
urbanization, deforestation, and the burning of fossil Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to the SDG
fuels. The consequences of inaction in the face of this tenets of ‘leave no one behind’ and ‘reach the furthest
crisis are significant and far-reaching, affecting both the behind first’, too few are living up to these commitments,
natural systems that sustain life on Earth and the well- especially as powerful groups block adequate public
being of human societies. support for weaker groups.
In her 2022 report on the SDGs, E. Tendayi Achiume –

UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism,
Grave dangers of social tipping racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance
points – noted that racism and racial discrimination are key
barriers to sustainable development, and called attention
Unless the SDGs are actively pursued, geophysical tipping to the failure of some States to collect disaggregated data
points combined with technological disruptions could on race, ethnicity, indigeneity, and migration status in the
ignite disastrous social conflicts within and between context of the 2030 Agenda. She noted however that,
nations. We must therefore acknowledge the real risk of while disrupting the dynamic of racially discriminatory
negative “social tipping points” beyond which peaceful underdevelopment may require a greater transformation
governance and co-existence breaks down, as it did in than is possible at this moment, the SDGs held untapped
World War I and World War II. potential to advance both development and non-
discrimination. The report’s recommendations include
We firmly believe that international cooperation together calling for more racially-disaggregated SDG indicators
with the achievement of the SDGs is the best preventative and for dialogue with stakeholders on how to use these
to this dire and growing risk, and represent an opportunity indicators to better allocate resources and prioritize the
to create positive social tipping points: for example, inclusion of marginalized peoples.11
through equal access to high-quality education (SDG 4),
and by fighting all forms of inequalities, including income The geopolitical situation today is certainly the most
and wealth inequalities (SDG 10). conflictual in decades, perhaps since World War II. The
rise of China has led to great tension between it and the
11. Achiume, T. E. (2022). 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,

the Sustainable Development Goals and the fight against racial
9. UNEP. 2022. Emissions Gap Report. Available at https://www.unep.org/ discrimination. Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary
resources/emissions-gap-report-2022. forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
10. David I. Armstrong McKay, et al., Exceeding 1.5°C global warming intolerance. A/HRC/50/60 (13 June–8 July 2022), available from
could trigger multiple climate tipping points. Science 377, eabn7950 https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/thematic-reports/ahrc5060-
(2022). DOI:10.1126/science.abn7950 2030-agenda-sustainable-development-sustainable-development.

Investing in the SDGs
United States, and much of the world is trying to adjust Development practitioners have identified eight major
to the strains between these two major economies. kinds of capital assets:
The disastrous war in Ukraine has further destabilized
and divided the world’s nations. There are calls in many 1. Human capital: The skills and health of a productive
countries to increase military budgets, even as the SDGs citizenry, supported by universal health access
are woefully underfunded at home and internationally. and coverage, quality education, shared data and
New records on global military spending were reached in knowledge, promotion of a culture of peace and non-
2022, totaling US$2.2 trillion, even as the most basic social violence, global citizenship, and the appreciation of
services were under grave stress in many countries. cultural diversity.
2. Infrastructure: Energy production and distribution,
Economic tipping points could accompany or be land and sea transport, telecommunications, digital
triggered by environmental, social, governance, and information services, public buildings (e.g., schools and
geopolitical tipping points. Banking failures are a prime hospitals), and safe water and sanitation.
example of an economic tipping point: the national
economy deteriorates to the point where a financial crisis 3. Natural capital: The capacity and healthy functioning
is triggered, in turn pushing the economy into a massive of ecosystems, to be protected by ending human-
downturn. This was seen in the Great Depression of the induced climate change, protecting biodiversity,
1930s and the Great Recession of 2008. Similarly, extreme sustainably managing freshwater resources, and
poverty can lead to a collapse of tax revenues, followed by eliminating toxic pollutants.
government bankruptcy and further economic collapse, a 4. Innovation capital: The stock of intellectual property
syndrome that now threatens dozens of poor countries. and data resulting from public and private research and
development, creative cultural works, and responsibly
governed and managed emerging technologies.
Investing in the SDGs
5. Business capital: Goods and services of true social
value derived from utilizing the machinery, buildings,
Despite this ominous news, the SDGs are still achievable.
information resources, and other capital assets that
None of their objectives are beyond our reach.12 Yes,
underpin business productivity.
the world is off-track, but that is all the more reason to
double-down on the goals, rather than surrendering to 6. Social capital: Social trust and pro-social values, good
human-made shortfalls in achieving them. Our future governance and justice, freedom of speech and the
remains in our hands. press, trusted scientific capabilities, and international
cooperation.
At their core, the SDGs are an investment agenda. In the
7. Urban capital: Spatial human settlements, notably
most basic terms, the world must devote an increased
in urban areas, that drive and support productive and
portion of current output to building up sustainable
creative interactions across the other seven capital
capital assets for the future, and must deploy such assets
assets.
effectively. Sustainable capital assets are long-lasting
capital resources that can enable the world to meet the 8. Cultural capital: Appreciation of the diversity of
agreed goals of economic well-being, social justice, and cultures, value systems, languages, the traditional
environmental sustainability. The world must both shift knowledge systems of Indigenous peoples, and artistic
its current investment patterns and increase the overall expressions.
investment flow in order to build the future we want.
These capital assets are complementary; that is, they
work together in a mutually-supportive manner. A
12. Sachs JD, Schmidt-Traub G, Lafortune G., 2020. Speaking truth to
power about the SDGs, Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/ business cannot be productive if its workers lack skills
d41586-020-02373-7 and health, or if there is no electricity, piped water,

transport, or digital access. A society cannot function recommendations: rebuilding trust in multilateralism,
peacefully if there is a breakdown of social capital. safeguarding our planet and its people, scaling up and
A city cannot function without water. Challenges improving the efficacy of global finance, improving data
such as decarbonization cannot be met with existing systems and their governance, and promoting peace.13
technologies alone, and so depend on continued
innovation and scientific research, especially in countries
where investment is low. There is no hope of achieving
global food security for more than eight billion people Failures (and some successes) of
unless Earth’s natural capital is protected. And there is national SDG governance
no hope for global peace unless there is respect for, and
investment in, cultural capital and cultural diversity. The most important level of decision-making remains the
nation-state. Nation-states hold the primary responsibility
To achieve the SDGs, the world must invest boldly, for achieving the SDGs. They are members of the United
amply, and consistently in all eight kinds of capital. Nations and the signatories of United Nations treaties.
These investments must involve both governments They hold juridical responsibility for implementing
and corporations. For example, while business capital is treaty agreements and the rest of the United Nations
mainly the purview of the private sector, human capital architecture, including the United Nations Charter, the
is mainly the purview of the public sector. Governments Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the SDGs.
too must take the lead in protecting natural capital, National governments must ensure both the domestic
while civil society especially must promote social and implementation of the SDGs, including the reduction of
cultural capital, including mutual understanding across negative spillovers, and international implementation by
cultures and nations. Infrastructure capital and innovation building a global governance and financial architecture
capital tend to be financed roughly equally by the public that delivers the SDGs. Crucially, national government
and private sectors. For example, governments tend must also work with subnational governments to
to finance power transmission grids, while the private implement the SDG agenda at the local level, including
sector tends to finance power generation. Governments sustainable urban infrastructure, delivery of social services,
generally finance basic scientific research, while and ensuring safe communities.
businesses focus on applied R&D.
Virtually all governments of the world have embraced
Parallel to investing in the SDGs, the world needs to the SDGs in principle. 188 of 193 UN Member States have
stop investing in activities that threaten planetary submitted VNRs for comment by the other nations. Only
boundaries, destroy human and natural capital, and harm five countries, notably the United States, Haiti, Myanmar,
social cohesion. Curtailing the extraction and use of South Sudan, and Yemen, have never presented VNRs.
fossil fuels is of paramount importance. To curb harmful Four of these countries are wracked by violence and
investments, regulatory measures, including fair and poverty. The case of the United States stands as a glaring
sustainable taxation and the dismantling of unsustainable exception.
subsidies, need to be an integral element of the SDG
investment agenda. The Nordic countries and European Union have shown
considerable support for the SDGs. So too have many
In 2022, the United Nations Secretary-General appointed developing countries in the G20. However, many
a High-Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism, governments of developing countries have made
with a mandate to develop a list of concrete, actionable
recommendations to improve international cooperation
and advance the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable 13. High-Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism (HLAB),
2022. A Breakthrough for People and Planet: Effective and Inclusive
Development. The Board’s 2023 report lists six areas for Global Governance for Today and the Future, https://www.
action that are directly aligned with the SDGs and SDSN’s highleveladvisoryboard.org/breakthrough

Failures (and some successes) of national SDG governance
only low to moderate SDG commitments, although the European Green Deal (EGD), which is exemplary in
of course these countries have also not received the many regards. Many EU member states demonstrate a
financing needed to support the Goals.14 In many cases, high or moderate SDG commitment. The EGD embraces
national SDG strategies remain disconnected from core an EU-wide set of goals, timelines to 2050, and financing
government policies and priorities. These are some of the strategies across major dimensions of the SDGs: energy
findings of SDSN’s annual (2023) survey on government decarbonization, climate resilience, circular economy (to
efforts and commitments for the SDGs, which is cut pollution), sustainable agriculture (the “farm-to-fork”
conducted in close cooperation with our global network strategy), digital access, and innovation. EU-wide financial
of experts and practitioners. Of 74 governments analyzed, resources, notably the EU Recovery and Resilience Facility,
we see large differences in terms of government efforts were mobilized to support the EGD. The European
and commitments (see Part 3). Regional Development Fund, which provides the EU
cohesion funds, is also directed towards the EGD. The
The greatest responsibility for achieving the SDGs and Horizon Europe program and EU Missions in Horizon
safeguarding the planetary boundaries lies with the G20 Europe catalyze the EU’s efforts to stimulate innovation
members. These countries represent more than 80% of and identify concrete solutions for the EGD. However,
global GDP, around 70% of the world’s forests, more than the EGD and EU policies at large lack a comprehensive
60% of the earth’s population, and more than 50% of its alignment to the SDGs, politically agreed targets for many
landmass. The G20 countries account for 90% of global SDG indicators, and clarity on how to achieve the SDGs.
lignite and coal extraction and more than 60% of global
oil and gas production. The EU has also highlighted the strategic role of the
private sector in achieving the SDGs, by implementing a
The United States, as the world’s biggest economy in new directive asking companies to publish sustainability
terms of GDP at market prices and its biggest oil and reports and, in particular in the food sector, by promoting
gas producer, has a responsibility both to itself and the “Code of Conduct on Responsible Food Business and
to the rest of the world to immediately embark on an Marketing Practices”, a tool for setting out the actions that
ambitious transformation towards the SDGs, as well as agri-food companies can voluntarily commit to in order
towards other global climate and biodiversity goals. With to tangibly improve and communicate their sustainability
the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, the Biden government performance. SDSN’s Europe SDR emphasizes the
announced its intention to reduce carbon emissions by importance of living up to the ambitions of the EGD
roughly 40 percent from 2005 levels by 2030, although and the SDGs, both inside the EU as well as in the EU’s
there are growing concerns that outcomes will lag behind foreign actions, despite the multiple crises faced.15 In
these goals, due in part to the legislation’s lack of an July 2023, the EU is set to present its first Union-wide
agreed national financing strategy other than tax credits. voluntary review at the United Nations. This presents a
This and other policy measures fall short, however, of the good opportunity for the EU to send a strong message
scope and ambition of the SDGs. Overall, the United States to the international community, and to demonstrate its
has so far shown very little commitment to the SDGs. We commitment to and leadership on the SDGs.
call on the United States to formulate an SDG action plan
and to present a VNR to the High-Level Political Forum. China, as the world’s largest economy in purchasing-
power-adjusted terms and its biggest coal producer,
The European Union – the world’s second-largest intends to implement the SDGs by integrating them
economy and its major lignite producer – has produced into its medium and long-term national development
strategies, such as its five-year plans. China has already
presented two VNRs to the HLPF (2016 and 2021). The
14. Lafortune, G., Fuller, G., Bermont Diaz, L., Kloke-Lesch, A., Koundouri,
P., Riccaboni, A. (2022). Achieving the SDGs: Europe’s Compass in a
Multipolar World. Europe Sustainable Development Report 2022. SDSN
and SDSN Europe. France: Paris. https://eu-dashboards.sdgindex.org 15. ibid.

14th five-year plan referred to the 2030 Agenda mainly Failures of global governance
in the context of international cooperation. Recently,
China has reiterated its support for the SDGs, such as in Achieving the SDGs will require a transformative global
greening its Belt and Road Initiative and launching the approach. Yet current methods and mechanisms for
Global Development Initiative as a worldwide effort. A key implementing the Agenda largely reflect pre-2015 world
measure for China will be the explicit integration of the realities and are far from meeting the universality and
SDGs’ domestic and international implementation into the transformative ambition of the SDGs. Four basic failures
15th five-year plan (2026–2030). stand out: First, implementation is largely left to the
national level and on a voluntary basis, without effective
Some other G20 countries have shown weak multilateral enforcement mechanisms in place. Second,
commitments to the SDGs in recent years. Many of the developed countries are not being held to account,
poor performers, such as Brazil, recently elected new neither for their adverse spillovers, nor for ensuring
governments that have staked out a far more ambitious adequate flows of financing for sustainable development.
position vis-à-vis the SDGs. We urge all G20 governments Third, the rules governing trade and international
to show the leadership required of them. finance are not geared towards the SDGs. For example,
globalized trade rules for ‘cleantech’ could accelerate
Most of the low-income and lower-middle income the energy transition and offer protections to workers,
countries, home to more than the half of humanity, face however such rules have not been negotiated or agreed
major challenges in achieving most of the SDGs by 2030. upon. Unifying international business ecosystems could
Many of them lack an adequately high SDG commitment, similarly improve industrial supply chains, particularly
and almost all lack access to the necessary financial means by leveraging artificial intelligence. And fourth, national
to implement the SDGs. governments typically lack ‘vertical’ coordination with
subnational governments for SDG implementation.
At the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda, all countries, poorer
and richer alike, should use the half-way momentum to Both the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Climate Agreement
self-critically review and revise their national strategies, established mechanisms to encourage and monitor
using the principles of the 2030 Agenda (transformative, their implementation by nation-states. However,
integrated, inclusive, leaving no one behind) as a yardstick. experience so far with VNRs and Nationally Determined
Across the globe, we need to leave the comfort zones of Contributions (NDCs), respectively, demonstrate that
political leaders and question the obstacles of outmoded these mechanisms – despite some progress – have not
ideologies, habits, and weak governance. We also need delivered the effort necessary to achieve global goals.
responsible business leadership leaving their comfort Even the progress on consistent national reporting on
zone to establish SDG-compatible business models and SDG indicators is inadequate. There are no assessments
appropriate business governance.16 or recommendations by the respective secretariats or
decision-making bodies on the adequacy or further
enhancement of national implementation, let alone
measures of enforcement. This is especially important
16. Leisinger, Klaus M. Integrity in Business and for those SDGs where national (non-)compliance has
Society, CRT publications, Minneapolis, United States, December 2021.
significant externalities for the global community and
avoiding threats to the planetary boundaries. There are
lessons to be learned from international agreements
in other fields like trade, human rights, or international
peace and security; these can be translated and refined
to support sustainable development.

Failures of the global financial architecture
Failures of the global financial 5. Private capital markets continue to direct large flows
of private saving to unsustainable technologies and
architecture practices, delaying decarbonization of the world’s
The “global financial architecture” (GFA) refers to the energy system and underpinning destruction of the
complex system of public and private finance that world’s ecosystems.
channels the world’s saving to the world’s investment. The 6. International cooperation is trapped by bureaucratic
GFA includes multilateral institutions (for example, IMF and institutional frameworks that reduce the speed,
World Bank), national and local budgets, public borrowing efficacy, and efficiency of funding to meet the SDGs,
and debts, and private equity and debt financing. Financial and that fail to provide the framework for large-scale
institutions that intermediate savings and investment play SDG financing.
a key role, including national and multilateral development
banks (publicly owned banks that borrow from capital It is widely recognized that the world needs to overhaul
markets to on-lend funds to public and private entities), the GFA. Such an overhaul should address the failures
sovereign wealth funds, private-sector banks, insurance above and aim to achieve six objectives:
funds, pension funds, asset management funds, venture
capital, credit rating agencies, and others. 1. Greatly increase funding to national and subnational
governments and private businesses in the emerging
The global financial architecture falls short in the following economies, especially the LICs and LMICs, to carry out
six ways: the needed investments.
2. Revise the credit rating system and debt sustainability
1. Deep, chronic, and crippling under-investment in
metrics to facilitate long-term sustainable
virtually all low-income countries (LICs) and lower-
development.
middle-income countries (LMICs). In 2022, Investment
per person in the LICs averaged a meagre US$175 per 3. Revise liquidity structures for LICs,LMICs, and SIDS,
person, compared with US$11,535 per person in the especially regarding sovereign debts, to forestall self-
HICs. (Table 1.1). In fact, investment as a share of GDP fulfilling banking and balance-of-payments crises.
was lower in the LICs (20.9%) than in all other income 4. Create ambitious and internationally-agreed upon
categories. The poor are consequently languishing in criteria for sustainable finance that are mandatory for
poverty. all public financial institutions in HICs, MICs, and LICs
2. Most LICs and LMICs (and many small-island alike.
developing states [SIDS], including those that are 5. Align private business investment flows in all countries
UMICs) lack the credit ratings to borrow on acceptable with the SDGs, through improved national planning,
terms (Table 1.2) regulation, reporting, and oversight.
3. LICs, LMICs, and SIDS are highly vulnerable to self- 6. Reform current institutional frameworks and develop
fulfilling liquidity crises and balance of payments new, innovative mechanisms to improve the quality
crises, making it nearly impossible for these countries and speed of deployment of international cooperation,
to implement a long-term sustainable investment and monitor progress in an open and timely manner.
strategy.
4. HICs are able to mobilize vast financial resources
very quickly, as seen during the 2008 financial crisis,
the pandemic, and the war in Ukraine. Yet they are
not prepared to mobilize such resources for global
sustainable development, despite the urgency and
previous promises regarding development assistance
and climate financing.

Table 1.1
Global Population, Investment, and GDP by World
Bank Income Category (% of World Total)
Population Investment GDP
LIC 8.0% 0.4% 0.5%
LMIC 43.2% 11.9% 10.7%
UMIC 32.7% 37.4% 28.5%
HIC 16.1% 50.3% 60.3%
Source: IMF World Economic Outlook, October 2022
Table 1.2
Credit Ratings by Income Category
Countries with Countries with an Population with

Number of UN Countries with a
an investment- investment-grade an investment-
Member States Moody’s rating
grade rating rating, % grade rating, %
LIC 28 9 0 0.0% 0.0%
LMIC 54 36 3 5.6% 52.8%
UMIC 52 40 10 19.2% 70.2%
HIC 59 52 45 76.3% 98.3%
WORLD 193 137 58 30.1% 60.5%
Source: Moody’s and World Bank (2023)
SDSN’s strategy to achieve the SDGs locally, at the provincial and city level, including through
city networks. The GFA also requires alignment of the
Overhauling global governance mechanisms and the private sector with the SDGs, brought about through
global financial architecture is fundamental to unlocking regulation, incentives (such as tax incentives or carbon
needed investments for sustainable development and pricing), and management practices.
ending non-sustainable practices. The GFA includes
not only strictly financial mechanisms, but also public The SDG policy agenda is complex. The SDGs call for
policies regarding budgets and regulation. Moreover, lasting, long-term, directed change. For governments
public policies must be pursued at all levels: globally to combine the objectives of economic development,
through treaties such as the UNFCCC; regionally, such social inclusion, transparency, energy decarbonization,
as through the European Union, the African Union, climate adaptation, water resources and sanitation,
and Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN); biodiversity conservation, digital access, gender
nationally, through national plans and budgets; and equality, circular economy, over-harvesting, universal

SDSN’s strategy to achieve the SDGs
health access and coverage, and universal (pre- Long-term investment plans are essential for national
primary, primary, and secondary) high-quality public success in meeting the SDGs. SDSN has recommended
education, is daunting. These challenges are far more six inter-related long-term transformations:20
complex than the typical aims of government. They
are long-term, technology-based, and capital intensive, 1. Universal quality education and innovation-based
replete with technological and political uncertainties, economy
inherently a blend of public and private actions, and in 2. Universal health access and coverage
need of coordinated investments and planning with
neighboring countries. 3. Zero-carbon energy systems
4. Sustainable ecosystems, sustainable agriculture,
SDSN puts a great emphasis on long-term national and climate resilience
planning, to coordinate public investments, regulations,
5. Sustainable cities
and incentive structures over a time horizon of 20-30
years. Our special emphasis is on pathway analysis to 6. Transformation to universal digital access and
help governments and business design long-term services
investment plans. For that reason, the SDSN first
pioneered the concept of “Deep Decarbonization Each of these challenges will require large-scale
Pathways” in the lead-up to the Paris Agreement, to public and private investments to mid-century,
show governments how they could plan their energy technological transformation, and a sound financing
investments during the time period 2015-2050. The strategy. None can be solved by the private sector
SDSN’s initiative contributed to the concept of Long- alone; indeed, governments will have to take the
term Low-Emission Development Strategies (LEDS) built lead to design policy and financial frameworks within
into the Paris Agreement (Article 4.19). All countries are which business can profitably invest and innovate.
to prepare and submit long-term LEDS for submission The Sustainable Development Report 2023 identifies
to the UNFCCC. SDSN also launched the Global Climate five levers to be deployed to bring about the
Hub to continue this work.17 SDSN is also leading necessary transformations: governance, economy and
global efforts, in cooperation with the Food and Land finance, individual and collective action, science and
Use (FOLU) Coalition and other partners, to define technology, and capacity building. The development
long-term sustainable food and land-use pathways of financing strategies could be supported by using
via the Food, Agriculture, Biodiversity, Land-Use, and the methodology of integrated national financing
Energy (FABLE) Consortium.18 SDSN has joined the frameworks, whichare already being developed in
Group on Earth Observations (GEO)19 as a Participating more than 80 countries globally.
Organization, supporting the efforts of this voluntary
intergovernmental community to focus national, Planning for the long term, however, illuminates
international, and private sector investments in Earth the global financial architecture’s Achilles heel.
observations on urgent SDG needs. While the high-income countries (HICs) and upper-
middle income countries (UMICs) can and should,
in principle, finance these transformations via
a combination of budget outlays, public-sector
borrowing, and private financing (equity and debt),
17. SDSN Global Climate Hub. Website. Accessed May 16, 2023. https:// this is surely not true of the low-Income countries
unsdsn.globalclimatehub.org. (LICs) and the lower middle-income countries
18. Mosnier, A., Schmidt-Traub, G., Obersteiner, M. et al. How can diverse
national food and land-use priorities be reconciled with global
sustainability targets? Lessons from the FABLE initiative. Sustain Sci 18, 20. Sachs, J.D., Schmidt-Traub, G., Mazzucato, M. et al. Six Transformations
335–345 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01227-7 to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Nat Sustain 2, 805–814
19. Earth Observations. Available at: https://earthobservations.org (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0352-9

(LMICs). Careful research by the SDSN and the The urgent need for an SDG Stimulus
International Monetary Fund has revealed the very
large financing gap facing nations in the poorer half In his opening address to the UN General Assembly
of the world.21 on September 20, 2022, UN Secretary-General António
Guterres called on the G20 to launch an “SDG Stimulus”
According to IMF estimates in 2019, the financing gap to offset the deteriorating market conditions faced
facing 57 low-income developing countries (LICs and by developing countries and to accelerate progress
LMICs that are eligible for IMF concessional financing) towards the SDGs and the Paris Climate Agreement.23
to cover very basic investments in health, education, SDSN provided the Secretariat of a High-Level Informal
power, roads, and water and sanitation was in the order Working Group for the SDG Stimulus (HLIWG),24 that
of US$300 billion to US$500 billion per year.22 Even the made the case for an SDG Stimulus of an additional
most basic economic needs are currently out of reach US$500 billion per year by 2025 of SDG finance. The SDG
for roughly half the world. And these IMF estimates Stimulus plan recommended by the High-Level Working
do not yet begin to include the full costs of energy Group and introduced by SG Guterres last February25 has
decarbonization, climate adaptation, losses and damages five main components:
from climate-related disasters, digital access, or urban
infrastructure. Adding in these extra needs, the global SDG 1. Increased funding from the Multilateral Development
financing gap is perhaps US$1 trillion per year, or roughly Banks (MDBs) and Public Development Banks (PDBs)
1% of gross world product (GWP) at market prices. As a to developing countries, linked to investments in the
rough rule of thumb based on work by SDSN and the IMF, SDGs, a need echoed in the 2023 report of the High-
the LICs need roughly 20% of their GDP in increased SDG Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism26
investment outlays while the LMICs need roughly 10%, 2. Enhancement of the Debt Service Suspension Initiative
though precise amounts vary by country. (DSSI) and debt relief for countries facing debt distress
To make sure that existing financial resources and the 3. Expansion of liquidity by the International Monetary
required additional resources are used for sustainable Fund (IMF) and major central banks
investments, international finance institutions must 4. Empowerment and expansion of the specialized global
fully incorporate achieving the SDGs and safeguarding funds
the planetary boundaries into their core mandates, and
5. Expansion of private philanthropy, with focus on ultra-
monitor these regarding all countries, poorer and richer
high net worth individuals
alike. Global infrastructure programs like China’s Belt and
Road, the EU’s Global Gateway, or the United States’ Build
Back Better World initiatives must be much better aligned 23. Guterres, A. The Secretary-General: Address to the General Assembly.
with the SDGs and coordinated with each other. New York, 20 September 2022. https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/
speeches/2022-09-20/secretary-generals-address-the-general-assembly
24. The High-Level Informal Working Group is co-convened by Ms. Amina
Mohammed, Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations and
Professor Jeffrey Sachs, University Professor, Columbia University.
Members: Dr. Amar Bhattacharya, Brookings; Mr. Navid Hanif, UN
DESA; Dr. Homi Kharas, Brookings; Dr. Mahmoud Mohieldin, United
Nations; Mr. Remy Rioux, AFD; Dr. Rajiv Shah, Rockefeller; Mr. Achim
Steiner, UNDP.
25. United Nations Secretary-General. 2023. SDG Stimulus To Deliver
21. Gaspar, Vitor et al. 2019. Fiscal Policy and Development: Human, Agenda 2030. https:/www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/wp-
Social, and Physical Investment for the SDGs. IMF Staff Discussion content/uploads/2023/02/SDG-Stimulus-to-Deliver-Agenda-2030.pdf
Note. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Staff-Discussion-Notes/ 26. High-Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism (HLAB),
Issues/2019/01/18/Fiscal-Policy-and-Development-Human-Socialand- 2022. A Breakthrough for People and Planet: Effective and Inclusive
Physical-Investments-for-the-SDGs-46444 Global Governance for Today and the Future, https://www.
22. ibid. highleveladvisoryboard.org/breakthrough

Regional cooperation and sustainable development
The urgent objective of the SDG Stimulus is to address – 3. The IMF should build its national reviews
in practical terms and at scale – the chronic shortfall of (Article IV), debt sustainability framework (DSF),
international SDG financing facing the LICs and LMICs, and country programming around the public
and to ramp up financing flows by at least US$500 billion policies and financing needed for national success
by 2025. The most important component of the stimulus in achieving the SDGs.
plan is a massive expansion of loans by the multilateral 4. The G20 should organize its financial
development banks, backed by new rounds of paid-in cooperation, reporting, and metrics around
capital by HIC members. Working together with the IMF the reform of the GFA, as needed to achieve
and the MDBs, the emerging countries also need to the SDGs.
strengthen their debt management and creditworthiness
5. All UN Member States should present VNRs
by integrating their borrowing policies with tax policies,
at least once every three years. It is especially
export policies, and liquidity management, all to prevent
urgent that the five countries that have not
future liquidity crises. The G20 Bali Leaders’ Declaration
yet presented VNRs should do so no later
noted another important point, which is the need to
than 2024.
expand and enhance innovative financing mechanisms,
including blended finance, as well as improving 6. United Nations agencies, multilateral
transparency and mutual accountability. organizations, and Member States need to
increase investment in, and coordination
It is also vital to share fairly and globally the burden of of, national and international data and
financing for human-induced adaptation and losses and statistical systems and scientific capacity to
damages (L&D) among responsible countries, and to assess SDG progress and support sustainable
respond to the needs of vulnerable countries and small development decision making and
island developing states (SIDS).27 investment, including disaggregated data by
region, social stratification, and other criteria
as helpful.
Enhanced global governance for

the SDGs
Regional cooperation and
The SDGs are not yet properly incorporated into sustainable development
global governance. Systems coherence, and ultimate
success in meeting the SDGs, leads us to the following One of the consistent findings of the SDSN is that SDG
recommendations: success requires strong cooperation at the regional level.
Neighboring countries share ecosystems (rivers, forests,
1. All United Nations agencies should put the SDGs fishing zones, wetlands) and must cooperate to protect
at the centerpiece of their strategies, programs, them. Strong regional partnerships are needed to
and reporting. achieve regional objectives. The great seas, such as the
2. The World Bank and the other MDBs should Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea, are under severe
put the SDGs at the center of their financing threat from chemical and plastics pollution, and must be
strategies, performance reviews, and reporting. protected by all countries whose rivers feed these seas.
Moreover, regional cooperation is needed to promote
technological and social innovations. For example, the
27. Sachs et al. 2021. The Decade of Action and Small Island Developing Mediterranean region is a hot spot for climate change,
States: Measuring and addressing SIDS’ vulnerabilities to accelerate threatened also by urbanization, economic pressures,
SDG progress. https://irp.cdn-website.com/be6d1d56/files/uploaded/
WP_MVI_Sachs%20Massa%20Marinescu%20Lafortune_FINAL_ and geo-political crises. Nonetheless, it is recognized
cVeeBVmKSKyYYS6OyiiH.pdf as the birthplace of the “Mediterranean diet,” with an

agri-food sector with the potential to meet the increased The sub-national level
demand for healthy, sustainable foods in the future.
Provincial, metropolitan, and city governments are
Transport, zero-carbon power, and digital (fiberoptic) typically at the front line in achieving the SDGs. Nearly
backbones depend on regional-scale grids. For all of 60 percent of the world population now lives in urban
these reasons and more, neighboring countries must areas, and that proportion is likely to rise to at least
cooperate deeply to build infrastructure and share 70 percent, and probably higher, by mid-century.
data and knowledge, and to implement sustainable Moreover, cities constitute at least 85 percent of total
development policies. Regional international policies world output and energy use. What happens in cities will
and agreements should be based on available determine the future of the world, and the success or
scientific knowledge. failure in sustainable development.
SDSN calls for, and is actively supporting, the devel- Local governments have the front-line responsibility
opment of similar regional-based sustainability plans for implementing universal health systems, places in
with associated financing. SDSN is closely following school for all children, safe water and sanitation, public
and supporting the EU’s endeavors to achieve the transport services, adequate housing, and physical safety
SDGs, inter alia by the EU’s European Green Deal. The in the local environment (from crime, toxic wastes, and
EU Green Deal has great potential to bring about natural hazards). This is why mayors and city councils
transformation both within the EU and beyond, around the world have rallied to the SDGs, even if their
including the larger European and Mediterranean local leadership is sometimes under-appreciated and
region, and even Africa. SDSN is working with the under-noted because national governments tend to
ASEAN Secretariat and member states to help develop hold the limelight at the United Nations, with the MDBs,
the ASEAN Green Deal, introduced in 2022 under the and in the media.
ASEAN Presidency of Cambodia. SDSN is supporting
the African Development Bank to develop a strategic Cities face one other chronic problem. While they are
plan to accelerate Africa’s sustainable development, largely responsible for service delivery, it is national
with the aim of the African Union achieving high-in- governments that, by and large, collect revenue to fund
come status and sustainable development by 2063, public investments and social services. Cities are therefore
the 100th anniversary of the Organization of African caught between front-line responsibility and back-of-the-
Unity. SDSN is working with the Amazon Basin line access to the necessary public financing.
nations, through the Scientific Panel of the Amazon,
to develop a regional strategy for the conserva- SDSN recognizes this gap in the practical means of
tion and sustainable development of the Amazon. implementation of city governments, and is currently
In that capacity, the SDSN is also supporting new working with the major urban think tanks and global
partnerships between the rainforest countries of the urban networks (including the C40 and ICLEI) to address
Amazon Basin, the Congo Basin, and Southeast Asia the challenge of sub-national financing of the SDGs.
for a global financing mechanism to protect all three This initiative will be launched in Paris in during the June
tropical rainforest regions. Protection and sustainable Summit for a New Global Financial Pact.
management of rainforest ecosystems through related
standardization will support their impact assessment
on a global basis.

The continuing efforts of the SDSN
Global peace as the prerequisite for The continuing efforts of the SDSN
sustainable development
The SDSN was created in 2012, soon after the Rio+20
SDG 16 recognizes the vital role of peaceful and inclusive Summit which mobilized the world’s universities, think
societies, and SDG 17 underscores the need for global tanks, and national laboratories on behalf of the SDGs.
outreach and cooperation to achieve the Goals. Peace and SDSN’s mission was fourfold: scholarly research, educa-
global cooperation must not become mere slogans. They tional innovation, and partnerships, convening power, and
are ever more vital to human survival in an age when both outreach to the public. We are proud of our efforts since
nuclear weapons and environmental devastation threaten 2012 in these four areas.
the very survival of humanity. We recall in this context the
powerful truth spoken by United States President John F. The SDSN is now a global network of more than 1,900
Kennedy more than 60 years ago, when he declared, “The member organizations, mainly universities, organized in
world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal 53 national and regional chapters. The SDSN convenes
hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty global university leadership on behalf of shared activities
and all forms of human life.” Peace and global cooperation to support sustainable development. In 2022, hundreds
mean nothing less and nothing more than choosing the of university presidents brainstormed and shared best
end of human poverty over the end of human life. practices in aligning their institutions with the SDGs. SDSN
membership continues to grow rapidly, and new national
We take note of the dire warning of the Bulletin of Atomic Sci- and regional chapters are regularly launched.
entists, which recently moved the hands of its Doomsday Clock
to just 90 seconds from midnight, the closest to Armageddon We aim to ensure that institutions of higher learning
in the Clock’s 76-year history; “largely (though not exclusively) and public policy research centres in all 193 UN Member
because of the mounting dangers of the war in Ukraine.”We States are actively part of the SDSN. The SDSN’s flagship
commend global leaders who “oppose the use of or the threat educational initiative, the SDG Academy, directly reaches
to use nuclear weapons”28 and urge all sides to follow this call. hundreds of thousands of learners each year, with an
expanding provision of free, world-class educational offer-
Had the negotiations underway in March 2022 between ings. In 2023, the SDSN is working with universities around
Russia and Ukraine been successfully concluded, count- the world to launch further low-cost master’s degrees
less lives would have been saved and the devastation of in sustainable development, in an effort to dramatically
Ukraine’s cities would have been spared. The world would increase the number of students reached each year.
have escaped the current tumult of soaring food and
energy prices and other financial dislocations. We would SDSN is working closely with the UNESCO SDG 4 High-
not be even closer to nuclear Armageddon. Level Steering Committee on these two major issues, via
Mission 4.7 through an SDG Academy Partnership with
International relations scholars have powerfully described the Open Education Resources Recommendation team at
the “tragedy” of great power conflict. They warn that the UNESCO.29 The International Commission on the Futures of
jostling for power – or hegemonic domination – ends in Education recognizes that open education resources are
tragic wars. We cannot afford such a tragedy in our world essential for supporting students, educators, and young
today. The world is indeed very different now, as we live professionals on their education for sustainable develop-
under the threat of nuclear war, and even nuclear anni- ment (ESD) journeys.30 The UNESCO Recommendation on
hilation. We need not only technological know-how, but open education resources was endorsed by all Member
also diplomatic know-how, to respect global diversity and States in November 2019. In September 2022, at the
to settle international disputes peacefully.
29. Mission 4.7. Available from: https://www.mission4point7.org
28. Xinhua. 2022. Xi meets German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. https://english. 30. UNESCO, Futures of Education, International Commission. Available from:
news.cn/20221104/f544bca38c33443186d3de8b3d0a9a27/c.html https://en.unesco.org/futuresofeducation/international-commission

Transforming Education Summit in New York, the United Sustainable development to 2030
Nations Secretary-General announced a number of global and 2050
initiatives. One of them is the International Financing
Facility for Education.31 Another is the Gateways to Public The tasks of sustainable development – ensuring
Digital Learning project32 to ensure equitable access to material human well-being and security, social
and resources for digital learning. inclusion and justice, environmental sustainability, and
global cooperation to secure peace and sustainable
The SDG Academy33 is also building partnerships around development – are not just tasks to 2030. They are the
professional training to upskill employees and make preeminent tasks of the coming generations, enshrined
them future-ready for implementing the SDGs and Paris in several documents including the 2030 Agenda (2015)
Agreement. Ideally, at every stage of life, individuals and UNESCO’s Declaration on the Responsibilities of the
should understand how they coexist in harmony with Present Generations Towards Future Generations (1997).
people and the planet. We may not wish to harm people, They are the work of the 21st century.
or our common home, but all of us must “go back to
school” and learn how to create positive linkages to We conclude by underscoring the vital, life-affirming
people and nature in everyday activities, at home and at importance of four key international agreements: the
work. SDSN will endeavor to support professional training Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris Climate
and lifelong learning across all sectors. Agreement, the Kunming-Montreal Framework for
Biodiversity, and the High Seas Treaty. These are signal
Another key dimension of the SDSN’s work is supporting achievements of humanity, to have come together across
governments, at all levels, to understand the implications all nations to adopt a common set of challenges. As we
of policy choices and to make evidence-based and have emphasized in this statement, our major challenge
forward-looking decisions. SDSN engages in a wide range today is matching these soaring ambitions with the
of intergovernmental processes, including the G20, G7, means to achieve them, most importantly, the financial
UNFCCC, CBD meetings, and World Health Assembly. resources and regulatory conditions for the investments
These fora are critical to encourage international needed to achieve these goals.
collaboration, promote peace, and implement the
recommendations contained within this document, in At the mid-point of the SDG agenda, we are far
particular on SDG finance. SDSN remains at the disposal of off target. Yet we have gained ground. Almost all
all stakeholders to analyze pathways and scenarios, and to governments have committed to adopting SDG-
leverage knowledge to make sound decisions. based action plans; technologies have advanced that
can support the goals (such as green energy, green
All UN Member States and United Nations agencies can transactions, green jobs, Earth observations, and
count on the continued efforts and energies of the SDSN artificial intelligence); and there is growing regional
around the world to support all governments, businesses, cooperation to achieve the goals on the ground,
and civil society to embrace and align with the SDGs on through shared investments, knowledge, and policies.
sustainable development.
Achieving the SDGs requires more than “normal politics”.
Governments are only now learning how to design
31. Guterres, A. Secretary-General’s remarks to the Press on the International integrated strategies that address economic, social,
Finance Facility for Education [as delivered], 17 September 2022.
https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/press-encounter/2022-09-17/ and environmental objectives in tandem. Governments
secretary-generals-remarks-the-press-the-international-finance- are only now mapping out pathways to mid-century
facility-for-education-delivered to meet crucial energy, healthcare, and education
32. United Nations, Gateways to Public Digital Learning, 19 September objectives, among others. Governments are only now
2022. https://www.un.org/en/transforming-education-summit/
gateways-public-digital-learning
establishing R&D funds to promote breakthroughs
33. SDG Academy. Available from: https://sdgacademy.org
in key technologies that will expand their power and

Sustainable development to 2030 and 2050
reduce their costs. Governments are only now building

the digital platforms and data networks that integrated
strategies will depend on. And governments are only
now, many years late, turning their attention to the
chronic and deep shortcomings of the GFA.
Sustainable human development is a multi-dimensional

process. The balance between the ecological, economic,
social, and cultural spheres, together with political,
ethical, and cultural aspects, must be nurtured. Open
sharing of data and knowledge across these dimensions
is essential to building trust and cooperation. People
of good will must choose and act coherently in their
private and in their professional lives to further the
common good.
For these reasons, we end our message with two

urgent and timely calls for action:
First, that UN Member States, at the 2023 SDG Summit

and the 2024 Summit of the Future, recommit boldly,
strongly, and proactively to the SDGs, accelerate progress
to 2030, and adopt even more ambitious SDG targets
and objectives to mid-century, also incorporating recent
international agreements on oceans and biodiversity.
As the aims of the 2030 Agenda are ever-evolving, and
linked to many processes, we call on academia, civil
society, and business to develop proposals on how this
agenda can be enhanced and enforced in the decade(s)
to come.
Second, UN Member States, starting with the G20

meeting this September in India, should adopt an SDG
Stimulus to accelerate progress towards the SDGs by
2030 and enhance global governance for enforcing the
implementation of the SDGs by all countries.

2
The SDG Index

and Dashboards
Part 2
The SDG Index and Dashboards
The SDG Index and Dashboards track the annual progress of all 193 UN Member States towards the SDGs
(Box 2.1). At the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda, however, the SDGs are far off track. Despite the world improv-
ing on average half a point per year on the SDG Index between 2015 and 2019 (which was already too slow)
progress has stalled since the outbreak of the pandemic and the onset of other overlapping crises. And while
most high-income countries (HICs) were able to mitigate the socioeconomic impacts of these multiple crises
through automatic stabilizers, emergency expenditures, and recovery plans, there has been limited progress
on environmental and biodiversity goals, including SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production),
SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and SDG 15 (Life on Land), including in countries that are
largely responsible for the climate and biodiversity crises. The disruptions caused by these multiple crises
also aggravated fiscal-space issues in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LICs and LMICs),
leading to a reversal in progress on several related goals and indicators.
2.1 SDG Status at the midpoint of completion rates. Due to limited data availability at the
the 2030 Agenda global level, it does not track the quality of education,
equity in learning outcomes, or lifelong learning. The
Based on the pace of progress since 2015, none of the dashboard for SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and
goals is on track to be achieved globally by 2030. Figure 2.1 Production) focuses on production-based nitrogen
provides a summary of the population-weighted world emissions, imported nitrogen emissions, and export of
average performance by goal. Those related to hunger, plastic waste, however we lack time series for several other
sustainable diets, and health outcomes are particularly indicators for this goal. Country-level information and
off-track, as are the goals concerning terrestrial and marine regional averages are available in the country profiles.
biodiversity, urban pollution, housing, strong institutions,
and peaceful societies. Although on average the world We estimate that on average only around 18 percent of the
has made some progress in strengthening access to key SDG targets are on track to be achieved globally by 2030.
infrastructure, covered notably under SDG 6 (Clean Water These are notably related to basic health outcomes, such
and Sanitation), SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) as neonatal mortality and under-5 mortality rates, as well as
and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), this access to basic infrastructure and services – such as targets on
varies extensively across countries, and the world average mobile use, internet use, and the share of adults with a bank
remains too slow to achieve these SDGs globally by 2030. account. Other recent findings at the global and regional
The education dashboard focuses on access to pre-primary levels similarly suggest that less than 20 percent of the SDG
and primary education, as well as on lower-secondary targets are on track (United Nations 2023; UNECE 2023).
Box 2.1 The SDG Index and Dashboards

The SDG Index is an assessment of each country’s overall performance on the 17 SDGs, giving equal weight to each
Goal. The score signifies a country’s position between the worst possible outcome (score of 0) and the target (score
of 100). The dashboard and trend arrows help identify priorities for further actions and indicate whether countries are
on track or off track to achieve the goals and targets by 2030, based on latest trend data. The 2023 SDG Index edition
includes 97 global indicators. Two-thirds of the data come from official statistics (typically United Nations custodian
agencies) with one third from non-traditional statistics, including research centers, universities, and non-governmental
organizations. Published since 2015, the SDG Index and Dashboards has been peer-reviewed and the global edition
has been statistically audited by the European Commission in 2019 (Schmidt-Traub et al. 2017; Papadimitriou, Neves,
and Becker 2019). More detailed information is available in the Methods Annex, in the detailed methodology paper
(Lafortune et al. 2018), and on our website (www.sdgtransformationcenter.org and www.sdgindex.org).

2. The SDG Index and Dashboards
Figure 2.1
World SDG Dashboard at the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda
D D S D S S
S D S D D S
D D D D D
Major challenges Significant challenges Challenges remain SDG achieved
p Decreasing 5 Stagnating D Moderately improving L On track or maintaining SDG achievement
Source: Authors’ analysis
Figure 2.2 Table 2.1

Status on individual SDG targets at the midpoint of The world's top five countries in terms of SDG targets
the 2030 Agenda achieved or on track, and those with the greatest
percentage of targets showing a reversal in progress
Reversal in progress
The 5 countries with the The 5 countries with the
% largest number of targets largest number of targets
% achieved or on track showing reversal in progress
Denmark Myanmar
Czechia Venezuela, RB
Estonia Papua New Guinea
Latvia Yemen, Rep.
Slovak Republic Lebanon

%
Limited or no progress

2.1 SDG Status at the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda
Figure 2.3
The 2023 SDG Index: score and rank
Rank Country Score Rank Country Score
1 Finland 86.8 45 Kyrgyz Republic 74.4

2 Sweden 86.0 46 Cuba 74.1
3 Denmark 85.7 47 Bosnia and Herzegovina 74.0

4 Germany 83.4 48 Israel 74.0
5 Austria 82.3 49 Russian Federation 73.8
6 France 82.0 50 Brazil 73.7
7 Norway 82.0 51 Argentina 73.7
8 Czechia 81.9 52 Costa Rica 73.6
9 Poland 81.8 53 Azerbaijan 73.5
10 Estonia 81.7 54 Albania 73.5
11 United Kingdom 81.7 55 Vietnam 73.3
12 Croatia 81.5 56 Armenia 73.3
13 Slovenia 81.0 57 Fiji 72.9
14 Latvia 80.7 58 Tunisia 72.5
15 Switzerland 80.5 59 Cyprus 72.5
16 Spain 80.4 60 North Macedonia 72.5
17 Ireland 80.1 61 Bhutan 72.3
18 Portugal 80.0 62 Dominican Republic 72.1
19 Belgium 79.5 63 China 72.0
20 Netherlands 79.4 64 Singapore 71.8
21 Japan 79.4 65 Peru 71.7
22 Hungary 79.4 66 Kazakhstan 71.6
23 Slovak Republic 79.1 67 Montenegro 71.4
24 Italy 78.8 68 Maldives 71.3
25 Moldova 78.6 69 Uzbekistan 71.1
26 Canada 78.5 70 Morocco 70.9
27 New Zealand 78.4 71 Algeria 70.8
28 Greece 78.4 72 Türkiye 70.8
29 Iceland 78.3 73 El Salvador 70.7
30 Chile 78.2 74 Ecuador 70.4
31 Korea, Rep. 78.1 75 Indonesia 70.2
32 Uruguay 77.7 76 Colombia 70.1
33 Luxembourg 77.6 77 Jordan 69.9
34 Belarus 77.5 78 Malaysia 69.8
35 Romania 77.5 79 United Arab Emirates 69.7
36 Serbia 77.3 80 Mexico 69.7
37 Lithuania 76.8 81 Egypt, Arab Rep. 69.6
38 Ukraine* 76.5 82 Jamaica 69.6
39 United States 75.9 83 Sri Lanka 69.4
40 Australia 75.9 84 Barbados 69.4
41 Malta 75.5 85 Tajikistan 69.2
42 Georgia 75.0 86 Iran, Islamic Rep. 69.1
43 Thailand 74.7 87 Bolivia 68.9
44 Bulgaria 74.6 88 Paraguay 68.8

Figure 2.3.
(Continued)
Rank Country Score Rank Country Score
89 Cabo Verde 68.8 128 Pakistan 59.0

90 Oman 68.6 129 Gambia, The 58.3
91 Turkmenistan 68.5 130 Syrian Arab Republic 58.2
92 Suriname 68.2 131 Mali 58.0
93 Mauritius 68.0 132 Eswatini 57.9
94 Saudi Arabia 67.7 133 Mauritania 57.2
95 Lebanon 67.5 134 Tanzania 56.8
96 Guyana 67.4 135 Malawi 56.3
97 Panama 67.3 136 Togo 56.3
98 Philippines 67.1 137 Sierra Leone 55.7
99 Nepal 66.5 138 Zimbabwe 55.6
100 Qatar 66.2 139 Cameroon 55.1
101 Bangladesh 65.9 140 Benin 55.1
102 Brunei Darussalam 65.7 141 Uganda 55.0
103 Cambodia 64.8 142 Guinea 54.9
104 Nicaragua 64.8 143 Lesotho 54.9
105 Iraq 64.8 144 Ethiopia 54.5
106 Mongolia 64.7 145 Zambia 54.3
107 Belize 64.6 146 Nigeria 54.3
108 Kuwait 64.4 147 Burundi 53.9
109 Namibia 64.3 148 Papua New Guinea 53.6
110 South Africa 64.0 149 Mozambique 52.7
111 Bahrain 63.7 150 Djibouti 52.7
112 India 63.4 151 Congo, Rep. 52.6
113 Gabon 63.1 152 Haiti 52.6
114 Trinidad and Tobago 63.0 153 Burkina Faso 52.4
115 Lao PDR 63.0 154 Comoros 51.7
116 Honduras 62.9 155 Angola 50.8
117 Venezuela, RB 62.9 156 Madagascar 50.3
118 Botswana 62.7 157 Liberia 49.9
119 Sao Tome and Principe 62.7 158 Afghanistan 49.0
120 Cote d'Ivoire 62.3 159 Congo, Dem. Rep. 48.6
121 Senegal 61.8 160 Sudan 48.6
122 Ghana 61.8 161 Niger 48.3
123 Kenya 60.9 162 Somalia 48.0
124 Bahamas, The 60.9 163 Yemen, Rep. 46.8
125 Myanmar 60.4 164 Chad 45.3
126 Rwanda 60.2 165 Central African Republic 40.4
127 Guatemala 59.4 166 South Sudan 38.7
* The data for Ukraine correspond to the situation prior to February 2022, as many data points have not been updated since then.

2.2 Leave no one behind
There is significant variation in progress by regions and 2.2 Leave no one behind

income groups. Overall, European countries top the SDG
Index and are also on track to achieving more targets Multiple and overlapping health and geopolitical crises
than any other region. Denmark, Czechia, Estonia, Latvia, have led to stagnation in SDG progress globally since
and the Slovak Republic are the five countries that have 2020. At the global level, the SDG Index has stalled since
achieved, or are on track to achieving, the largest number 2020 – and in 2022 is one full point below the projected
of SDG targets. By contrast, Lebanon, Yemen, Papua New level based on pre-pandemic trends (Figure 2.4). In LICs,
Guinea, Venezuela, and Myanmar present the largest the preliminary estimated average SDG Index score for
number of SDG targets for which there has been a reversal 2022 is lower than it was for 2021, a shift driven partly by
in progress. estimated declines in life satisfaction and feelings of safety
(Figure 2.5). Extreme poverty rates in LICs remain above
Overall, Finland tops the 2023 SDG Index, followed by pre-pandemic levels, while the percentage of surviving
Sweden and Denmark. All top 20 countries on the SDG infants who have received 2 WHO-recommended
Index are in Europe, most of them European Union vaccines has dropped significantly (Figures 2.6 and 2.7).
member states. Yet none of these countries obtains a In HICs and LICs, the pandemic and other crises have
perfect score. The dashboards presented in section 2.4 led to substantial declines in subjective well-being,
illustrate that even the highest-performing countries on which remains below pre-pandemic levels (Figure 2.8).
the SDG Index still face major challenges in achieving Unemployment rates in both HICs and LICs is above pre-
several SDGs, especially those related to climate, pandemic levels, although it has increased much more in
biodiversity, and sustainable diets and food systems. As LICs (Figure 2.9). From a simple linear projection of past
detailed in the Europe Sustainable Development Report growth rates, the gap between SDG outcomes in HICs
2022, trends on several leave-no-one-behind indicators and in LICs is expected to be greater in 2030 than it was in
are not heading in the right direction in many EU member 2015. This is in sharp contrast to the pre-pandemic trend,
states (Lafortune et al. 2022). where there was some convergence in SDG outcomes
(Figure 2.10).
Chad, Central African Republic, and South Sudan obtain
the lowest 2023 SDG Index scores. As a result of missing
data, we were unable to compute SDG Index scores for
many Small Island Developing States (SIDS), although their
country profiles provide an overview of their performance
by goals and targets, and highlight where data are missing
for these countries.

Figure 2.4
SDG Index World Average, 2010-2022
70
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
World Average Pre-pandemic trend
Note: Projected trend based on an extrapolation of the annual growth rate of the SDG Index over the period 2015-2019 (pre pandemic).
Figure 2.5
SDG Index Low-Income Countries’ Average, 2010-2022
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
LICs Average Pre-pandemic trend
Note: Projected trend based on an extrapolation of the annual growth rate of the SDG Index over the period 2015-2019 (pre pandemic).

2.2 Leave no one behind
Figure 2.6 Figure 2.7
Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (PPP, %) in LICs Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended

vaccines (%), in LICs
50
74
49
72
48
70
47
68
46
66
45
64
44
43 62
42 60
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Source: Authors, based on World Poverty Clock Source: Authors, based on WHO and UNICEF
Figure 2.8
Subjective Well-Being, in HICs and LICs
2015 4.1
LICs 2019 4.2
2022 3.7
2015 6.5
HICs 2019 6.7
2022 6.6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Source: Authors, based on Gallup World Poll

Figure 2.9
Unemployment Rate, in HICs and LICs
2015 5.8
LICs 2019 6.0
2023 6.6
2015 6.8
HICs 2019 4.9
2023 5.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Source: Authors, based on ILO
Figure 2.10
Observed and projected gaps in SDG Index score between HICs and LICs
Gap in 2015
Gap in 2022

(current trend)

(pre-pandemic trend)
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Note: Projected gap based on extrapolation of annual growth rate on the SDG Index over the period 2019-2021.
Pre-pandemic gap is based on an extrapolation of SDG Index annual growth rates over the period 2015-2019.

2.3 International spillovers and policy coherence
Above all, the SDGs represent an investment agenda: access to all-season roads, and shows the gap between

to develop physical infrastructure (including renewable the world average and that of the HICs.
energy, electrification, broadband access, public
transport) and human capital (health, education,
social protection). Yet many LICs and LMICs face major 2.3 International spillovers
fiscal-space constraints that represent significant and policy coherence
barriers to investing in the SDGs, and which the
COVID-19 pandemic and other international crises have The climate and biodiversity crises are driven by domestic
aggravated. The dashboards highlight persisting gaps action, but they are also impacted by activities that
between LICs, LMICs, and HICs in access to physical extend beyond national borders: through trade and
infrastructure and human capital. As one example, other cross-border activities. In addition to environmental
this year’s SDG Index includes a new indicator related spillovers, which are driven by international trade and
to access to all-season roads, based on geospatial domestic policies, countries also generate economic,
information. Figure 2.11 presents the 11 countries in financial, social, and security spillovers. These spillover
which less than 50 percent of the rural population has effects are captured in the SDG Index.
Figure 2.11
Countries where 50% or more of the rural population has no access to
all-season roads, and comparison with HICs and World average (%)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Afghanistan Congo, Dem. Central Eritrea Mauritania Madagascar Papua New Sudan Chad Congo, Rep. South Sudan
Rep. African Rep. Guinea
Proportion of the rural population that lives within 2 km of an all-season road

HICs average World average
Note: Proportion of the rural population that lives within 2 km of an all-season road. An all-season road is one that is motorable throughout the year
but may be temporarily unavailable during inclement weather. New indicator included in the SDG Index building on geospatial information. SDSN
methodology, based on Workman, R. & McPherson, K., TRL (2019). The averages for HICs and the World are weighted by population.

Figure 2.12
SDG Index scores versus International Spillover Index scores, by income level
SDG Index 2023 International Spillover Index 2023
High-income countries
Upper-middle-income countries
Lower-middle-income countries
Low-income countries
From 0 (worst) to 100 (best) From 0 (worst) to 100 (best)
Note: The list of 13 indicators included in this year’s International Spillover Index is accessible online.
The 2030 Agenda and the SDGs recognize the to indicators related to financial secrecy have also been
importance of international spillovers in several integrated, building notably on the work of the Tax
crucial ways. SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) calls Justice Network.
for ‘policy coherence’ for sustainable development,
SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) Environmental spillovers are driven to a large extent
stresses the need for more sustainable production and by inadequate pricing of environmental externalities,
consumption, and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic particularly natural capital. One step in the right
Growth) demands the eradication of child labor and direction is the growing adoption of the System of
modern slavery. The SDSN, working with partners, has Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) – an
from the start incorporated international spillovers international statistical standard for natural capital
in our assessment of countries’ progress towards the accounting (UN DESA 2022). A second major driver of
SDGs. This can explain certain differences in SDG Index such spillovers is the fact that countries design their
results compared with those of other SDG monitoring national policies to meet national objectives that
instruments (Lafortune et al. 2020). may not incorporate the need to reduce spillovers
and to safeguard the global commons. This makes
Overall, HICs tend to generate the largest negative environmental spillovers hard to address. SDG 17
spillovers, due to unsustainable consumption, financial (Partnerships for the Goals) calls on all countries to
secrecy, and the presence of tax havens. Spillover enhance policy coherence for sustainable development
indicators are included in calculating the SDG Index (PCSD), yet we still lack a robust and comparable
and individual goal scores and dashboards, and are headline indicator of countries’ efforts to implement
also aggregated in a stand-alone international spillover PCSD, despite the efforts of UNEP and the OECD to
index. Figure 2.12 compares international spillover develop a methodology (UNEP and OECD 2022). A
index results by income level. This year, we included an recent analysis led by SYSTEMIQ, the University of Tokyo,
additional indicator that tracks cases of modern slavery and SDSN identifies four major national policy levers
embodied in international supply chains, building on a to curb international spillovers: target setting, public
study published in 2022 (Malik et al. 2022). Major updates management, regulation, and fiscal policy and financing.

2.3 International spillovers and policy coherence
Figure 2.13
Illustration of environmental impacts embodied in international trade

Embodied
Water Stress
Embodied
Air Emissions
Couns tCroy A CouenstrcyloB Counetsrcyl C

w tton duc thin m oth
Gro Pro g onsu ing
C
Spillover Water Stress

Domestic Water Stress Domestic Air Emissions
Domestic Air Emissions
Source: SDSN, Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, and Center for Global Commons at the University of Tokyo. 2023, Global Commons Stewardship Index 2022. Paris; New Haven, CT; and Tokyo.
Supply chains can stretch through multiple countries, 59 percent are emitted along the supply chains of
and spillover impacts accumulate as they are embodied countries other than those where the final products
at multiple steps along the journey to the final are consumed (i.e., spillovers), while 41 percent are
destination country. Figure 2.13 illustrates a simplified emitted in the countries in which the final products are
example using three countries (SDSN, University of consumed (i.e., non-spillovers). These GHGs originate
Tokyo, and Yale University 2023). Water stress in Country from a variety of sectors along the textiles and clothing
A and air emissions in Country B count as domestic supply chains of countries on the left side of the diagram,
impacts within those countries. Because the final including the textile sector itself, electricity production,
demand is in Country C, these impacts both count as chemical production, and more. Of the spillover GHG
spillovers in Country C. Spillovers thus include more emissions caused by the final consumption of textiles
impacts than those embodied only in the last segment and clothing, the two largest destinations are the EU27
of the supply chain. and the United States, each accounting for 21 percent.
Among countries whose supply chains contribute to
As one example: when considering consumption producing these goods for consumption abroad, China
patterns, the textiles and clothing sector is one of generates 40 percent of the spillover GHG emissions.
the most substantial generators of spillovers of GHG The textiles and clothing sector is also associated with
emissions. Figure 2.14 indicates that, of GHG emissions negative socioeconomic spillovers, including accidents
due to global final demand for textiles and clothing, at work and child labor (Malik et al. 2021).

Figure 2.14
GHG emissions embodied in the final consumption of textiles and clothing
Non-Spillovers
41%
Imported
Spillovers
59%
Note: The impacts occur in the countries on the left side of the diagram, while the products are ultimately consumed in the countries on the right side of the diagram (intermediate countries along supply
chains are not shown). Of the total global GHG emissions due to demand for textiles and clothing, 59 percent are embodied in spillovers.
Source: SDSN, Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, and Center for Global Commons at the University of Tokyo. 2023. Global Commons Stewardship Index 2022. Paris; New Haven, CT; and Tokyo.
Curbing trade-related spillovers is a matter of making to tackle this shared challenge (University of Tokyo,
trade more sustainable and more consistent with Systemiq, and SDSN, 2023).
the objectives of the Paris Agreement, the Global
Biodiversity Framework, the High Seas Treaty and the
SDGs – rather than simply restricting trade, which
plays such a massive role in enabling developing 2.4 SDG Dashboards by income
countries to generate employment and socioeconomic groups and major world regions
development. Success requires a combination of
better metrics and policies in importing countries that The SDG dashboards highlight each country’s strengths
must be coupled with support to exporting countries, and weaknesses in relation to the 17 goals, presenting
particularly tropical forest countries, to transition performance in terms of levels and trends. As described
towards more environmentally sustainable technologies in the methodology section, dashboard ratings for each
and development paths. Both sides – importers and goal are based on data for the two indicators on which
exporters – must work closely together in partnership the country performs worst. Good performance on five of

2.4 SDG Dashboards by income groups and major world regions
seven indicators, for example, does not compensate for population-weighted averages for each region and

poor performance on the other two. In other words, our income group, using the same set of indicators as the SDG
methodology assumes low substitutability or compensa- Index. The OECD dashboards incorporate more indicators
tion across indicators in the construction of our composite than others, owing to the greater availability of data for
index. The arrow system focuses on structural trajectories these countries. We also find that 17 “headline” indicators
since the adoption of the SDGs (and less on year-on-year tend to be very good predictors of the overall SDG Index,
changes). As in previous years, the dashboards include which uses 97 indicators (Box. 2.2).
Box 2.2 Explaining the SDG Index with a handful of key indicators

The SDG Index is an accountability tool, but it is also a tool to highlight data gaps and areas where further effort is needed to
strengthen data availability and timeliness. Overall, this year’s edition includes 97 indicators. Yet the SDG Index score and rankings
can be explained through a handful of key indicators. Using 17 “headline” indicators that cover SDSN’s Six SDG Transformations and
other major principles, including leave no one behind, good governance, and the concept of international spillovers, we find a
very high and statistically significant correlation (both in terms of scores and ranks) with the overall SDG Index. These indicators are:
(1) Poverty headcount ratio at US$2.15/day, (2) Prevalence of undernourishment, (3) Life expectancy at birth, (4) Lower secondary
completion rate, (5) Share of women parliamentarians, (6) Population using at least basic sanitation services, (7) Population with
access to electricity, (8) Unemployment rate, (9) Population using the internet, (10) GINI coefficient, (11) Annual mean concentration
of particulate matter of less than 2.5 microns in diameter, (12) Imported SO2 emissions, (13) CO₂ emissions from fossil fuel combustion
and cement production, (14) Ocean Health Index: Clean Water, (15) Red List Index of species survival, (16) Corruption perception
index, and (17) Statistical Performance Index. There are no signs of collinearity among these indicators.
Figure 2.15
Correlation between 2023 SDG Index Score and Narrow SDG Index (17 “headline” indicators)
Narrow
Note: Correlation coefficient (r) between SDG Index scores=0.97. Source: Authors

Figure 2.16
2023 SDG dashboards by region and income group (levels and trends)
DECENT INDUSTRY, RESPONSIBLE PEACE,

GOOD HEALTH CLEAN WATER AFFORDABLE WORK AND INNOVATION SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION LIFE JUSTICE PARTNERSHIPS
NO ZERO AND QUALITY GENDER AND AND CLEAN ECONOMIC AND REDUCED CITIES AND AND CLIMATE BELOW LIFE AND STRONG FOR THE
POVERTY HUNGER WELL-BEING EDUCATION EQUALITY SANITATION ENERGY GROWTH INFRASTRUCTURE INEQUALITIES COMMUNITIES PRODUCTION ACTION WATER ON LAND INSTITUTIONS GOALS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
East and South Asia •AG •D • S •D •S •A •S •D •A • • •D •S •D •D •D •D •D
Eastern Europe and Central Asia •G •D •SD •SS •SS •SS •D •D •SS •D •D •D •D • D
• •D •D •S
Latin America and the Caribbean •G •D •S •S •D •A •D •D •S • • •D •A •S •D •D
G A D • D S A •D •AS
Middle East and North Africa •D •G •D •S •D •D •D • • •S • • •D • • •D •D •D • • •D D D
Oceania •D •D •S •S •S •A •S •S •S •D •S •D •D •D •D •D •S
OECD members •D •D •D •G •D •D •D • • •D •D •D • • •S •D •D •D •D
Small Island Developing States •D •D •D •D •D •D •D •D •D • • •D •A •A •D •D •G •D
Sub-Saharan Africa • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Low-income countries •D • D •D • • •S •D •D •D •D • • •D •A •S •G •D •G •D
Lower-middle-income countries •SS •D •D •D •D •SA •SS •D •SA • •• •D •AS •D •SD •D •D •D
Upper-middle-income countries •A •D •S •S •S •A •S •S •A •D •S •D •D •D •D •D •D
D S S S S S S G D
High-income countries •D •D •S •D •S •S •S •D •S •D •D •S •D •D •D •D •SD
World average • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
SDG achievement Challenges remain Significant challenges remain Major challenges remain
L On track D Moderately Increasing 5 Stagnating p Decreasing • Data not available
Note: Excluding OECD specific indicators. Population-weighted averages. Source: Authors’ analysis

Figure 2.17
2023 SDG dashboards for OECD countries (levels and trends)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Australia
•GS •D •SS •D •SA •SS •SS •SD •SS •GS •SS •SD •D •D •GD •D •SS
Austria
•D •S •S •D •A •A •S •S •S •A •S •G •D •S •S •S •D
D S S
• S
Belgium
•A •D •S •S •S •D •D •S •S •S •D •D •S •S •D •D •S
Canada
•D •D •S •S •A •A •S •D •S •G •S •D •D •D •D •G •S
Chile
•G •D •S •S •S •S •S •D •S •G •D •S •A •G •D •D •S
Colombia
•G •D •S •D •S •D •S •G •S •D •S •D •S •D •G •D •S
Costa Rica
•A •D •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •A •D •D • • •S •D •A
Czechia
•S •D •S •D •A •S •A •S •S •D •S •D •S •D •S •S •S
Denmark
•S •D •S •A •S •S •S •D •S •S •D •D •S •S •S •S •A
Estonia
•A •D •S •D •S •S •A •S •S •G •S •D •G •S •S •S •S
Finland
•S •D •S •S •A •D •S •S •S •D •S •D •S •S •S •S •A
France
•G •D •S •D •S •A •S •D •S •G •S •S •S •S •S •S •S
Germany
•S •D •S •D •D •A •S •S •S •A •S •G •S •S •S •D •S
Greece
•S •D •S •D •S •S •S •S •A •D •S •D •D • • •S •D •S
Hungary
•A •D •S •D •S •S •A •D •S • • •S •D •D •S •D •S •A
Iceland
•A •D •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •A •S •G •D •S •S •S •S
Ireland
•S •D •S •D •D •S •S •D •A •S •S •D •S •D •D •S •S
Israel
•A •D •S •D •S •A •S •S •S •D •S •D •S •D •D •S •S
Italy
•A •D •S •S •S •S •S •S •S • • •S •S •D •D •D •D •S
Japan
•S •D •S •S •S •S •S •D •S •S •S •S •S •D •G •S •S
Korea, Rep.
•S •D •S •S •S •A •A •D •S •G •S •G •D •S •S •S •S
Latvia
•S •D •S •S •S •A •S •S •S •D •S •D •G •D •A •S •S
Lithuania
•A •D •S •D •A •D •S •S •D •D •A •D •S • • •S •D •S
Luxembourg
•D •D •S •D •S •S •S •D •D •S •S •D •S •D •G •G •D
Mexico
•D •D •S •D •S •S •S •S •S •G •S •D •S •D •D •D •S
Netherlands
• • •D •S •D •A •S •D •S •S •D •S •D •S •D •D •D •S
New Zealand
•D •D •S •D •A •D •S •S •S •S •S •G •S •D •D •S •S
Norway
•A •D •S •S •S •A •S •S •A •A •D •D •D •S •S •D •A
Poland
•A •D •S •S •A •A •S •S •S •S •S •D •S •D •G •S •S
Portugal
•A •D •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •D • • •A •D •S
Slovak Republic
•A •D •S •S •S •A •S •S •S •S •S •D •D •S •D •D •S
Slovenia
•D •S •S •D •A •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •D •S •S
Spain
•A •D •S •S •A •A •S •D •S •S •S •D •D •S •D •S •S
Sweden
•D •D •S •S •S •A •S •A •S •G •S •A •D • • •D •D •S
Switzerland
•A •D •S •A •D •S •S •D •S •D •D •S •D •S •D •D •D
Türkiye
•G •D •S •S •S •S •S •A •S •D •D •S •S •S •S •D •D
United Kingdom
•S •D •D •S •S •S •S •D •S •D •S •S •D •S •G •D •S
United States
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Figure 2.18
2023 SDG dashboards for East and South Asia (levels and trends)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Bangladesh •SS •SD •SS •AA •D •SS •SS •D •SS • •• •D •AA •D •G • •GG •GD •D
Bhutan • • •S •D •D •D •A •S •D •A • • •A •D •G •D •D •G •SS
S D S S
Brunei Darussalam • • •S •D •S •S •S •S •D •S • • •S •D •D •D •D •D •S
Cambodia •A •S •S • • •D •A •S •S •A •D •S •D •D •D •G •D •D
China •A •D •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •G •D •A •D •S •G •D •S
India •A •D •S •A •S •A •D •S •S •S •D •S •D •D •D •D •D
Indonesia • • •D •D • • •S •D •D •S •D • • •D •S •D •D •D • • • •
Korea, Dem. Rep. •D •D •S •D •S •A •D •D •S • • •S •D •D • • •D •D •D
Lao PDR •A •D •D •D •S •D •D •D •S • • •S •S •D •S •D •S •D
Malaysia •A •S •S •A •D •A •S • • •S •A •S • • •D •S •G •D •S
Maldives •D •D •S •A •D •S •D •D •S •G •D •D •G • • •D •D •A
Mongolia •D •D •D •A •D •S •D •S •S • • •D •D •S •G •G •G •D
Myanmar •S •D •S •D •S •A •D •D •S • • •D •D •D • • •D •D •S
Nepal •S •D •D •D •D •S •D •D •D •A •D •S •S •S •D •D •S
Pakistan •S •S •S •D •D •A •D •S •S •S •D •S •D •S •D •D •S
Philippines • • •D •S •S •S •A •S •S •S • • •S •A •A •D •G •D •S
Singapore •G •S •S •A •D •S •D •D •A • • •D •S •S •D •G •D •D
Sri Lanka •A •D •S •S •S •A •A •D •S •D •S •S •D •D •G •D •D
Thailand •G •D •S •S •D •S •S • • •D • • •S • • • • •G • • •S •S
Timor-Leste •A •S •S •D •S •A •D •S •S •G •S •S •D •D •G •S •D
Vietnam • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Figure 2.19
2023 SDG dashboards for Eastern Europe and Central Asia (levels and trends)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Afghanistan •GA •D •D •D •SS •SA •D •D •D • A • •D •AD •D • D
• •S •D •S
Albania • • •G • • • • •S •A •S • • •S • • •A • • •D • • •D
S S G S D S D S •D •D
Andorra •A •D •S •D •S •A •D •D •S •A •D •D •G • • •D •D •AS D •
Armenia •A •D •S •S •D •A •D •D •S • • •S •S •S • • •S •D •A
Azerbaijan •A •D •S •G •S •S •S •D •S •A •S •D •D • • •S •D •S
Belarus •A •S •S • • •S •D •S •S •S • • •D •D •D •S •S •D •S
Bosnia and Herzegovina •A •S •S •G •S •D •D •S •S •G •D •D •D •D •S •D •S
Bulgaria •A •S •S •D •S •A •S •S •A •A •S •G •G •S •S •S •S
Croatia •D •D •S •S •D •D •S •S •S •A •D •S •G •S •D •G •S
Cyprus •S •S •S •D •S •D •S •D •S •S •S •D •G •G •D •D •D
Georgia •A •D •S •D •D •S •D •S •S •D •D •D •S • • •D •S •S
Kazakhstan •S •D •S •S •D •A •S •D •S •A •S •S •S • • •D •D •D
Kyrgyz Republic • • • • • • •S • • • • •A • • •S • • • • • • • • • • •S • • • •
Liechtenstein •D •D •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •G •S •S •S •D •S •D •S
Malta • • • • • • • • • • •A •A • • •S • • •A • • • • • • • • • • •G
Monaco •A •S •S •S •S •S •D •S •D •A •A •G •G • • •S •S •A
Moldova •A •D •S •S •D •A •D •D •S •A •D • • •A •S •D •S •A
Montenegro •A •S •S •D •S •A •D •S •D •A •D •D •D • • •S •S •S
North Macedonia •A •S •S •D •S •A •D •S •S •S •S •D •G •S •D •D •S
Romania •A •D •S •A •D •S •D •D •S •S •S •D •G •D •D •D •A
Russian Federation • • • • • • • • •A • • •A • • •A • • •A • • • • • • • • • • •A
San Marino •D •S •S •D •S •A •S •S •S •A •S •S •D • • •S •D •S
Serbia •A •S •S • • •D •S •S •D •D • • •S •S •S • • •D •D •S
Tajikistan •D •D •D • • •S •A •S •G •D • • •D •S •D • • •D •D •D
Turkmenistan • • •S •S • • •S •S •S •D •S •A •D •D •D •D •S •S •D
Ukraine* •S •D •S •S •A •A •D •D •S • • •S •D •S • • •D •S •S
Uzbekistan • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
*The data for Ukraine correspond to the situation prior to February 2022, as many data points have not been updated since then.

Figure 2.20
2023 SDG dashboards for Latin America and the Caribbean (levels and trends)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Antigua and Barbuda • G • •D •SD •AS •D • •• •SS • S • •SD • G • •SS • S • •D •D •D •SD •SD
Argentina • • •D •S • • •S •S •S •S •S • • •A •G •S •D •G •D •S
D A S D D
Bahamas, The • • •S •S •G •S •A •S •D •A • • •S • • •S •S •G •D •A
Barbados •G •S •D •D •S •S •S •G •S • • •S •A •A •D •G •D •A
Belize •S •D •D •S •D •S •S •D •S •S •S •S •S • • •G •D •A
Bolivia •A •G •S •S •S •A •A •D •D •D •S •D •A •D •D •D •S
Brazil • • •D •D •D •D •S •S •S •S • • •D •S •A •D •D •D •D
Cuba • • •D • • •D •A • • •D • • •S • • • • • • •A •S •G •D •A
Dominica •A •D •D •D •S •S •S •G •S •A •D •S •S •D •D •D •S
Dominican Republic •G •D •S •D •S •A •S •D •A •G •A •D •A •D •D •D •D
Ecuador •A •S •S •D •D •D •S •D •D •S •D •A •S •D •D •D •A
El Salvador • • •D •S •S •S • • •D • • •A • • • • • • •D •D •D •D •G
Grenada •D •D •S •S •D •S •S •G •D • • •D •S •S •D •G •D •D
Guatemala •A •S •S •A •S •D •D •S •S • • •S • • •D •S •S •D •A
Guyana •D •D •D • • •S •D •D •G •D • • •D •S •S •G •D •G •D
Haiti •D •D •S •D •S •S •S •D •S •D •S •D •S •D •D •D •D
Honduras •D •D •D •G •A •D •D •D •S • • •D •D •S •D •D •D •S
Jamaica •D •D •S • • •S •D •D •D •S • • •S •S •A •D •G •G •S
Nicaragua •S •S •S •S •S •S •D •D •S •D •A •S •G •D •D •D •A
Panama •A •D •S •D •S •A •D •G •S •S •S •D •D • • •D •D •S
Paraguay •S •D •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •G •S •S •S •S •D •D •S
Peru • • •D • • •S •S • • •S • • •A • • •A • • •D •D •D •D •D
St. Kitts and Nevis •D •D •D •D •S •S •D • • •S • • •S • • •D •D •G •D •S
St. Lucia • • •D •S •A •S • • •D • • •A • • • • • • •A •D •D •S •A
St. Vincent and the Grenadines • • •S •D •G •S •A •S •G •S • • •D • • •D •D •D •D •A
Suriname •D •D •S • • •S •S •S •S •S • • •S • • •S •D •D •D •S
Trinidad and Tobago •A •D •S •D •S •A •S •S •S •G •A •D •D •D •D •S •A
Uruguay •G •D •D •D •S •S •S •S •D • • •A •S •A •S •D •D •D
Venezuela, RB • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Figure 2.21
2023 SDG dashboards for the Middle East and North Africa (levels and trends)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Algeria •A • •SD •SS •AD •D •D •SS •D •SS • •• •D •AS •SG •D •GG •GD •SD

Bahrain •G •D •S •A •S •A •S •S •S • • •S •A •S •D •D •D •D
D A D D D
Egypt, Arab Rep. •D •D •S •A •D •S •D •D •A •G •D •S •S •S •D •D •D
Iran, Islamic Rep. • • •D •S • • •D •A •S •D •S • • •D •A •S •D •G •D •A
Iraq •A •S •D •D •D •D •S •S •S • • •D •S •A •A •D •D •D
Jordan • • •D •S •D •D •A •S •S •S • • •S •S •D •S •D • • •S
Kuwait •D •D •D • • •D •S •S •G •A • • •G •G •S •S •G •D •D
Lebanon • • •G •S • • •D •S •G •G •D • • •G •D •G •D •S • • •D
Libya •D •D •S •S •D •A •S •G •A • • •D •S •D •D •S •D •A
Morocco • • •D •S •S •D •S •S •A •S • • •S •A •D •D •D • • •A
Oman • • •D •S •S •S •S •S •A •S • • •S •A •D •S •G •G •S
Qatar •A •D •S •D •D •A •S •S •S • • •S •S •S •D •G •G •A
Saudi Arabia • • •D •S • • •D •D •D •D •D • • •G •A •A •D •D •G •D
Syrian Arab Republic •A •D •S •A •D •A •S •D •S • • •D •S •S •D •D •D •A
Tunisia •A •S •S •D •S •S •S •D •A • • •S •D •D •S •D •S •S
United Arab Emirates •G •D •D • • •D •D •D •S •D • • •S •S •A •G •G •G •G
Yemen, Rep. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Figure 2.22
2023 SDG dashboards for Oceania (levels and trends)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Fiji •G • •SD •D •SG •D •SD •D • •• •SS • •• •D • •• •D •SD •G • •G • •SS
Kiribati • • •D • • •G •D • • •D • • •D • •
S D D • • • • • • •D • • • • •S
S D
Marshall Islands • • • • •D •G •D • • •D • • •D • • • • • • •D •D •D • • •D
Micronesia, Fed. Sts. • • •D • • •G •D •A •S • • •G • • •S • • •D •G • • • • •A
Nauru • • • • • • •S •D •A •S • • •A • • •A • • • • •D •D • • •S
Palau •D •G •D • • •D •D •D •D •D • • •D •D •D •D •D •D •D
Papua New Guinea •S •D •D •D •D •S •D • • •S • • •D • • •D •G •G •A •S
Samoa •G •D •D •G •S •G •D • • •D • • •D • • •A •G •G •D •S
Solomon Islands •A •D •D •A •D • • •S • • •S • • •A • • •D •D • • •D •A
Tonga • • •D • • •G •D •A •S • • •S • • •A • • •D •D • • • • •A
Tuvalu •G •D •D •S •D •D •D • • •S • • •D • • •D •D •D • • •S
Vanuatu • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Figure 2.23
2023 SDG dashboards for sub-Saharan Africa (levels and trends)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Angola •GA •D •D •SD •D •D •SG •D •D • A • •GD •AS •AD •D •D •D •D
Benin •D •D •D • • •S •S •D •D •A • • •D •D •S • • •S •D •SS
D D D D S S D D D
Botswana •D •D •D •S •D •G •D •D •D •G •S •S •D • • •S •D •S
Burkina Faso •G •D •D •S •S •D •D •A •G • • •S •D •S • • •D •G •D
Burundi •S •D •S •D •S •S •S • • •S • • •S • • •D •D •S •S •A
Cabo Verde •D •D •D •D •S •D •D •D •S • • •D •S •S •S •G •D •D
Cameroon •D •D •D • • •D •G •D •D •D • • •G •S •D • • •D •G •D
Central African Republic •G •D •D •D •D •D •D •D •D • • •D •S •A • • •D •G •S
Chad •D •D •D • • •D •D •S • • •D • • •D • • •D •G •S •G •D
Comoros •D •D •D •S •S •G •D •D •S • • •D •A •A •D •D •D •D
Congo, Dem. Rep. •G •D •D • • •D •D •S •S •D • • •G •S •S •S •S •G •D
Congo, Rep. •A •D •D •A •S •D •D •S •S •A •D •A •S •S •D •D •D
Cote d'Ivoire •S •D •D •D •S •D •D •G •A • • •S •A •S •G •G •D •D
Djibouti • • •D •D • • •D • • •D •G •D • • •G •A •A •D •S • • •G
Equatorial Guinea •D •D •S •G •S • • •D •D •D • • •G •A •S •G •G • • •D
Eritrea •D •D •S •A •S •D •S • • •S • • •D • • •D • • •D •G •D
Eswatini •S •D •S •D •S •D •S •D •D • • •D •D •D • • •D •D •D
Ethiopia •D •D •D • • •D •D •A •S •S • • •D •A •A •D •S •D •D
Gabon •S •D •D •D •S •D •D •S •D • • •D •A •A •G •S •S •S
Gambia, The •D •S •S •S •S •S •S •S •S • • •G •D •D •D •G •D •D
Ghana •S •D •D •S •D •D •D •D •D • • •D •S •D •G •D •D •S
Guinea •D •D •D •D •D •D •D • • •D • • •D • • •D •D •G •D •D
Guinea-Bissau •D •D •D •S •S •D •S •D •S • • •G •A •S •D •G •D •D
Kenya •D •D •D •D •S •D •D •G •D • • •S • • •A • • •S •G •D
Lesotho •G •D •D •G •D •D •D •D •D • • •D •A •A •S •D •D •S
Liberia •D •D •D •G •S •D •D •G •D • • •D •A •D •D •D •D •D
Madagascar •G •D •S •D •S •D •D •D •D •A •D •S •S • • •D •D •D
Malawi •D •D •D •G •S •S •D •D •D • • •S •D •S • • •S •D •D
Mali •D •D •D •S •D •D •D •D •S • • •D •S •S •S •D •D •D
Mauritania •A •D •D •D •S •A •D •S •A • • •D • • •D •D •D •D •A
Mauritius •D •D •D •S •S •S •D •S •G • • •D •S •A •S •G •G •D
Mozambique •G •D •S •S •A •D •D •D •S • • •G •S •A •D •A •G •D
Namibia •D •D •D •G •S •D •D •S •D •G •S •A •A • • •S •D •S
Niger •D •D •D • • •D •S •D •D •S •S •D •D •D •S •G •D •D
Nigeria •D •D •D •D •S •D •S •G •S • • •D •D •S • • •D •D •S
Rwanda •D •D •D • • •D •D •S • • •S • • •D • • •A •D •S •D •S
Sao Tome and Principe •S •D •S •D •D •S •D •S •S • • •D •S •D •S •D •D •S
Senegal • • •D •S •S •D •A •S • • •A • • •S • • •D •D •S • • •A
Seychelles •S •D •D •D •D •D •D •S •D • • •G •A •S •D •D •D •A
Sierra Leone •G •D •D • • •D •D •D •D •D • • •S •S •A •D •G • • •A
Somalia •D •D •S •G •S •S •D •S •S • • •D •S •S •S •D •D •S
South Africa •G •D •D • • •S •D •D •D •D • • •D •S •A • • •D •G •D
South Sudan •G •D •D • • •D •D •S •D •S • • •D • • •A •D •D •S •D
Sudan •D •D •S •S •S •D •D •S •D • • •D •A •S •G •D •D •D
Tanzania •S •D •S •S •D •D •S •S •S •D •D •S •S •D •G •G •D
Togo •D •S •S • • •S •D •S •S •D •D •D •A •S • • •G •D •D
Uganda •G •D •S • • •S •D •D •S •D • • •D •S •S • • •D •G •D
Zambia •G •D •D •D •S •G •D •D •D • • •G •S •S • • •G •G •D
Zimbabwe • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Figure 2.24
2023 SDG dashboards for Small Island Developing States (SIDS) (levels and trends)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Antigua and Barbuda • •• •D •SS •A • •D • S • •SS • S • •SS • •• •SA • G • •D •D •D •SD •SS
Bahamas, The • • •S •S •G •S •A •S •D •A • • •S • • •S •S •G •D •A
D S S D G
Barbados •G •S •D •D •S •S •S •G •S • • •S •A •A •D •G •D •A
Belize •S •D •S •D •S •S •S • • •S • • •S • • •D •D •S •S •A
Cabo Verde •D •D •D • • •D •D •S • • •D • • •D • • •D •G •S •G •D
Comoros • • •D •D •D •D •S •S •S •S • • •D •S •A •D •D •D •D
Cuba • • •D • • •D •A • • •D • • •S • • • • • • •A •S •G •D •A
Dominica •A •D •D •D •S •S •S •G •S •A •D •S •S •D •D •D •S
Dominican Republic •G •S •D •S •D •S •D • • •S • • •D • • •D •S •G •G •S
Fiji • • •D •S •S •S • • •D • • •A • • • • • • •D •D •D •D •G
Grenada •D •D •D •D •D •D •D • • •D • • •D • • •D •D •G •D •D
Guinea-Bissau •A •S •S •A •S •D •D •S •S • • •S • • •D •S •S •D •A
Guyana •D •D •D • • •S •D •D •G •D • • •D •S •S •G •D •G •D
Haiti •D •D •D •G •A •D •D •D •S • • •D •D •S •D •D •D •S
Jamaica • • •D •S •G •D •D •D • • •S • • •S • • •D •D • • • • •S
Kiribati •A •S •S •A •D •A •S • • •S •A •S • • •D •S •G •D •S
Maldives • • •D • • •G •D • • •D • • •D • • • • • • • • •D • • • • •S
Marshall Islands •A •D •D •D •S •A •D •S •A • • •D • • •D •D •D •D •A
Mauritius • • • • •D •G •D • • •D • • •D • • • • • • •D •D •D • • •D
Micronesia, Fed. Sts. • • •D • • •G •D •A •S • • •G • • •S • • •D •G • • • • •A
Nauru • • • • • • •S •D •A •S • • •A • • •A • • • • •D •D • • •S
Palau •D •G •D • • •D •D •D •D •D • • •D •D •D •D •D •D •D
Papua New Guinea •S •D •D •D •D •S •D • • •S • • •D • • •D •G •G •A •S
Samoa •D •D •D • • •D •D •S • • •S • • •D • • •A •D •S •D •S
São Tomé and Príncipe • • •D •S •S •D •A •S • • •A • • •S • • •D •D •S • • •A
Seychelles • • •D •S •S •S •A •S •S •S • • •S •A •A •D •G •D •S
Singapore •G •D •D •G •S •G •D • • •D • • •D • • •A •G •G •D •S
Solomon Islands • • •D • • •S •S • • •S • • •A • • •A • • •D •D •D •D •D
St. Kitts and Nevis •D •D •D •D •S •S •D • • •S • • •S • • •D •D •G •D •S
St. Lucia • • •D •S •A •S • • •D • • •A • • • • • • •A •D •D •S •A
St. Vincent and the Grenadines • • •S •D •G •S •A •S •G •S • • •D • • •D •D •D •D •A
Suriname •G •D •S •S •D •S •S • • •D • • •S • • • • •G • • •S •S
Timor-Leste •A •D •D •A •D • • •S • • •S • • •A • • •D •D • • •D •A
Tonga •D •D •S • • •S •S •S •S •S • • •S • • •S •D •D •D •S
Trinidad and Tobago • • •D • • •G •D •A •S • • •S • • •A • • •D •D • • • • •A
Tuvalu •G •D •D •S •D •D •D • • •S • • •D • • •D •D •D • • •S
Vanuatu • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

References
Schmidt-Traub, Guido, Christian Kroll, Katerina Teksoz, David
Lafortune, Guillaume, Grayson Fuller, Leslie Bermont Diaz,
Durand-Delacre, and Jeffrey D. Sachs. 2017. National
Adolf Kloke-Lesch, Phoebe Koundouri, and Angelo
baselines for the Sustainable Development Goals assessed
Riccaboni 2022. Achieving the SDGs: Europe’s Compass in a
in the SDG Index and Dashboards . Nature Geoscience 10
Multipolar World. Europe Sustainable Development Report
(8): 547‑55. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2985.
2022 . SDSN and SDSN Europe. France: Paris.
SDSN, University of Tokyo, and Yale University. 2023. 2022
Lafortune, Guillaume, Grayson Fuller, Jorge Moreno, Guido
Global Commons Stewardship Index . Center for Global
Schmidt-Traub, and Christian Kroll. 2018. SDG Index
Commons.
and Dashboards. Detailed Methodological paper . Paris:
Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development UN DESA. 2022. Moving Beyond GDP and Achieving Our
Solutions Network. http://sdgindex.org/assets/files/2018/ Common Agenda with Natural Capital Accounting .
Methodological%20Paper_v1_gst_jmm_Aug2018_FINAL.pdf. UN DESA Policy Brief No. 144: https://www.un.org/
development/desa/dpad/publication/un-desa-policy-
Lafortune, Guillaume, Grayson Fuller, Guido Schmidt-Traub,
brief-no-144-moving-beyond-gdp-and-achieving-our-
and Christian Kroll. 2020. How Is Progress towards the
common-agenda-with-natural-capital-accounting/.
Sustainable Development Goals Measured? Comparing
Four Approaches for the EU . Sustainability 12 (18): 7675. UNECE. 2023. Growing Challenges for Sustainable
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187675. Development: Can the UNECE Region Turn the Tide in
2023? United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.
Malik, Arunima, Guillaume Lafortune, Sarah Carter, Mengyu
Geneva.
Li, Manfred Lenzen, and Christian Kroll. 2021. International
Spillover Effects in the EU’s Textile Supply Chains: A Global UNEP and OECD. 2022. Methodology for SDG-indicator
SDG Assessment . Journal of Environmental Management 17.14.1: Mechanisms in place to enhance policy coherence
295 (octobre): 113037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. for sustainable development . UN Environment Programme.
jenvman.2021.113037.
United Nations. 2023. Progress towards the Sustainable
Malik, Arunima, Guillaume Lafortune, Camille J Mora, Sarah Development Goals: Towards a Rescue Plan for People and
Carter, and Manfred Lenzen. 2022. International spillovers Planet . UN Economic and Social Council. Report of the
embodied in the EU’s supply chains: Tracking forced Secretary-General (Special Edition). https://www.google.
labour, accidents at work and climate impacts in the EU’s earch?q=sustainable+development+goals+progress+
consumption of fossil and mineral raw materials . Case report&rlz=1C1ONGR_frFR1022FR1022&source=lnt&tbs=
Study. GIZ, SDSN and University of Sydney. qdr:m&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiauZ2l04H_AhXYVqQEHVoGD
m8QpwV6BAgBEB0&biw=1536&bih=746&dpr=1.25.
Papadimitriou, Eleni, Ana Neves, and William Becker. 2019.
JRC Statistical Audit of the Sustainable Development Goals University of Tokyo, Systemiq, and SDSN. 2023. Tackling
Index and Dashboards . European Commission, Joint international spillovers: an overview of policy options.
Research Centre. doi:10.2760/723763, JRC116857. Discussion Paper. Center for Global Commons.

3
Government Efforts and

Commitments for the SDGs
Part 3
Government Efforts and Commitments
to the SDGs
The SDGs require long-term directed change and global cooperation. Long-term investment plans are
essential for national success in meeting the goals. There was no expectation in 2015, when the SDGs and
Agenda 2030 were adopted, that all goals and targets would be achieved at their midpoint. However, by
2023, one would expect that most countries would have implemented ambitious policy, regulatory and
investment frameworks compatible with achieving major SDG transformations. It could also be expected that
all countries would have at least once documented their progress and their plans for achieving the SDGs in a
Voluntary National Review (VNRs) presented at the United Nations.
This section discusses government commitment and A detailed database and additional technical information
efforts for the SDGs. It captures something different from are available online. This remains largely a work in
the SDG Index. A country facing a large gap to conquer progress, and we welcome feedback and comments on
on the SDG Index may have introduced ambitious the selected indicators and methodology (see more at
policy frameworks that are likely to lead to future SDG www.sdgtransformationcenter.org).
breakthroughs – especially if these policies and planned
investments are supported by adequate financing. As
such, this assessment of government commitment and
efforts for the SDGs is more “forward-looking”. Compared
with outcome statistics, however, input and process
3.1 Political leadership and
statistics are less internationally standardized and rely on institutional coordination:
more qualitative information and expert judgement. results from the 2023 SDSN
survey of government efforts
Nation-states continue to hold the primary responsibility
for achieving the SDGs. This section focuses primarily for the SDGs
on the executive branch at the federal/national level,
although we briefly discuss how regions and cities can The SDGs have a significant impact on public
also use the SDGs as a strategy and monitoring frame- management practices and procedures (SDSN and
work. Other SDSN reports discuss subnational SDG OECD, 2019). Every year since 2018, SDSN has called on
progress and challenges at length. Building on earlier work its global network of experts to track public statements
conducted by the SDSN (Sachs et al, 2018–2022; Lafortune by governments and their strategic use of public
et al, 2022), we conceptualize government efforts for the processes to support the SDGs. This information is
SDGs using a three-pillar framework: (1) political leader- collected through a survey of national coordination and
ship and institutional coordination; (2) SDG integration in implementation mechanisms at the central/federal level
sectoral policies and long-term pathways; and (3) commit- of government. The survey evaluates whether the SDGs
ment to multilateralism under the UN Charter (see Figure are used and mentioned in official speeches, strategies,
3.1). For each pillar, we present proxy indicators that build monitoring systems, budgets, and other public processes.
on a combination of qualitative survey tools, third-party It provides an overarching assessment of national/
data, and data scraped from online institutional resources. federal government efforts to embrace the SDG agenda
We include results for each pillar, which we aggregate into which is complemented by a more granular assessment
an overall score for “government efforts and commitments of the alignment of sectoral policies, regulations,
for the SDGs”. Building on close cooperation with SDSN and investments for the SDGs (presented in the next
national and regional networks and other partners, we sub-section).
cover this year 74 countries from various income groups
and world regions.

Figure 3.1
A conceptual framework to evaluate government efforts and commitment to the SDGs
Political
SDG Integration
Leadership &
into Sectoral
Institutional
Policies &
Coordination
Pathways
for the SDGs
Commitment to
Multilateralism under
the UN Charter
This year’s survey covers 74 countries (14 more than Most VNRs identify SDG priorities and actions within
in 2022) plus the European Union. It includes all G20 country borders, but fail to accurately capture efforts to
countries, most OECD members, most countries with curb negative international spillovers and the potential
a population greater than 100 million inhabitants, and transboundary impacts of their policies. In general,
several LICs, LMICs, UMICs, HICs, and SIDS. Overall, these our findings echo other research published over the
74 countries represent nearly 85 percent of the world’s past twelve months, showing continued gaps in SDG
population. Survey results are presented in Table 3.1. Data leadership and institutionalization (Biermann et al, 2022;
were collected and analyzed in close partnership with Kotzé et al, 2022; IGS, 2023). Further integration of goal-
SDSN’s global network, and results have been shared with based sustainable development into public management
UN Permanent Missions for comment prior to publication. processes, supported by long-term, science-based
pathways, remains a top priority in most countries if they
The key finding from this survey is that, seven years after are to achieve SDG breakthroughs by 2030 and beyond.
the adoption of the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs, most
governments have signaled “soft” SDG integration into Official high-level speeches and the preparation of VNRs
their public management practices and procedures – (as the official government-led process to report on SDG
although there is significant variation across countries progress, gaps, and policy efforts) provide relevant proxies
– yet “hard” SDG integration is generally missing, including to gauge political commitment to the SDGs. Between
the use of the SDGs to support long-term budget and January 2022 and April 2023, 64 percent of the countries
investment frameworks. By July 2023, all UN Member surveyed reinforced their commitment to the SDGs
States will have presented a VNR except for Haiti, in an official speech or statement by the head of state
Myanmar, South Sudan, the United States and Yemen. (president or prime minister) – an increase from 2022,

the 2023 SDSN survey of government efforts for the SDGs
Table 3.1
National government efforts to implement the SDGs, survey results
SDG strategy/
High-level SDGs into Central government
VNR SDGs in national budget National SDG monitoring Spillovers mentioned in VNR
statements sectoral action coordination of SDGs
plans
yes, as a central pillar
WB Overarching (5 mentions or more)
no. of Location of
Income Year submitted yes/no yes/no yes/no narrative/section DI/IC* yes/no yes/no yes, in the general narrative
indicators coordinating unit
group or budget line (1 to 4 mentions)
no
Albania UMIC 2019 yes yes no yes 61 yes center of government no
Algeria LMIC 2019 yes yes no no, but online reporting yes foreign affairs no
Argentina UMIC 2017, 2020, 2022 no yes yes overarching narrative DI and IC no, but online reporting 242 yes center of government no
Australia HIC 2018 no no no no, but online reporting no no
Austria HIC 2020, 2023 yes yes yes section or budget line DI and IC yes 200 yes center of government no
Bangladesh LMIC 2017, 2020 yes yes no no, but online reporting 40 yes center of government no
Barbados HIC 2020, 2023 yes yes no no yes a central ministry no
Belgium HIC 2017, 2023 yes yes no yes 82 yes center of government yes, as a central pillar
Benin LMIC 2017, 2018, 2020 yes yes yes section or budget line DI yes 164 yes a central ministry no
Bolivia LMIC 2021 no yes no yes 315 yes a central ministry no
Bosnia and
UMIC 2019, 2023 no no no no, but online reporting yes a central ministry no
Herzegovina
Brazil UMIC 2017 yes yes no no, but online reporting no no
Bulgaria UMIC 2020 yes yes no yes 64 no yes, in the general narrative
Cameroon LMIC 2019, 2022 no yes no no yes a central ministry yes, in the general narrative
Canada HIC 2018, 2023 yes yes yes overarching narrative yes 76 yes a central ministry no
Chile HIC 2017, 2019 yes yes no yes 138 yes foreign affairs no
China UMIC 2016, 2021 yes yes no no, but it is planned yes foreign affairs no
Colombia UMIC 2016, 2018, 2021 yes yes yes overarching narrative DI yes 161 no no
Congo,
LIC 2020, 2023 no yes no yes 22 yes a central ministry no
Dem. Rep.
Cyprus HIC 2017, 2021 yes yes yes section or budget line DI yes 140 yes a central ministry no
Czechia HIC 2017, 2021 no yes no yes 133 yes a central ministry no
Denmark HIC 2017, 2021 no yes yes section or budget line DI and IC yes 197 yes a central ministry yes, as a central pillar
Ecuador UMIC 2018, 2020 yes yes no no, but online reporting no no
Egypt,
LMIC 2016, 2018, 2021 yes yes no yes 97 yes a central ministry yes, in the general narrative
Arab Rep.
Ethiopia LIC 2017, 2022 no yes yes section or budget line DI yes 60 no no
European
2023 yes yes yes overarching narrative DI and IC yes 101 yes center of government
Union
Finland HIC 2016, 2020 yes yes yes overarching narrative DI and IC yes 42 yes center of government yes, as a central pillar
France HIC 2016, 2023 no yes no yes 98 yes a central ministry no
Georgia UMIC 2016, 2020 yes yes no yes 200 yes center of government no
Germany HIC 2016, 2021 yes yes no yes 75 yes center of government yes, in the general narrative
Ghana LMIC 2019, 2022 yes yes yes overarching narrative DI yes 102 yes center of government no
Greece HIC 2018, 2022 yes yes yes overarching narrative DI yes 102 yes center of government yes, in the general narrative
Hungary HIC 2018 no no no yes 134 yes a central ministry yes, in the general narrative
India LMIC 2017, 2020 no no no yes 118 yes a central ministry no
Indonesia LMIC 2017, 2019, 2021 yes yes yes overarching narrative DI and IC yes 319 yes a central ministry no
Ireland HIC 2018, 2023 yes yes no no, but online reporting 123 yes a central ministry yes, in the general narrative
Israel HIC 2019 no no no no, but it is planned no yes, in the general narrative
Italy HIC 2017, 2022 yes yes yes overarching narrative IC yes 138 yes center of government yes, as a central pillar
Jamaica UMIC 2022 yes yes no yes 119 yes a central ministry yes, as a central pillar
Japan HIC 2017, 2021 yes yes yes section or budget line DI and IC yes 162 yes center of government no
Kazakhstan UMIC 2019, 2022 yes no no yes 280 yes a central ministry yes, in the general narrative
Kenya LMIC 2017, 2020 yes yes no yes 143 yes a central ministry no
Korea, Rep. HIC 2016 yes yes no yes 214 yes center of government no

Table 3.1
(continued)
SDG strategy/
High-level SDGs into Central government
VNR SDGs in national budget National SDG monitoring Spillovers mentioned in VNR
statements sectoral action coordination of SDGs
plans
yes, as a central pillar
WB Overarching (5 mentions or more)
no. of Location of
Income Year submitted yes/no yes/no yes/no narrative/section DI/IC* yes/no yes/no yes, in the general narrative
indicators coordinating unit
group or budget line (1 to 4 mentions)
no
Malaysia UMIC 2017, 2021 yes yes yes section or budget line DI no, but online reporting yes a central ministry no
Mexico UMIC 2016, 2018, 2021 no yes yes overarching narrative DI yes 54 yes a central ministry no
Morocco LMIC 2016, 2020 yes yes no no, but online reporting yes center of government no
Netherlands HIC 2017, 2022 yes yes yes overarching narrative IC yes 171 yes foreign affairs yes, as a central pillar
New Zealand HIC 2019 yes no no yes 115 no yes, in the general narrative
Nigeria LMIC 2017, 2020 yes yes yes section or budget line DI yes 141 yes center of government no
Norway HIC 2016, 2021 yes yes yes overarching narrative DI and IC no, but online reporting 97 yes a central ministry yes, as a central pillar
Pakistan LMIC 2019, 2022 yes yes yes section or budget line DI no, but online reporting yes a central ministry no
Peru UMIC 2017, 2020 no no no no, but online reporting no no
Philippines LMIC 2016, 2019, 2022 no yes no yes 155 yes a central ministry no
Poland HIC 2018, 2023 no yes no yes 126 yes a central ministry yes, in the general narrative
Portugal HIC 2017, 2023 yes yes yes overarching narrative DI and IC yes 163 yes center of government yes, in the general narrative
Romania HIC 2018, 2023 yes yes no yes 98 yes center of government yes, in the general narrative
Russian
UMIC 2020 no no no yes 176 yes a central ministry no
Federation
Rwanda LIC 2023 yes no no no yes a central ministry no
Samoa LMIC 2016, 2020 yes yes no yes 246 yes a central ministry yes, in the general narrative
Saudi Arabia HIC 2018, 2021, 2023 no yes no no, but online reporting yes a central ministry no
Senegal LMIC 2018, 2022 no yes yes overarching narrative DI and IC yes 142 yes a central ministry no
Serbia UMIC 2019 yes yes yes section or budget line DI no, but online reporting 126 no yes, in the general narrative
Seychelles HIC 2020 yes yes no no no yes, in the general narrative
Slovenia HIC 2017, 2020 no yes no yes 54 yes a central ministry yes, in the general narrative
South Africa UMIC 2019 no yes no yes 154 yes center of government no
Spain HIC 2018, 2021 yes yes yes section or budget line DI and IC no, but online reporting yes a central ministry yes, as a central pillar
Sweden HIC 2017, 2021 yes yes yes section or budget line DI and IC yes 65 yes a central ministry yes, as a central pillar
Switzerland HIC 2016, 2018, 2022 yes yes no yes 109 yes a central ministry yes, in the general narrative
Thailand UMIC 2017, 2021 yes yes yes section or budget line DI and IC yes 172 yes center of government no
Türkiye UMIC 2016, 2019 no yes no yes 153 yes center of government yes, in the general narrative
Uganda LIC 2016, 2020 yes yes no yes 92 yes center of government yes, in the general narrative
Ukraine* LMIC 2020 no no no yes 183 yes a central ministry no
United
HIC 2019 no yes no no, but online reporting no yes, in the general narrative
Kingdom
United States HIC none no no no no, but online reporting no
Vietnam LMIC 2018, 2023 no no no yes 158 yes a central ministry no
Note: * DI = Domestic implementation; IC = International cooperation. Data from Jamaica, except questions about VNRs, are from the 2022 SDSN survey of government efforts.
Responses for Ukraine reflect the situation as of February 2022. Spillovers in VNRs mean the use of terms “spillovers”, “international spillovers”, “transboundary effects” and “policy coherence”
(in the context of trade or official development assistance). More details about questions and results are online at wwww.sdgindex.org and www.sdgtransformationcenter.org).
Source: SDSN 2023 Survey of Government Efforts for the SDGs (February 2023).

when only 57 percent of surveyed countries had done so Most countries surveyed had also defined SDG monitoring
– and since 2016, 188 UN Member States have prepared systems. More than two-thirds (68 percent) have adapted
VNRs (see Figure 3.2). Forty countries have committed the SDG framework to their context and identified a set
to submitting a VNR this year: two will be presenting a of nationally relevant indicators. Often these are aligned
VNR for the first time, 37 for the second time, and one for with official United Nations SDG indicators or represent
the third time. Two countries – Togo and Uruguay – have a subset of them. Some countries have also developed
submitted four VNRs since 2016. Two non-UN-members localized indicators that account for country contexts.
(the European Union and Palestine) have or will also For example, France has a national dashboard of 98 SDG
submit VNRs. At the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda, only indicators, adopted after several rounds of consultations,
five countries have never submitted a VNR, among them which includes indicators that go beyond the official
the United States (HLPF, 2023). UN SDG indicator framework. France also contributes to
3. Government Efforts & Commitments

global statistical efforts by working with UN agencies to
On institutional coordination, we find that a large report data points across all 231 official global indicators.
majority of countries have appointed a lead unit or An average of 136 indicators are included in national
agency to coordinate the SDGs, but only around a third frameworks for monitoring the SDGs. Many countries have
of the countries surveyed locate this unit at the center also developed online platforms to report on progress
of government (in cabinet offices or within the offices of towards the goals. The survey does not evaluate the
the President or Prime Minister) (Figure 3.3). The majority integration and influence of such monitoring tools within
position it in a central ministry (of economy, planning, broader policy, regulatory, and budget cycles, however
public administration, or environment, for example), while it has recently been suggested that SDG monitoring
Spain has a dedicated Ministry of Social Rights and the frameworks so far suffer from insufficient linkages to
2030 Agenda. The survey does not evaluate, in practice, policy implementation as well as low overall visibility
the effectiveness and influence of such coordination (Lepenies et al, 2023). Supreme audit institutions and
mechanisms and units in driving a whole-of-government parliamentary processes have also been used in some
approach to SDG implementation. countries to track efforts to implement the SDGs (Office of
the Auditor General of Canada, 2018 and 2021; INTOSAI,
A large majority of governments – 83 percent of those 2019; European Parliament, 2022).
surveyed – have published some form of strategic vision
and/or action plan to implement the goals. For many, As in previous years, there is some discrepancy between
this takes the form of a national sustainability strategy expressed political support for the SDGs and integration
explicitly linked to the 2030 Agenda goals and targets. of the goals into strategic public policy processes, espe-
Some countries take a mainstreaming approach, where cially long-term budget and investment frameworks. A
SDGs are implemented by each government ministry little over a third of governments surveyed (36 percent)
within the scope of its mandate (instead of via an mention the SDGs or use related terms in their latest
overarching national action plan). The mainstreaming official budget document. Among these 27 countries,
approach was used by the European Union, which also less than half go beyond this to include the SDGs in a
adopted the European Green Deal as its main strategic dedicated section, budget lines, or allocation. Some
roadmap for achieving sustainable development. Our countries specifically refer to the SDGs in their national
survey cannot evaluate the breadth or actualization of budget to support domestic SDG implementation
these strategic visions and action plans, although SDSN nationally (including through national health, edu-
has published a detailed analysis of SDG integration cation, social protection, or economic development
in post-COVID-19 recovery and resilience plans in the reforms), abroad (for example, in aid allocation or
European Union (Lafortune et al., 2021). The next sub- foreign policy), or both. Looking ahead, establishing
section goes beyond references to SDG and describes stronger connections between SDG gaps, targets,
persistent gaps in sectoral policy measures for major SDG monitoring systems, and multi-year budget allocations
transformations in greater detail. remains an important priority.

Figure 3.2
Submissions of voluntary national reviews (number of submitters, 2023) and submissions per year since 2016
Countries/entities that have

2
submitted exactly 4 VNRs

14

108

64
submitted exactly 1 VNR

5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Number of VNR submissions (per year)

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Note: Data includes VNRs that will be submitted by countries in 2023.

Source: Authors’ analysis. Based on data from the United Nations (2023).

Figure 3.3
Designated lead unit for SDG coordination at the central/federal level of government to
implement the SDGs (2023)
Designated lead unit for SDG coordination at Location of designated lead coordination unit
the central/federal level of government if led from central/federal level of government
(83 %)
yes
6.5 %
no 17 %

58.1% 35.5 %
yes 83 %
Foreign affairs Center of government A line ministry
Note: “Center of government” refers to the designated unit being in the President’s or Prime Minister’s office or as a cabinet-level position. “A line ministry” refers to the
ministry of finance, economic development, planning, public service or administration, environment or similar. “Foreign affairs” refers to the ministry of foreign affairs,
international cooperation or similar. Source: SDSN 2023 Survey of Government Efforts for the SDGs (February 2023).
Figure 3.4
Integration of the SDGs into key policy processes by income groups
100
90
95%
80
85%
82% 82%
79% 80% 80%
70
73%
70%
60 67% 68%
65%
63%
59% 58%
50
40
45%
39%
30
35%
32% 32%
20
10
0
High-level statements SDG strategy / SDGs into SDGs in national budget National SDG monitoring Central government
sectoral action plans coordination
LICs and LMICs (n=22, 75% of global LIC and LMIC pop.) UMICs (n=19, 92% of global UMIC pop.)
HICs (n=33, 97% of global HIC pop.) G20 (n= 20, 100% of G20 pop.)
Source: SDSN 2023 Survey of Government Efforts for the SDGs (February 2023).

As G20 countries represent two-thirds of the world’s Building on the work of previous Sustainable Development
population and 85 percent of global GDP, integrating Reports, we present here an updated and improved
the SDGs into their governance systems is particularly version of the SDG Transformation scorecards, to evaluate
important. Compared with other countries, G20 countries how the SDGs are being integrated into sectoral plans.
tend to lag in several aspects of institutional leadership for Each scorecard consists of a collection of headline policy
the SDGs, including explicit political support in speeches and investment measures to track SDG implementation.
and monitoring and coordination mechanisms. The These scorecards complement the SDG Index, which is
integration of the SDGs in national budget processes could based on outcome data (for example, on poverty rates, life
be strengthened in most countries, and especially in LICs expectancy, and CO₂ emissions). At the international level,
and LMICs, where less a third of the countries surveyed such measures of outcome tend to present significant time
refer to the SDGs in their national budgets – either in the lags: they may not adequately reflect the impact of trans-
narrative or as a dedicated section or budget line. formative policies and investments that governments have
introduced since the adoption of the SDGs, and which
often yield results only in the medium or long term. The
scorecards instead focus on the enabling legal, regulatory,
3.2 SDG integration into sectoral and investment conditions needed to achieve the SDGs
policies and pathways: and the objectives of the Paris Climate Agreement.
scorecards for the Six SDG This exercise has several caveats and limitations. First,
Transformations internationally comparable policy trackers and measures
(such as laws, regulations, investments, and subsidies) tend
The SDGs require long-term directed change, with long- to be less available than international outcome data. They
term investment plans essential for national success in rely on more qualitative methods and require an advanced
meeting the goals. SDSN has recommended six inter- understanding of policy areas and country policies and
related long-term transformations: contexts (generally, more comparable policy trackers
and measures are available for OECD countries than for
1. Universal quality education and innovation-based others). Second, policy efforts need to be interpreted with
economy an understanding of national challenges and contexts (for
2. Universal health coverage instance, the absence of advanced cybersecurity policies
matters less in a country with low internet access and poor
3. Zero-carbon energy systems digital infrastructure). Third, apart from a few exceptions,
4. Sustainable ecosystems, sustainable agriculture, and government pledges and policies do not capture their
climate resilience effective implementation. And fourth, targets or thresholds
to gauge policy ambitions are not always clearly defined.
5. Sustainable cities
6. Transformation to universal digital access and services The rest of this section provides a brief overview of
countries’ policy efforts and commitments relating to
Each of these challenges requires large-scale public achieving the six SDG Transformations, and highlights
and private investments to mid-century. Each requires a where more research and policy trackers are required to
technological transformation. Each requires a financing broaden our understanding of national SDG efforts. We
strategy to underpin the investment plans and monitoring present detailed results for the G20 countries, along with
systems. None can be solved by the private sector alone. population-weighted averages by geographic region and
Governments must take the lead in all six areas to design income group. Detailed information on indicator sources,
policy and financial frameworks within which business thresholds and results for all 193 UN Member States are
can profitably invest and innovate. accessible online.

Transformation 2: Universal health coverage
Transformation 1: Universal quality Transformation 2: Universal health

education and innovation-based coverage
economy This Transformation promotes key investments in health
and well-being. It aligns closely with SDG Target 3.8,
Education builds human capital, which in turn promotes achieving universal health coverage and ensuring that
economic growth, innovation, decent work, and the all people have access to the health services they need.
elimination of extreme poverty, and helps overcome In the SDGs, universal health care (UHC) is considered a
gender and other inequalities. Countries must further target in itself. For the SDG Transformation scorecards,
expand and transform education systems. SDG target 4.1 however, we consider UHC an enabler (input) for greater
calls for universal access to 12 years of free primary and health outcomes. Even before the Covid-19 pandemic, the

secondary education, with at least 9 years compulsory. WHO and other international institutions had lamented
the slow pace of progress towards achieving universal
This scorecard shows that many countries around health coverage (WHO, 2019). Compared with the rest
the world currently fall short of this target. To reduce of the world, a higher percentage of people in OECD
inequalities, governments also need to expand social countries tend to be covered by public or mandatory
safety nets. These should be complemented by anti- private health insurance, and incidence rates of
discrimination measures (including those furthering catastrophic out-of-pocket health expenditures are lower
gender equality); improved labor standards; and measures – although there are exceptions, including Mexico, Costa
to end all forms of modern slavery, trafficking, and child Rica, Poland, and the United States.
labor. Investments in research and development will also
help to promote economic growth, which can contribute The SDGs also call on all countries to strengthen their
to reducing inequalities. capacities for early warning, risk reduction, and the
management of national and global health risks (SDG
Looking ahead, a lead global indicator must be target 3.d). As a measure of pandemic preparedness, the
established to assess country efforts to strengthen their Global Health Security Index turned out to be a rather
population’s and students’ knowledge of sustainable poor predictor of effective early response to COVID-19, as
development and their ability to navigate an information- measured by the number of cases and deaths (Lafortune,
rich environment. This is important to achieve long-term 2020), indicating that important factors are at play that are
science-based transformations of all economies, and to not yet adequately captured by existing policy trackers.
build up public support and accountability. According to Nevertheless, we have not identified a better policy-
the OECD, only one in 10 students in OECD countries can focused indicator of pandemic preparedness. In the
distinguish between fact and opinion (OECD, 2018). context of the High-Level Pandemic Summit to take place
in September 2023 and the forthcoming global pandemic
treaty, it remains vital to define solid international
measures and monitoring systems that can better
gauge countries’ preparedness for global health security
threats. But it is also important to address drivers that
can lead to the emergence of new pathogens, including
environmental drivers, through “One Health” approaches
(Sachs et al, 2022; McKee et al, 2021).

Table 3.2
Scorecard – Transformation 1: Universal quality education Note: Regional and income level averages are population weighted. Details
on definitions, sources, and thresholds are available on www.sdgindex.org
and innovation-based economy
Transformation 1: Universal quality education and

innovation-based economy
Commitment to
Gender Equality
Years of free Years of compulsory Reducing Inequalities: Expenditure on research
in the Law
education in the law education in the law Tax Progressivity & and development
(score, 2023,
(#, 2022, UNESCO) (#, 2022, UNESCO) Protection of Labor Right (% of GDP, 2020, UNESCO)
World Bank)
(score, 2022, Oxfam & DFI)
G20 Countries
Argentina 12 12 0.63 79.4 0.5
Australia 13 10 0.74 96.9 1.8
Brazil 12 12 0.55 85.0 1.2
Canada 12 10 0.74 100.0 1.7
China 9 9 0.57 75.6 2.4
France 12 10 0.69 100.0 2.4
Germany 13 13 0.74 97.5 3.1
India 8 8 0.47 74.4 0.7
Indonesia 12 9 0.54 64.4 0.3
Italy 8 12 0.66 97.5 1.5
Japan 9 9 0.71 78.8 3.3
Korea, Rep. 9 9 0.67 85.0 4.8
Mexico 12 12 0.57 88.8 0.3
Russian Federation 11 11 0.67 73.1 1.1
Saudi Arabia 12 9 NO DATA 80.0 0.5
South Africa 12 9 0.65 88.1 0.6
Türkiye 12 12 0.58 82.5 1.1
United Kingdom 13 11 0.69 97.5 1.7
United States 12 12 0.65 91.3 3.5
By regions
East and South Asia 9 9 0.53 72.1 1.2
Eastern Europe and Central Asia 11 10 0.62 73.3 0.7
Latin America and the Caribbean 12 11 0.56 84.1 0.7
Middle East and North Africa 11 10 0.55 49.8 0.7
Oceania 1 0 0.48 61.8 NO DATA
OECD members 11 11 0.66 91.3 2.3
Sub-Saharan Africa 9 8 0.45 71.8 0.3
By income level
Low-income countries 9 7 0.44 65.5 0.3
Lower-middle-income countries 9 9 0.50 68.8 0.5
Upper-middle-income countries 10 10 0.58 77.5 1.7
High-income countries 11 11 0.68 91.4 2.6
More ambitious ≥ 12 years ≥ 12 years ≥ 0.7 ≥ 90 ≥ 2.3%

Moderately ambitious ≥ 9 years ≥ 9 years ≥ 0.5 ≥ 70 ≥ 1.0%
Less ambitious less than 9 years less than 9 years below 0.5 below 70 below 1.0%

Table 3.3
Note: Regional and income level averages are population weighted. Details on
Scorecard – Transformation 2: Universal health coverage definitions, sources, and thresholds are available on www.sdgindex.org
Catastrophic out-of- Global Health Security

pocket health spending: Population coverage for Index: Pandemic
UHC index of service coverage
Pop. spending 10%+ of health care Preparedness
(score, 2019, WHO)
household income on health (%, 2020, OECD) (score, 2021, NIS &
(%, 2016, WHO) Johns Hopkins)
G20 Countries
Argentina 73.0 9.6 NO DATA 54.4
Australia 87.0 2.5 100.0 71.1
Brazil 75.0 11.8 NO DATA 51.2
Canada 89.0 3.5 100.0 69.8

China 82.0 24.0 NO DATA 47.5
France 84.0 NO DATA 99.9 61.9
Germany 86.0 1.5 100.0 65.5
India 61.0 17.3 NO DATA 42.8
Indonesia 59.0 4.5 NO DATA 50.4
Italy 83.0 9.3 100.0 51.9
Japan 85.0 10.5 100.0 60.5
Korea, Rep. 87.0 12.0 100.0 65.4
Mexico 74.0 1.6 72.4 57.0
Russian Federation 75.0 7.7 NO DATA 49.1
Saudi Arabia 74.0 1.3 NO DATA 44.9
South Africa 67.0 1.0 NO DATA 45.8
Türkiye 79.0 3.2 98.8 50.0
United Kingdom 88.0 2.3 100.0 67.2
United States 83.0 4.3 90.3 75.9
By regions
East and South Asia 67.6 17.2 NO DATA 44.3
Eastern Europe and Central Asia 69.0 10.3 NO DATA 43.2
Latin America and the Caribbean 72.6 10.4 NO DATA 45.4
Middle East and North Africa 68.2 16.6 NO DATA 30.7
Oceania 37.5 NO DATA NO DATA 25.1
OECD members 82.5 5.9 94.4 63.5
Sub-Saharan Africa 44.4 8.4 NO DATA 32.9
By income level
Low-income countries 42.0 7.7 NO DATA 28.6
Lower-middle-income countries 58.1 14.0 NO DATA 38.5
Upper-middle-income countries 78.2 16.5 85.4 48.0
High-income countries 83.4 6.3 96.6 64.0
More ambitious ≥ 80 ≥ 4% ≥ 99% ≥ 80

Moderately ambitious ≥ 60 ≤ 10% ≥ 95% ≥ 50
Less ambitious below 60 below 10% below 95% below 50

Transformation 3: Zero-carbon
energy systems Today’s land-use practices and food systems have led to
persistent hunger, malnutrition, and obesity. They account
This Transformation aims to ensure universal access to for a quarter of greenhouse gas emissions, over 90 percent
modern energy sources; decarbonize the energy system of scarcity-weighted water use, most biodiversity loss,
by mid-century (in line with the Paris Agreement); and the overexploitation of fish populations, eutrophication
reduce industrial pollution of soil, water, and air. More through nutrient overload, and the pollution of our water
than 130 countries are signatories to the UN Climate and air. Food systems are also highly vulnerable to climate
Ambition Alliance, and more than 50 have anchored change and land degradation: integrated strategies are vital
their net-zero commitment in a law or policy document to ensure that these systems, along with land-use practices
(Net Zero Tracker, 2023; UNFCCC, 2022). By September and ocean ecosystems, are sustainable and healthy for
2022, 139 countries had submitted or updated nationally people. The Convention on Biological Diversity, adopted
determined contributions (NDCs), with studies finding in December 2022 during the 15th Convention of Parties in
that new and updated NDCs present more ambitious Canada, calls to protect and conserve at least 30 percent
emission-reduction targets and planning (WRI, 2022). of terrestrial, inland water and coastal and marine areas by
2030, “especially areas of particular importance for biodiver-
There continues to be a major discrepancy between coun- sity and ecosystem functions and services” (UN, 2022).
tries’ self-declared ambitions and their tangible efforts and
policies. The Climate Action Tracker, an independent scien- UNEP estimates that 84 percent of Parties to the UN
tific analysis of governments’ climate actions, finds that no Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have
single G20 country has adopted a sufficient mix of policies now adopted climate adaptation plans, strategies, laws,
and actions to achieve the Paris Climate Agreement objec- and policies (UNEP, 2022). But there is a significant gap in
tives, with only the United Kingdom reaching an “almost funding these measures. Annual adaptation funding needs
sufficient” level of policy (Climate Action Tracker, 2022). are expected to reach US$160 billion to US$340 billion by
Many countries continue to provide substantial subsidies 2030, and US$315 billion to US$565 billion by 2050 (UNEP,
for fossil fuels, undermining their initiatives to decarbonize 2022). Establishing mechanisms to ensure that the burden
the energy system, such as the United States’ Inflation of financing human-induced adaptation is shared fairly and
Reduction Act (IRA) and the European Union’s Net Zero globally, and that the countries responsible pay the costs
Industry Act (NZIA) (DGAP 2023). While comparable coun- of loss and damages, remains an important priority for the
try-level data are not yet available, the IEA has concluded international community.
that global fossil-fuel consumption subsidies rose sharply
in 2022, as governments attempted to shield consumers The SDSN is highly committed to supporting global
from rising energy bills (IEA 2023, OECD 2022). and national efforts to develop sustainable food and
land systems, preserve major ecosystems, and ensure
adequate finance for nature and climate adaptation.
In close collaboration with the Food and Land Use
Transformation 4: Sustainable Coalition (FOLU), the SDSN’s FABLE and FELD projects
ecosystems, sustainable provide support for long-term, sustainable food and
land use pathways and policies. Despite the recognized
agriculture, and climate resilience importance of decarbonizing agriculture and enhancing
Unsustainable consumption is strongly interconnected carbon sinks towards achieving the objectives of the
with diets, land-use policies, and the health of major Paris Climate Agreement, FELD recently documented the
ecosystems. This is why Transformation 4 calls for limited integration of food and land policies into NDCs
integrated transformations to address dietary shifts, (FELD, 2022). Other flagship projects include the Global
biodiversity, agricultural systems, and land-use policies. Commons Stewardship Initiative (led by the Center for
Bringing these elements together is a main difference Global Commons at the University of Tokyo in cooperation
between the Six Transformations and the “six entry with SDSN and other partners) and the Science Panel for
points for action” presented in the Global Sustainable the Amazon (CGC, SDSN and Yale, 2023; CGC, SYSTEMIQ,
Development Report (GSDR, 2023), which treats “Sustainable SDSN et al, 2022). Considering the complexity and far-
Food Systems and Healthy Nutrition” and the “Global reaching nature of this Transformation, we are not yet in a
Environmental Commons” as two separate entry points. position to present a scorecard for Transformation 4.

Transformation 4: Sustainable ecosystems, sustainable agriculture, and climate resilience
Table 3.4
Scorecard – Transformation 3: Zero-carbon energy systems Note: Regional and income level averages are population weighted. Details on
definitions, sources, and thresholds are available on www.sdgindex.org
Transformation 3: Zero-carbon energy systems
Law, policy- or NDC-based

UN Climate 1.5°C Paris-agreement- Unconditional fossil
commitment to reach
Ambition Alliance compatible climate action fuel subsidies
net-zero emissions by 2050
Signatory (April 2023, Climate (USD per capita, March 2022,
(April 2023, Energy & Climate
(March 2022, UN) Action Tracker) Energy Policy Tracker)
Intelligence Unit)
G20 Countries
Argentina ✓ X Highly Insufficient 29.82
Australia X ✓ Insufficient 65.53
Brazil X X Insufficient 2.71
Canada ✓ ✓ Highly Insufficient 537.99

China X 2060 Highly Insufficient 17.55
France ✓ ✓ Insufficient 116.01
Germany ✓ ✓ Insufficient 195.23
India X X Highly Insufficient 27.19
Indonesia X X Highly Insufficient 23.66
Italy ✓ ✓ Insufficient 65.76
Japan ✓ ✓ Insufficient 12.93
Korea, Rep. ✓ ✓ Highly Insufficient 97.46
Mexico ✓ X Highly Insufficient 61.88
Russian Federation X 2060 Critically Insufficient 35.50
Saudi Arabia X 2060 Highly Insufficient 158.17
South Africa X X Insufficient 10.66
Türkiye X 2053 Critically Insufficient 165.68
United Kingdom ✓ ✓ Almost Sufficient 589.53
United States X ✓ Insufficient 217.32
By regions
East and South Asia NO DATA 11 of 21 NO DATA NO DATA
Eastern Europe and Central Asia 14 of 27 20 of 27 NO DATA NO DATA
Latin America and the Caribbean 21 of 29 18 of 29 NO DATA NO DATA
Middle East and North Africa NO DATA 9 of 17 NO DATA NO DATA
Oceania 12 of 12 6 of 12 NO DATA NO DATA
OECD members 33 of 38 34 of 38 NO DATA NO DATA
Sub-Saharan Africa 40 of 49 20 of 49 NO DATA NO DATA
By income level
Low-income countries 25 of 27 8 of 27 NO DATA NO DATA
Lower-middle-income countries 34 of 54 30 of 54 NO DATA NO DATA
Upper-middle-income countries 32 of 54 33 of 54 NO DATA NO DATA
High-income countries 43 of 58 47 of 58 NO DATA NO DATA
More ambitious signatory net-zero by 2050 1.5⁰C compatible 0 USD/capita

Moderately ambitious N/A net-zero by 2060 2⁰C compatible ≤ 50 USD/capita
Less ambitious not a signatory no commitment above 2⁰C 50+ USD/capita

Transformation 5: Sustainable cities urban organizations and associations have mainstreamed

the SDGs into their work programs, including C40,
Cities and other urban areas are home to around UN-Habitat, United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG),
55 percent of humanity, and account for 70 percent and Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI), as well
of global economic output. By 2050, these shares will as the OECD’s Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs, Cities
increase to 70 and 85 percent, respectively (Jiang and and Regions.
O’Neill, 2017). The OECD estimates that 105 of the
169 SDG targets will not be reached without sufficiently By design, Transformation 5 calls for regional and local
engaging sub-national governments (OECD, 2020). the policy trackers. These would notably track efforts at the
COVID-19 pandemic has had lasting impacts on urban regional and city level to curb urban pollution, increase
mobility, land use, property values, and transport systems housing affordability, and strengthen mobility and
in developed and developing countries alike. Many access to public transport. Other policy measures could
Box 3.1 The OECD, SDSN and the European Committee of the Regions survey of city
and regional SDG policies in a time of crisis
The survey focused on impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine on SDG implementation at the subnational
level. Questions explored policy measures to address rising costs of living (SDGs 1, 2, 11, 13), energy costs (SDG 7) and food prices
(SDG 2), which have emerged as political priorities across the world.
The responses from over 250 governments and territorial stakeholders will be used to support the OECD program “A Territorial
Approach to the SDGs”. An OECD-SDSN policy paper and a CoR map on city and regional commitment to the SDGs will be
presented at the UN High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development – where progress on SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities) is
being reviewed – and at the September 2023 SDG Summit.
More than half of the 192 local and regional governments surveyed have a dedicated SDG strategy or action plan and a similar
percentage use indicators to track SDG progress (as of April 2023). Other survey questions looked at the types of data used by
cities and regions to track progress, challenges and success factors, and explored specific policy initiatives related to SDGs 2 and 7.
Figure 3.5
Percentage of local and regional governments using selected SDG policies and actions
Awareness raising campaigns
A dedicated Strategy or Action Plan
Use of indicators to track progress
An internal structure working across

services and horizontally
A sustainable development council or similar
attached to a high level decision maker
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Source: 2023 OECD-SDSN-CoR survey on the role of cities and regions for the SDGs in an uncertain geopolitical context

Transformation 6: Universal digital access and services
be considered proxies of local government commitment Countries face different challenges depending on the
to achieving the triple objective of being economically maturity of their digital infrastructure and technologies.
productive, socially inclusive, and environmentally Less-connected countries especially need to invest to
sustainable. SDSN is working with local partners to provide widespread, affordable internet access and
strengthen policy frameworks in regions and cities, and promote digital literacy. Yet issues surrounding privacy,
to reinforce the science-policy interface at the subna- cybersecurity, e-government, digital inclusion, and the
tional level. robustness of digital regulatory frameworks concern
all countries.
In early 2023, the OECD, SDSN, and the European Committee
of the Regions (CoR) conducted a survey to take stock of city The Transformation 6 scorecard builds on the World
and regional SDG progress. Previous surveys on the topic Bank’s Digitalization for Development policy framework
were conducted by the OECD and the CoR in 2019 and 2020. (World Bank, 2022). It aims to capture efforts made

to strengthen digital infrastructure, data security, and
government platforms and services, as well as the
promotion of key enablers such as digital literacy and
Transformation 6: Universal digital privacy and inclusiveness (including bringing a social
access and services and gender perspective to digital and technology
policies). For now, the scorecard captures a subset of
Artificial intelligence and other digital technologies these different elements: we aim to improve coverage
are disrupting almost every sector of the economy: over time. UN DESA’s Online Services Index assesses the
agriculture (precision agriculture), mining (autonomous quality of government provision of online services;
vehicles), manufacturing (robotics), retail (e-commerce), the ITU’s ICT Regulatory Tracker is a composite score
finance (e-payments, trading strategies), media (social of regulatory and competition framework for the
networks), health (diagnostics, telemedicine), education ICT sector; UNCTAD’s Global Cyberlaw tracker maps
(online learning), public administration (e-governance, legislation on e-commerce, consumer and data
e-voting), and more recently, clerical, drafting, research protection and cybercrime; and, finally, the Inclusive
and creative work (generative AI), as well as other fields in Internet Index’s policy score assesses a set of policies
science and technology. on digital inclusion for women and children and safety
and privacy, as well as policies aiming to increase
Digital technologies can raise productivity, lower produc- broadband and 5G access.
tion costs, reduce emissions, expand access, dematerialize
production, improve matching in markets, enable the use Further analyses will be needed to capture policies and
of big and unconventional data, and make public services regulations supporting “last-mile inclusion”, particularly
more readily available. They can also improve resource- in relation to financial services and digital literacy,
use efficiencies, support the circular economy, enable and participation and trust in digital institutions (BCG
zero-carbon energy systems, help monitor and protect 2020, Morell-Ducós 2021, Shree, S., Pratap, B., Saroy, R.
ecosystems, and assume other critical roles in support of 2021, CGAP/World Bank 2020). Trackers are also needed
the SDGs. Yet the disruptive nature of new technologies to better gauge the quality of internet regulations,
calls for deliberative exchanges and consultations with measure access to e-government services and evaluate
multiple stakeholders and careful assessment of distribu- their quality, and to assess government readiness to
tional impacts and trade-offs. respond to and to prevent cybersecurity threats.

Table 3.5
Scorecard – Transformation 6: Transformation to universal Note: Regional and income level averages are population weighted. Details
on definitions, sources, and thresholds are available on www.sdgindex.org
digital access and services Source: Authors’ analysis
Transformation 6: Transformation to universal

digital access and services
UN Online Policy Score, The Inclusive

ICT Regulatory Tracker 2022 Global Cyberlaw Tracker
Services Index Internet Index
(score, 2022, ITU) (score, 2021, UNCTAD)
(score, 2022, UNDESA) (score, Economist Impact, 2022)
G20 Countries
Argentina 0.81 84.50 4.00 0.64
Australia 0.94 94.50 4.00 0.82
Brazil 0.90 94.00 4.00 0.77
Canada 0.85 87.50 4.00 0.91
China 0.89 63.00 4.00 0.77
France 0.88 95.50 4.00 0.73
Germany 0.79 93.50 4.00 0.77
India 0.79 85.00 3.00 0.73
Indonesia 0.76 62.00 4.00 0.82
Italy 0.87 99.00 4.00 0.82
Japan 0.91 73.50 4.00 0.68
Korea, Rep. 0.98 70.20 4.00 NO DATA
Mexico 0.82 94.00 4.00 0.82
Russian Federation 0.74 61.50 4.00 NO DATA
Saudi Arabia 0.82 94.00 4.00 0.73
South Africa 0.75 85.30 4.00 0.73
Türkiye 0.86 93.50 4.00 0.86
United Kingdom 0.89 95.50 4.00 0.91
United States 0.93 90.50 4.00 0.82
By regions
East and South Asia 0.78 73.27 3.48 0.71
Eastern Europe and Central Asia 0.68 61.73 3.51 NO DATA
Latin America and the Caribbean 0.73 84.44 3.74 NO DATA
Middle East and North Africa 0.48 73.43 3.31 0.56
Oceania 0.34 61.53 1.51 NO DATA
OECD members 0.87 89.36 3.99 0.80
Sub-Saharan Africa 0.44 73.72 3.07 0.56
By income level
Low-income countries 0.33 62.06 2.45 NO DATA
Lower-middle-income countries 0.66 78.6 3.27 0.66
Upper-middle-income countries 0.82 71.1 3.91 NO DATA
High-income countries 0.88 88.6 3.98 0.79
More ambitious ≥ 0.8 ≥ 85 4 ≥ 80

Moderately ambitious ≥ 0.65 ≥ 70 >4 ≥ 60
Less ambitious below 0.65 below 70 below 3 below 40

3.3 Support for multilateralism under the Charter of the United Nations
3.3 Support for multilateralism This section is an attempt to take stock of countries’ efforts
under the Charter of the to adhere to the values and principles of multilateralism
in order to achieve sustainable development. To our
United Nations knowledge, there is currently no overarching measure
that captures the many dimensions of support for
Achieving the SDGs requires global cooperation under multilateralism. The International Peace Institute’s 2022
the UN Charter. The Charter, signed in 1945, is the Index of Multilateralism explored the state of multilateralism
founding document of the United Nations. It codifies globally, but it did not compare country engagement
the major principles of international relations, from the (IPI, 2022). Other reports focus on mapping the size of
sovereign equality of States to the prohibition of the diplomatic networks or measuring specific aspects of
use of force in international relations. Climate change, multilateral efforts (e.g., peace or official development

peace, cybersecurity, reliable data and information, and assistance). The assessment presented this year is a pilot
pandemic prevention and response all depend on close that we aim to improve and expand in coming years. We
collaboration across countries and a strong multilateral welcome comments and feedback.
system, while global supply chains and financial flows
can either support or undermine countries’ efforts to We present a variety of proxy indicators to gauge countries’
achieve the SDGs. The 2015 Declaration, Transforming ratification of UN treaties, their membership in UN
our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, institutions, unilateral sanctions they have adopted against
recalls that: other UN Member States, and their efforts to promote
global solidarity – including international financial flows
“Seventy years ago, an earlier generation of world – and peace. In most cases, we aim to capture the latest
leaders came together to create the United Nations. period (2018–2022) or the latest available data points.
From the ashes of war and division they fashioned The variables related to the ratification of treaties and the
this Organization and the values of peace, dialogue adoption of unilateral coercive measures cover 1946–2022
and international cooperation which underpin it. and 1950–2021respectively. This assessment is based
The supreme embodiment of those values is the on UN databases and several third-party sources. For
Charter of the United Nations.” presentational reasons, the tables and charts cover only
OECD, G20, and large economies. The full database and
The SDGs are not only a public policy framework; they additional material are accessible online.
are an ethical imperative grounded in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, which celebrates its 75th Percentage of UN Treaties ratified: This indicator covers
anniversary this year. The SDGs are based on the core all Conventions, International Conventions, and Agreements
premises of the Universal Declaration, that, “All human adopted by the United Nations from 1946–2022, including
beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights those adopted before 1946 that were later added to the
… and should act towards one another in a spirit of UN Treaty system. It excludes Protocols, Optional Protocols,
brotherhood,” and that “it is essential to promote the and Amendments, as well as Conventions that were later
development of friendly relations between nations”. In terminated or only applied to a small number of countries.
2022, the United Nations Secretary-General appointed a For each of the 150 treaties, we recorded whether Member
High-Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism, States had signed or ratified them. Signature of a treaty is
with a mandate to develop a list of concrete, actionable not legally binding, whereas ratification (or acceptance,
recommendations to improve international cooperation accession, definitive signature, and succession) is legally
and advance the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable binding. The indicator for the percentage of UN treaties
Development. We therefore consider that promoting ratified (all international) shows the percentage of these
multilateralism and global cooperation under the UN 150 treaties that each Member State has ratified, whereas
Charter is an important component of countries’ efforts the percentage of UN treaties ratified (selective) indicator
and commitments for the SDGs. shows the percentage each country has ratified of a select

Figure 3.6
UN treaties ratified by Member States (%), 1946–2022
Austria
Hungary
Italy
Spain
Sweden
Australia
Belgium
Denmark
Finland
Germany
Ireland
Netherlands
United Kingdom
France
Luxembourg
Norway
Portugal
Chile
Czechia
Greece
Japan
Mexico
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Switzerland
Canada
Costa Rica
Korea, Republic of
Lithuania
New Zealand
Poland
Latvia
Colombia
Estonia
Iceland
Türkiye
Israel
United States
Nigeria
Philippines
Argentina
Brazil
Russian Federation % UN Treaties ratified
(selective list, 1946–2022)
South Africa
Bangladesh % UN Treaties ratified
Pakistan (all international, 1946–2022)
India
China
Egypt, Arab Republic of Note: Countries listed in
descending order of the
Ethiopia
% UN treaties ratified
Indonesia (selective list).
Saudi Arabia Source: Authors based on
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 UN Treaty Collection

list of 58 treaties. This shorter list includes only those treaties to 2021. For EU member states, for example, this includes EU
ratified by more than 50 percent of UN Member States. sanctions as well as sanctions that the country has imposed
Austria, Hungary, Italy, Nigeria, Spain, and Sweden have individually. Sanctions imposed by the European Union
ratified more than 98 percent of all treaties in the selective after Brexit were allocated as separate sanctions for the UK.
list. By contrast, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Israel, Saudi Arabia,
and the United States have ratified less than 75 percent Membership and participation in selected United
(selective list) (Figure 3.6). Nations organizations: This indicator captures
membership in 24 United Nations organizations: all
Unilateral coercive measures (UCMs): This indicator 15 specialized agencies, all 6 United Nations funds
reviews the adoption by UN Member States of unilateral and programmes, the UN Conference on Trade and
sanctions against another UN Member State. Several UN Development (UNCTAD), the UN Framework Convention

resolutions stress that unilateral coercive measures and on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the World Trade
practices are “contrary to international law, international Organization (WTO). These organizations were selected
humanitarian law, the UN Charter and the norms and to represent a broad range of issues related to sustainable
principles governing peaceful relations among States, and development (education, health, finance, trade,
highlight that on long-term, these measures may result telecommunication, and industrial policies), as well as
in social problems and raise humanitarian concerns in including all of the specialized agencies.
the States targeted.”1 In 2014, the Human Rights Council
created the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the UN Specialized Agencies: the Food and Agriculture
negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the Organization (FAO); the International Civil Aviation
enjoyment of human rights. Organization (ICAO); the International Fund for
Agricultural Development (IFAD); the International Labour
Since 1966, the Security Council has established Organization (ILO); the International Monetary Fund
31 sanctions regimes: in Southern Rhodesia, South Africa, (IMF); the International Maritime Organization (IMO); the
the former Yugoslavia (2), Haiti (2), Angola, Liberia (3), Eritrea/ International Telecommunication Union (ITU); the UN
Ethiopia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Côte d’Ivoire, Iran, Somalia/ Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO);
Eritrea, Iraq (2), the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Sudan, Lebanon, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, (UNIDO); the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO); the
Libya (2), Guinea-Bissau, Central African Republic, Yemen, Universal Postal Union (UPU; the World Health Organization
South Sudan and Mali, as well as sanctions on ISIL (Da’esh) (WHO); the World Intellectual Property Organization
and Al-Qaida, and the Taliban. The famous 1977 United (WIPO); the World Meteorological Organization (WMO);
Nations Security Council Resolution 418 unanimously and the World Bank Group – including the International
imposed a sanctions regime against Apartheid South Africa. Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), the
International Development Association (IDA), and the
The data on UCMs presented in this report come from the International Finance Corporation (IFC). United Nations
Drexel Global Sanctions Database (V3, March 2023), which funds and programmes: UN Development Programme
provides information on sanctions adopted against other (UNDP), UN Environment Programme (UNEP), UN
countries, including the beginning and final year of sanction Population Fund (UNFPA), UN Human Settlements
imposition. Here we present sanctions adopted unilaterally Programme (UN-HABITAT), UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF),
from 1950 to 2021 that are still in place as of 2022. For our World Food Programme (WFP).
purposes, a sanction is considered unilateral if it has not
been approved by the UN Security Council, even if it is Memberships were verified as of May 2023 via each
imposed by multiple countries. Percentages represent the organization’s website. Several OECD countries are no
share of all sanctions that a country or region has adopted longer members of UNIDO; the United States and Israel
withdrew funding to UNESCO in 2011 and withdrew their
1. https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-unilateral-coercive-measures
membership in 2019.

Figure 3.7
Use of unilateral coercive measures (UCMs), number (1950–2021)
United States
Lithuania
Estonia
Latvia
Belgium
Denmark
France
Germany
Spain
Czechia
Hungary
Poland
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Austria
Finland
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Portugal
Sweden
United Kingdom
Norway
Canada
Iceland
Switzerland
Türkiye
Australia
Russian Federation
Nigeria
China
Egypt
Japan
Saudi Arabia
Republic of Korea
New Zealand
Argentina
Ethiopia
Indonesia
Pakistan
South Africa
Bangladesh
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
India
Israel
Mexico
Philippines
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
Note: Countries listed in descending order of the % UN treaties ratified (selective list). Source: Authors, based on Drexel Global Sanctions Database.

Figure 3.8
Membership in selected UN organizations, 2022
Austria
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Germany
Hungary
Italy
Japan
Korea, Republic of
Mexico
Netherlands
Poland
Spain
Switzerland
Türkiye
Czechia
Finland

France
Greece
Ireland
Israel
Luxembourg
Norway
Portugal
Slovenia
Sweden
Belgium
Canada
Denmark
Estonia
Iceland
Lithuania
New Zealand
Slovak Republic
United Kingdom
Australia
Latvia
United States
Argentina
Bangladesh
Brazil
China
Egypt, Arab Republic of
India
Indonesia
Nigeria
Pakistan
Philippines
Saudi Arabia
South Africa
Ethiopia
Russian Federation
19 20 21 22 23 24

Figure 3.9
Participation in conflicts and militarization, 2022
Iceland
New Zealand
Ireland
Czechia
Portugal Ongoing Conflict Score
Militarization Score
Austria
Canada
Slovenia
Hungary
Denmark
Slovak Republic
Japan
Belgium
Germany
Costa Rica
Poland
Switzerland
Chile
Sweden
Finland
Italy
Latvia
Australia
Spain
Estonia
Netherlands
Lithuania
Norway
United Kingdom
Greece
France
Colombia
Korea, Rep.
Mexico
United States
Türkiye
Israel
Argentina
Indonesia
South Africa
Bangladesh
Brazil
China
Philippines
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Nigeria
Saudi Arabia
Ethiopia
India
Pakistan
Russian Federation
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Note: Countries listed in ascending order of the average between both pillars. From 0 (best/more peaceful) to 5 (worst/less peaceful).
Source: Authors, based on Global Peace Index 2022 (compiled by the Institute for Economics and Peace).

Figure 3.10
Official Development Assistance (ODA) as share of GNI, 2018–2022
Luxembourg
Sweden
Norway
Denmark
Germany
United Kingdom
Netherlands

France
Switzerland
Finland
Belgium
Ireland
Japan
2018–2022
Canada
2022 (preliminary)
Austria
Iceland
New Zealand
Italy
Hungary
Spain
Poland
Australia
Slovenia
Portugal
United States
Czechia
Lithuania
Greece
Korea, Republic of
Slovak Republic
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2
Note: OECD, 2022 (2022 ODA data based on preliminary release, all other years from final data).
Countries listed in descending order of the average ratio ODA/GNI over the period 2018-2022.
Source: Authors, based on OECD

Militarization and participation in conflicts: This contributions to United Nations peacekeeping missions.
indicator aims to capture countries’ efforts to promote Overall, among G20, OECD and large countries, Czechia,
and preserve peace. It identifies countries’ level of military Iceland, Ireland, Malaysia, New Zealand, and Portugal
build-up and access to weapons, as well as their participa- obtain the highest (best) scores, whereas Israel and the
tion in ongoing domestic and military conflicts. It builds Russian Federation obtain the lowest (worst) scores.
on data provided in the Global Peace Index 2022 (compiled
by the Institute for Economics and Peace). The Ongoing International Solidarity and Financing: We present
Conflict Score builds on six indicators to investigate the data compiled by the OECD on Official Development
extent to which countries are involved in internal and Assistance (ODA) as a headline indicator of international
external conflicts, as well as their role and the duration of solidarity. In 2022, only five DAC members – Denmark,
their Involvement. The Militarization Score reflects coun- Germany, Luxembourg, Norway, and Sweden – had met or
tries’ level of military build-up and access to weapons, exceeded the 0.7 percent ODA target. When computing
as well as their level of peacefulness, both domestically overall scores, we use the average ratio of ODA/GNI over
and internationally. Comparable data on military expen- the past five years (Figure 3.10). In 2022, ODA rose by
diture as a percentage of GDP and the number of armed 13.6 percent in real terms, driven primarily by the sharp
service officers per capita are gauged, as are financial increase of in-donor refugee costs (OECD, 2023b).
Figure 3.11
Conceptual Framework for Evaluating Government Efforts and Commitments to Implement the SDGs and
Indicators Retained to Compute the Overall Score for 2023
Political Leadership & SDG Integration into Sectoral Commitment to Multilateralism

Institutional Coordination Policies & Pathways under the UN Charter
Ambitious policy, regulatory and investment
The SDGs are referenced & used in political Countries promote global cooperation
frameworks to achieve the
speeches and institutional processes for sustainable development
Six SDG Transformations
• Voluntary National Reviews • Universal quality education and • Ratification of UN Treaties

• Official speeches by country
innovation-based economy
• Membership in major UN
leaders making reference to the • Universal health coverage organizations
SDGs
• Zero-carbon energy systems • Promotion of demilitarization
• SDG coordination unit in
• Sustainable ecosystems,
and global peace
government
sustainable agriculture, and • Use of unilateral coercive
• National SDG strategy (or climate resilience measures
sustainable development
strategy) • Sustainable cities • Official Development Assistance
• National SDG monitoring system • Transformation to universal

digital access and services
(for OECD/HICs)
• SDGs referenced in annual

national budget
Note: For Pillar 2, the indicators listed correspond to the overall score for each Transformation Scorecard. This year, we could not compute scores for Transformation 4 (Sustainable ecosystems, sustainable
agriculture, and climate resilience) and Transformation 5 (Sustainable cities). Under pillar 3, the use of unilateral coercive measures correspond to measures adopted over the period 1950 to 2021 that are still
in place in 2022. They exclude measures adopted since January, 1 2022 and measures supported by UN resolutions. Political leadership and institutional coordination is weighted 50% of the total score, SDG
integration into sectoral policies and pathways is weighted 40%, and the pilot score for multilateralism counts for 10% (as this latter pillar remains a pilot this year). A Monte Carlo simulation is accessible
online showing how scores would vary with different weighting systems. Other sensitivity tests are also provided, including various aggregation methods (geometric mean vs arithmetic mean). Further
information is accessible on sdgindex.org.

3.4 Government effort and commitments for the SDGs: overall scores
3.4 Government effort and digital scorecards. More ambitious policies and actions
commitments for the SDGs: on climate and decarbonization are needed. (This year’s
edition does not track efforts on sustainable food and
overall scores land-use transformation, which is an important research
agenda at the SDSN.) Fourth, LICs and LMICs score more
Building on the Six Transformations scorecards, the SDSN highly on political leadership and institutional leadership
survey of government efforts for the SDGs, and a subset of for the SDGs than HICs. Fifth, all countries can do more to
variables related to government support for multilateralism promote multilateralism, in line with the United Nations
under the United Nations Charter, we present here overall Charter. Argentina, Barbados, Chile, Germany, Jamaica
scores rating government efforts and commitment to the and Seychelles score highest for their efforts to promote
SDGs. These scores range from 0 (very low SDG commit- multilateralism, yet no country obtains a perfect score.

ment) to 100 (very high SDG commitment) and cover all 74
countries in the 2023 SDG Policy Coordination Survey pre- Some countries perform significantly better on SDG
sented in section 3.1, including all G20 members and most government efforts and commitment than would
OECD countries. Scores draw on 32 indicators of policy be expected from their 2015 baseline level of SDG
efforts and commitment. Since the 2022 pilot, we have achievement and GDP. We assume that rich countries with
added four new indicators on digitalization and five on high educational levels and good health and infrastructure
engagement with multilateralism. We have also made some systems would have greater access to capital to invest in
methodological changes: these are explained in greater SDG transformations. Yet government efforts for the SDGs
detail in a technical annex available online, which also in 2023 correlate only moderately to their 2015 SDG Index
discusses the full list of indicators, the weighting scheme scores and per-capita GDP in 2015. Benin, Ghana, Indonesia,
applied, and various sensitivity tests used in developing Nigeria, and Senegal are just some of the countries that are
these scores. We welcome critical comments and feedback performing much better on the SDG government effort
that may help to strengthen future iterations of this work. measure than would be predicted from their baseline
SDG Index levels and 2015 per-capita GDP. In contrast, a
At the midpoint of the 2030 Agenda, we draw five major few countries with very high per-capita GDPs (US$50,000
conclusions from this comprehensive assessment of and above) and SDG Index scores (75 percent and above),
policy efforts and commitment to the SDGs (Table 3.6). such as Australia and the United States, demonstrate only a
First, government efforts and commitment to the SDGs limited commitment to the SDGs, with apparently limited
remains far too low. The average score of the 74 countries efforts made. See additional material available online.
assessed is 56 percent, with none even close to obtaining
a perfect score. Second, there are major differences across Note that this score focuses on federal or national govern-
countries. Four European countries stand out as being ment efforts for the SDGs and may not be representative
very committed to the SDGs (Finland, the Netherlands, of initiatives and policies adopted at subnational levels – in
Sweden, and Switzerland), but scores among the G20 regions, provinces, metropolitan areas, and cities. It has
countries range from 77 percent in Indonesia to less been SDSN’s privilege to also work with municipal and met-
than 40 percent in the Russian Federation and the ropolitan area associations in the United States and Brazil
United States. Third, of the three pillars, scores are on (ICS and SDSN, 2021; Lynch et al., 2019).
average lowest for the second one, related to adopting
and implementing SDG policies and pathways. This is At this midpoint of the 2030 Agenda, all countries, richer
driven in part by the moderate or low performance of and poorer alike, should use the half-way momentum to
LICs and LMICs on this pillar, as these countries may lack critically review and revise their national strategies, taking
the financial resources needed to successfully adopt and the 2030 Agenda principles as a yardstick (transformative,
implement SDG investments and pathways. The HICs’ integrated, inclusive, leaving no one behind). International
somewhat better performance on pillar 2 is largely due financing flows should be aligned with countries’ SDG
to their strong performance on the education, health and needs as well as their commitments.

Table 3.6
Measuring government SDG efforts and commitments: scores, ranks and performance by pillar
SD SD
G SD M G SD M
Co G ul Co G ul
o P til o Pa til
rd a rd a
inSDG ath SDGter Multilat- inSDG th SDGterMultilat-
SDG at w ali SDG at w ali
Coordi-
io aPath-
ys sm Coordi-
io aPath-
ys sm
Effort Country SDG Effort nationn ways eralism Effort Country SDG Effort nationn ways eralism
Rank Score Rating Rating Rating Rating Rank Score Rating Rating Rating Rating
1 Sweden 81.9
• • • • 38 Pakistan 62.2
• • • •
2 Switzerland 81.4
• • • • 39 Argentina 61.9
• • • •
3 Netherlands 80.5
• • • • 40 Morocco 61.4
• • • •
4 Finland 80.4
• • • • 41 Georgia 60.9
• • • •
5 Benin 78.7
• • • • 42 Uganda 60.6
• • • •
6 Norway 77.7
• • • • 43 Samoa 60.6
• • • •
7 Indonesia 77.3
• • • • 44 Poland 60.6
• • • •
8 Austria 77.1
• • • • 45 Bulgaria 60.4
• • • •
9 Denmark 76.6
• • • • 46 Türkiye 59.4
• • • •
10 Italy 76.2
• • • • 47 Jamaica 59.2
• • • •
11 Portugal 74.9
• • • • 48 Kazakhstan 58.0
• • • •
12 Spain 74.8
• • • • 49 Bangladesh 56.9
• • • •
13 Japan 73.7
• • • • 50 China 56.8
• • • •
14 Germany 73.5
• • • • 51 Serbia 56.0
• • • •
15 Belgium 73.3
• • • • 52 New Zealand 55.8
• • • •
16 Canada 73.3
• • • • 53 Korea, Rep. 55.1
• • • •
17 Greece 72.1
• • • • 54 United Kingdom 54.3
• • • •
18 Mexico 71.1
• • • • 55 Seychelles 53.9
• • • •
19 Colombia 71.1
• • • • 56 South Africa 52.5
• • • •
20 Ireland 69.4
• • • • 57 Hungary 52.2
• • • •
21 Slovenia 69.3
• • • • 58 Vietnam 51.5
• • • •
22 Ghana 69.1
• • • • 59 Ethiopia 51.2
• • • •
23 Cyprus 68.7
• • • • 60 Congo, Dem. Rep. 50.7
• • • •
24 Chile 67.5
• • • • 61 Peru 49.2
• • • •
25 Thailand 66.8
• • • • 62 Albania 49.2
• • • •
26 Czechia 66.0
• • • • 63 Ukraine* 48.7
• • • •
27 Egypt, Arab Rep. 65.8
• • • • 64 Brazil 48.7
• • • •
28 Romania 65.6
• • • • 65 India 47.5
• • • •
29 Senegal 65.3
• • • • 66 Algeria 47.4
• • • •
30 Nigeria 64.6
• • • • 67 Rwanda 47.0
• • • •
31 France 64.1
• • • • 68 Bosnia & Herzegovina 45.9
• • • •
32 Barbados 63.8
• • • • 69 Australia 45.7
• • • •
33 Kenya 63.7
• • • • 70 Bolivia 45.5
• • • •
34 Philippines 63.1
• • • • 71 Cameroon 42.1
• • • •
35 Ecuador 63.0
• • • • 72 Russian Federation 39.3
• • • •
36 Malaysia 62.8
• • • • 73 Israel 36.1
• • • •
37 Saudi Arabia

62.7
• • • • 74 United States 28.6
• • • •
*The data for Ukraine correspond to
Very High Effort High Effort Moderate Effort Low Effort Very Low Effort
the situation prior to February 2022,
as many data points have not been
72 Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus updated since then.
References
Lafortune, G. (2020). How much do we know about countries’
Biermann, F., Hickmann, T., Sénit, C. A., et al. (2022). Scientific
preparedness to respond to pandemics? Insights from
evidence on the political impact of the Sustainable
two country-level indices. SDSN. https://www.unsdsn.org/
Development Goals. Nature Sustainability, 5, 795–800.
how-much-do-we-know-about-countries-preparedness-
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-00909-5
to-respond-to-pandemics-insights-from-two-country-
BCG. (2020). Cash-In/Cash-Out Agent Networks: Reaching the level-indices.
Last Mile in Financial Inclusion. Boston Consulting Group.
Lafortune, G., Cortès-Puch, M., Mosnier, A., Fuller, G., Diaz,
https://connect.bcg.com/cicoeconomics/2-sizing-the-cico-
M., Riccaboni, A., Oger, A. (2021). Europe Sustainable
access-challenge_april-2020_v05/
Development Report 2021: Transforming the European Union
Campbell, L., and Gritz, A. (2023, March 21). Europe’s Green to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. SDSN, SDSN
Industrial Policy and the United States’ IRA. German Council Europe and IEEP. https://www.sdgindex.org/reports/
on Foreign Relations (DGAP). https://dgap.org/en/research/ europe-sustainable-development-report-2021/
publications/europes-green-industrial-policy-and-united-
Lafortune, G., Fuller, G., Bermont-Diaz, L., Kloke-Lesch, A.,
states-ira
Koundouri, P., Riccaboni, A. (2022). Europe Sustainable

The Center for Global Commons, SYSTEMIQ, and SDSN. Development Report 2022: Achieving the SDGs: Europe’s
(2023). Tackling International Spillovers – An Overview of Compass in a Multipolar World. SDSN and SDSN Europe.
Policy Options. Forthcoming. https://eu-dashboards.sdgindex.org/
European Parliament. (2022). European Parliament Resolution Lafortune, G., Woelm, F., Valentini, R., (2022). Towards a Sound
of 23 June 2022 on the Implementation and Delivery of the Measure of Government Efforts and Commitments for the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (2022/2002(INI)). SDGs? SDSN Working Paper. Paris, France. https://irp.cdn-
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9- website.com/be6d1d56/files/uploaded/SDSN_Policy%20
2022-0263_EN.html Tracker_WP_final_checked.pdf
FELD Action Tracker. (2022). Updated Analysis of NDCs. https:// Lepenies, R., Büttner, L., Bärlund, I. et al. (2023). The politics
feldactiontracker.org/analysis-of-ndcs of national SDG indicator systems: A comparison of four
European countries. Ambio 52, 743–756. https://doi.
HLPF. (2023). High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable org/10.1007/s13280-022-01809-w
Development. https://hlpf.un.org/home.
Lynch, A., LoPresti, A., and Fox, C. (2019). The 2019 US
IEA. (2022). Fossil Fuels Consumption Subsidies 2022. Cities Sustainable Development Report. https://www.
https://www.iea.org/reports/fossil-fuels-consumption- sustainabledevelopment.report/reports/2019-us-cities-
subsidies-2022 sustainable-development-report/
INTOSAI. (2019). Auditing Preparedness for Implementation McKee, M. et al. (2021). Drawing Light from the Pandemic:
of Sustainable Development Goals: Guidance for A New Strategy for Health and Sustainable Development.
Supreme Audit Institutions. https://www.idi.no/elibrary/ A Review of the Evidence. World Health Organization.
relevant-sais/auditing-sustainable-development- European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies.
goals-programme/1373-auditing-preparedness-for- WHO Regional Office for Europe. https://apps.who.int/iris/
implementation-of-sustainable-development-goals- handle/10665/345027.
guidance-for-supreme-audit-institutions-version-1/file
Morell-Ducós, J. (2021). Furthering Digitalization’s Potential
IPI. (2022). Multilateralism Index: Pilot Report. International for Financial Inclusion: Insights from Sub-Saharan FSPs,
Peace Institute. https://www.ipinst.org/2022/09/ Supervisors, and Associations. The Center for Financial
multilateralism-index-pilot-report Inclusion. https://www.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/
IISD. (2022). News: Tool Tracks Sustainable Development of furthering-digitalizations-potential-for-financial-inclusion-
All Cities in Brazil. SDG Knowledge Hub. https://sdg.iisd. insights-from-sub-saharan-fsps-supervisors-and-associations
org:443/news/tool-tracks-sustainable-development-of-all- OECD. (2018). PISA 2018 Insights and Interpretations. Organisation
cities-in-brazil/ for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
Kondouri, P., et al. (2022). Financing the Joint Implementation https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA%202018%20Insights%20
of the SDGs and the European Green Deal. 2nd report of the and%20Interpretations%20FINAL%20PDF.pdf
SDSN Senior Working Group on the European Green Deal. OECD. (2022). Support for fossil fuels almost doubled in
https://egd-report.unsdsn.org/ 2021, slowing progress toward international climate
Kotzé, L., et al. (2022). Planetary Integrity. Chapter 6 goals, according to new analysis from OECD and IEA.
of F. Biermann, T. Hickmann, and C. Sénit (Eds.), The Press release, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Political Impact of the Sustainable Development Goals:
Transforming Governance Through Global Goals? (pp.
140–171). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
doi:10.1017/9781009082945.007

References
Development, Paris. https://www.oecd.org/newsroom/ UNDESA. (2023). Global Sustainable Development Report

support-for-fossil-fuels-almost-doubled-in-2021-slowing- (GSDR). United Nations Department of Economic and
progress-toward-international-climate-goals-according-to- Social Affairs, New York. https://sdgs.un.org/gsdr/gsdr2023
new-analysis-from-oecd-and-iea.htm
UNEP. (2022). Adaptation Gap Report 2022. United Nations
OECD. (2023a). OECD Inventory of Support Measures for Environment Programme, New York. https://www.unep.
Fossil Fuels. Organisation for Economic Cooperation org/resources/adaptation-gap-report-2022
and Development, Paris. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/
agriculture-and-food/data/fossil-fuel-support_d86aea00-en United Nations. (2022). Nations adopt four goals, 23 targets
for 2030 in landmark un biodiversity agreement. Press
OECD (2023b). ODA Levels in 2022 – Preliminary Data: Detailed Release, United Nations, New York. https://www.un.org/
Summary Note. OECD Publishing. Paris, France. https:// sustainabledevelopment/blog/2022/12/press-release-
www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/ nations-adopt-four-goals-23-targets-for-2030-in-landmark-
ODA-2022-summary.pdf un-biodiversity-agreement/
OECD, SDSN and Committee of the Regions. (2023). The
Role of Cities and Regions for the SDGs in an Uncertain
Geopolitical Context. Forthcoming. Data Sources
Office of the Auditor General of Canada. (2018). Opening See codebook on sdgindex.org/sdgtransformationcenter.
statement to the Senate Standing Committee on Energy, org for more detailed information about data sources and
the Environment and Natural Resources. https://www.oag- up-to-date links.
bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/oss_20180614_e_43093.html
Colenbrander, S., Pettinotti, L., and Cao, Y. (2022). A fair share
Office of the Auditor General of Canada. (2021). Implementing of climate finance? An appraisal of past performance,
the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. Report 1 future pledges and prospective contributors. ODI Working
of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Paper. ODI, London. https://odi.org/en/publications/a-
Development https://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/ fairshare-of-climate-finance-an-appraisal-of-past-
English/att__e_43809.html performance-future-pledges-andprospective-contributors/
Provendier, F. (2022). ODD tout est lié ! Rapport autour des Drexel Sanctions Database. (2022). Syropoulos, C., Felbermayr,
objectifs de développement durable, remis au Premier ministre, G., Kirilakha, A., Yalcin, E., and Yotov, Y.V. The Global
Jean Castex et à la ministre de la Transition écologique, Barbara Sanctions Data Base - Release 3: COVID-19, Russia, and
Pompili. Ministères Écologie Énergie Territoires. https://www. Multilateral Sanctions. School of Economics Working
ecologie.gouv.fr/remise-du-rapport-florence-provendier-sur- Paper Series 2022-11. LeBow College of Business, Drexel
objectifs-developpement-durable-odd University, Philadelphia. https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/
Sachs, J., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G., Fuller, G., and Woelm, F. drxlwp/2022_011.html
(2022). Sustainable Development Report 2022. Cambridge: Energy Policy Tracker. (2021). https://www.
Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781009210058 energypolicytracker.org/region/g20/
SDGCounting. (2022). Halfway to 2030: A Global Goals Data Global Health Security Index. (2021). https://www.ghsindex.org/
Update. https://medium.com/sdg-counting/halfway-to-
2030-a-global-goals-data-update-5b29dcf62a7a Global Sanctions Data Base. Felbermayr, G., Kirilakha, A.,
Syropoulos, C., Yalcin, E., and Yotov, Y.V. (2020). European
SDSN and OECD. (2019). Long-Term Pathways for the Economic Review, Volume 129. https://www.sciencedirect.
Implementation of the SDGs: The Governance Implications. com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014292120301914
Reflection Paper. Paris, France. https://irp-cdn.
multiscreensite.com/be6d1d56/files/uploaded/OECD_ Green Economy Tracker. (2023). https://greeneconomytracker.
SDSN-Working-Paper_2019_Final.pdf org/policies/green-covid-19-recovery
SDSN, Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, and Center GHS Index. (2023). The 2021 Global Health Security Index.
for Global Commons at the University of Tokyo. (2023). Global https://www.ghsindex.org/
Commons Stewardship Index 2022. Forthcoming. IFAD. (2023). Member states. International Fund for
Shree, S., Pratap, B., Saroy, R. et al. (2021). Digital payments and Agricultural Development, Rome. https://www.ifad.org/en/
consumer experience in India: a survey based empirical member-states
study. Journal of Banking, Finance and Technology 5, 1–20. ILO. (2023). Member states. International Labour Organization,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42786-020-00024-z Geneva. https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/how-
Taryn Fransen, T., Henderson, C., O’Connor, R., et al. the-ilo-works/member-states/lang--en/index.htm
(2022). The State of Nationally Determined Contributions: ICAO. (2023). Member states. International Civil Aviation
2022. World Resources Institute. https://files.wri. Organization, Montreal. https://www.icao.int/about-icao/
org/d8/s3fs-public/2022-10/state-of-ndcs-2022. pages/member-states.aspx
pdf?VersionId=1KmRfYb85rXRRK2rYivyzxSDuUhdR60

Data Sources
IMF. (2023). List of members. International Monetary Fund, United Nations Digital Library. (2023). General
Washington D.C. https://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/ Assembly voting data. https://digitallibrary.un.org/
memdir/memdate.htm search?ln=en&cc=General%20
Assembly%20Plenary&p=&f=&rm=&ln=en&sf=&so=d&rg
IMO. (2023). Member states. International Maritime =50&c=General%20Assembly%20Plenary&c=&of=hb&fti=
Organization, London. https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/ 0&fct__1=Voting%20Data&fti=0
ERO/Pages/MemberStates.aspx
United Nations Treaty Collection. (2023). Treaty
Institute for Economics and Peace. (2022). Global Peace Index data. https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.
2022. https://www.economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/ aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=I-1&chapter=1&clang=_en
uploads/2022/06/GPI-2022-web.pdf
UNDESA. (2022). UN E-Government Survey 2022. United
ITU. (2023). ICT Regulatory Tracker. International Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New
Telecommunication Union, Geneva. https://app.gen5. York. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/
digital/tracker/metrics
UNESCO. (2023). Member states. United Nations Educational,

Net Zero Tracker. (2023). https://zerotracker.net/ Scientific and Cultural Organization, Paris. https://pax.
OECD. (2023). Social Protection: Voluntary Health Insurance. unesco.org/countries/ListeMS.html
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, UNESCO. (2023). UIS Statistics. United Nations Educational,
Paris. https://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=30139 Scientific and Cultural Organization, Paris. http://data.uis.
SIPRI Arms Transfers Database. (2023). Stockhom International unesco.org/
Peace Research Institute, Stockholm. https://sipri.org/ UNWTO. (2023). Member states. World Tourism Organization,
databases/armstransfers Madrid. https://www.unwto.org/member-states
UNEP. (2023). Member states directory. United Nations UPU. (2023). Member countries. Universal Postal Union, Bern.
Environment Programme, Nairobi. https://www.unep.org/ https://www.upu.int/en/Universal-Postal-Union/About-
cpr/member-states-directory UPU/Member-Countries
UNFCCC. Global Climate Action NAZCA. United Nations WHO. (2021). GHO, Data by Country. World Health
Framework Convention on Climate Change, Bonn. https:// Organization, Geneva. https://apps.who.int/gho/data/view.
climateaction.unfccc.int/ main.INDEXOFESSENTIALSERVICECOVERAGEv
UNFCCC. (2023). Parties, convention and observer states. WHO. (2023). Member countries. World Health Organization,
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Geneva. https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/countries
Bonn. https://unfccc.int/process/parties-non-party-
stakeholders/parties-convention-and-observer-states World Bank. Women, Business and the Law 2023. World Bank,
Washington, DC. doi:10.1596/978-1-4648-1944-5. https://
UNFPA. (2023). Worldwide. United Nations Population Fund, wbl.worldbank.org/en/reports
New York. https://www.unfpa.org/worldwide
World Bank. World Bank Open Data. https://data.worldbank.org
UN-Habitat. (2023). UN-Habitat Assembly. UN-Habitat,
Nairobi. https://unhabitat.org/governance/un-habitat- World Bank. (2023). Member countries. World Bank,
assembly#:~:text=UN%2DHabitat%20Assembly%20is%20 Washington D.C. https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/
a,RES%2F73%2F239). leadership/members#ibrd
UNHRC. (2023). Membership of the Human Rights Council, 1 WIPO. (2023). Members. World Intellectual Property
January - 31 December 2023 by year when term expires. Organization, Geneva. https://www.wipo.int/members/en/
United Nations Human Rights Council, Geneva. https://
www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/members-by-year WMO. (2023). Members. World Meteorological Organization,
Geneva. https://public.wmo.int/en/about-us/members
UNICEF. (2023). Where we work. United Nations International
Children’s Emergency Fund, New York. https://www.unicef.
org/where-we-work#A
UNCTAD. (2023). Global Cyberlaw Tracker. United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development, Geneva. https://
unctad.org/topic/ecommerce-and-digital-economy/
ecommerce-law-reform/global-cyberlaw-tracker
UNCTAD. (2023). Membership. United Nations Conference
on Trade and Development, Geneva. https://unctad.org/
about/membership

4
Lessons Learned and Next Steps

Ten Years of Work on SDG Data and
Statistics by The SDSN, its Networks,
and Partners
Part 4
Lessons Learned and Next Steps
Ten Years of Work on SDG Data and Statistics by
The SDSN, its Networks, and Partners
Despite the fact that we are halfway through to 2030, Council released its report Indicators and a Monitoring
much still needs to be done to strengthen the data and Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals:
methodologies underlying the SDG indicator framework. Launching a Data Revolution, directed to the UN Secretary-
The Resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly General (SDSN 2015). Through its flagship initiatives,
on 25 September 2015, Transforming Our World: The 2030 including the SDG Index and the Thematic Research
Agenda for Sustainable Development, recognized from the Network on Data and Statistics (TReNDS), the SDSN works
start the importance of closely monitoring progress on closely with many partners to support global, national,
the Goals. The section dedicated to SDG monitoring notes and local efforts to leverage the SDGs as a monitoring and
that “our governments have the primary responsibility for accountability tool. The SDG Index is, by design, a measure
follow-up and review, at the national, regional and global that goes beyond GDP. Building on more than ten years of
levels, in relation to the progress made in implementing work, this chapter discusses lessons learned from SDSN’s
the Goals and targets over the coming 15 years” (United flagship initiatives on data and statistics, identifying key
Nations, 2015). The resolution also calls for broader priorities for improving the availability, quality, and use of
measures of progress to complement GDP. data for sustainable development.
Thanks to the work of the United Nations Inter-Agency

and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDG), countries
have adopted a common monitoring framework 4.1 The SDG Index: a tool for guiding
comprising 231 indicators, for which 219 have data as
of October 2022.1 Gaps remain that limit our capacity SDG action and strengthening
to track SDG progress, and the IAEG-SDG continues to accountability
actively expand coverage where national data is missing,
developing new methods, identifying new sources to Measuring sustainable development: why the
disaggregate the indicators by key population groups SDG Index?
(such as by gender), and creating indicators to measure
progress in local areas. The Cape Town Global Action Plan Prior to the SDGs, there was already a vast body of
for Sustainable Development Data, released in South Africa literature on how to define and measure sustainable
at the first United Nations World Data Forum in January development (Brundtland 1987; Dasgupta and Mäler
2017 and adopted by the UN Statistical Commission, 2000; Stiglitz, Sen, and Fitoussi 2009; Arrow et al.
provides a strategic vision to strengthen data systems for 2013). The adoption of the SDGs and the Paris Climate
Agenda 2030 (HLG-PCCB 2017).2 Agreement in 2015 established a shared vocabulary for
sustainable development, oriented towards Agenda 2030,
Since its inception in 2012, the SDSN has incorporated a with the Paris Agreement aiming for climate-neutrality
strong focus on data and scienced-based pathways for by 2050. In comparison to previous international
sustainable development. In 2015, the SDSN Leadership development agendas and goals, such as the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), the SDGs incorporated
from the start a strong focus on targets, indicators, and
1. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/meetings/iaeg-sdgs-meeting-13/8_ monitoring – notably via the annual Voluntary National
Data-availability-review.pdf Review (VNR) process. The IAEG-SDG, which has operated
2. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/hlg/Cape_Town_Global_Action_Plan_for_
Sustainable_Development_Data.pdf
under the United Nations Statistical Commission (UNSC)

Part 4.Lessons Learned and Next Steps
since 2015, was tasked to develop and implement the as conversation-openers and contribute, along with other
global indicator framework for the SDGs. The global tools, to co-creating solutions with policymakers and
indicator framework was adopted by the General stakeholders (Lafortune and Schmidt-Traub 2019).
Assembly on 6 July 2017 and is refined and reviewed
annually. The framework currently includes 231 unique The SDG Index measures countries’ performance on
indicators (248 when including indicators that repeat the 17 SDGs. It both tracks distance to pre-defined
under two or three different targets). performance thresholds (at one point in time) and
evaluates whether countries are on-track or off-track
Indicators provide data in specific areas, but they do (based on past growth rates extrapolated to 2030).
not give us an aggregate measure of a country’s SDG Building on recommendations made in Launching a Data
performance (Schmidt-Traub et al. 2017). The SDGs include Revolution” back in 2015, the SDG Index includes around
169 targets and 240 indicators, which is complex to digest 100 indicators (this year’s edition includes precisely 97
from an operational point of view. Composite indices, global indicators), clustered by SDGs and normalized on
however, despite their well-known shortcomings, allow a 0–100 scale using a classic min-max function. Scores
us to synthesize complex information and may be more are calculated using the arithmetic mean of normalized
effective in stimulating public debate than a large number indicators and presented for each indicator, for individual
of individual scores that could result in cherry picking goals, and for the SDGs as a whole. Performance bounds
(OECD and JRC 2008). Widely used composite indices to denote SDG achievement for individual indicators are
include the Human Development Index, the Environmental based on a clear decision tree, similar to the one used by
Performance Index (Wolf and Emerson et al. 2022), and the OECD in its assessment of distance to SDG targets
the Better Life Index (OECD 2022a). The SDSN and partners (Lafortune et al. 2020; OECD 2019a). The Dashboards
have argued since 2017 that a combination of composite address the well-known problem of “compensation” in
SDG metrics and dashboards is needed at the global, the construction of composite indices, in which good
regional, and subnational levels to inform policies towards performance on some indicators compensates for poor
achieving complex integrated goals (Schmidt-Traub et al. performance on others, by focusing on the two lowest-
2017; Lafortune and Schmidt-Traub 2019). These metrics scoring indicators under each goal (Lafortune et al. 2018).
and dashboards can be combined with other instruments
(from forward-looking models to policy trackers towards The SDG Index methodology is fully transparent – and
deep decarbonization and sustainable food and land available online. It has been peer-reviewed by Nature
systems) to increase accountability and guide action on Geoscience (Schmidt-Traub et al. 2017) and by Cambridge
key SDG transformations. University Press. The global edition was statistically
audited by the European Commission in 2019, who
recognized that, “All things considered, the SDG Index is
The SDG Index: method and participative process a noteworthy effort of synthetizing the 17 adopted SDGs
into a single figure. Overall, the ranks of the SDG Index are
When it comes to integrated assessment models and tools fairly robust. The index is anchored on the 2030 Agenda
like the SDG Index, the process often matters as much as for Sustainable Development adopted by all UN Member
the results. The soundness, relevance, and practical utility States and rigorously follows the same structure of
of such models and tools depend not only on scientific 17 goals” (Papadimitriou, Neves, and Becker 2019).
robustness, but also on their ability to generate partici-
pative exchanges, and to connect with policymakers and It also builds on an inclusive and participative process.
other stakeholders. In the context of SDG monitoring in The SDG Index relies on inputs from the SDSN network
the European Union, we proposed a framework and set of experts – the largest global network of scientists and
of criteria in 2019, in collaboration with the Economic and experts mobilized for the SDGs – and other partner
Social Committee (EESC), to assess “the robustness and organizations. Each year, an open online consultation
fitness of SDG monitoring tools” – so that they could serve is conducted using draft SDG Index results before

4.1 The SDG Index: a tool for guiding SDG action and strengthening accountability
Box 4.1 GIS for the SDGs: Assessing pedestrian accessibility in urban areas
In the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the associated New Urban Agenda, countries agreed to take action
to provide cities with more accessible, well-connected infrastructure that would bring people into public spaces, and to
enhance walkability through pedestrian accessibility.
Pedestrian accessibility is the extent to which the built environment facilitates walking access to destinations of interest,
or the ability of urban residents to access services and opportunities. This metric is particularly useful for assessing spatial
justice in cities, usually represented by disadvantaged communities being compelled to live in deteriorated urban areas
that receive only a small share of public investments, resulting in low levels of accessibility.
Two sources of geographically explicit data were used to calculate this indicator. OpenStreetMap was used to collect
data on pedestrian infrastructure and geographically allocated places of interest (POI): hospitals, schools, supermarkets,
restaurants, schools, etc. Data on population density for each city was retrieved from the European Commission’s
2020 Global Human Settlement Layer (GHSL), covering functional urban areas across the entire world. The GHSL provides
data in the form of a 100 meter by 100 meter grid, in which each cell has an associated population-density value.
Figure 4.1
Map of Lagos, Nigeria, showing the scale at which calculations are performed (100 m2 grid).
4. Lessons Learned and Next Steps
To assess accessibility to services for each urban area, we used network analysis to measure the distance separating each
population cell grid from the closest amenities, divided by category, and considering the street network. This enabled us to
quantify and map accessibility to urban infrastructure at the street intersection level. For each 100 m2 cell in the population
grid data, “walking time” reflects the time that a person residing inside that cell area would take to walk to the closest
amenity from a given category of services, using existing pedestrian infrastructure.
The complete methodology, along with results and data visualizations, can be found on the SDG Transformation
Centre website. Data processing used code written in Python: the code is publicly available on SDSN’s Github page. The
methodology for this indicator was adapted and expanded from Nicoletti et al. (2022), “Disadvantaged communities have
lower access to urban infrastructure.”

Box 4.2 GIS for the SDGs: Assessing accessibility to all-season roads in rural areas
SDG Indicator 9.1.1 considers the proportion of the rural population living within two kilometers of an all-season road: a
road that is motorable throughout the year, although it may be temporarily unavailable during inclement weather.
To compute this indicator we used and expanded on the most recent official methodology put forward by the World
Bank and the 2019 Rural Access Index (RAI) Supplemental Guidelines (Workman and McPherson, 2019). The Sustainable
Development Report 2023 represents, to date, the only publicly available application of this method at a global scale.
Calculating final country scores relies entirely on geospatial datasets and methods. The key steps of this calculation are:
mapping all motorable roads, drawing a two-kilometer buffer around them, and determining the percentage of the rural
population that resides within the buffer.
Figure 4.2 Figure 4.3
Diagram of a motorable road with the two-kilometer Example of the method as applied in
buffer applied, identifying rural populations living rural Democratic Republic of the Congo
within and outside the buffer area
RURAL POPULATIONS
OUTSIDE ROAD BUFFER RURAL POPULATIONS
INSIDE ROAD BUFFER
URBAN POPULATIONS
(NOT COUNTED)
The particular challenge of this method lies in assessing whether or not a road provides all-season access. It is clear that
simply discounting unpaved roads altogether is not realistic, as those often do provide all-year access to rural populations.
Since no single, complete and timely road dataset is available to measure road access, several criteria were used to
approximate a road’s passability: road surface (paved or unpaved), accumulated precipitation, road slope, and data on the
country’s ability to keep roads motorable through infrastructure maintenance budgets (since the latter isn’t available for all
countries, GDP per capita was used as a proxy).
Rural areas within the unpaved roads’ buffer zones are assessed on passability criteria, and their populations are scaled
accordingly. For example, precipitation and slope criteria each represent a multiplying factor that ranges from 50% to 95%:
if a buffer area is very steep, cliffed, and in a very wet climate, only 25% (50% x 50%) of the rural population accessing that
road is considered to have access to it. GDP per capita is used as a correcting factor, as countries with the ability to invest in
road infrastructure should be able to keep roads passable despite harsh terrain and adverse climate conditions.
The complete methodology, along with results and data visualizations, can be found on the SDG Transformation Centre
website. Data processing used code written in Python and Javascript: the code is publicly available on SDSN’s Github page.
The methodology for this indicator was adapted and expanded from Workman and McPherson (2019), Measuring Rural
Access Using New Technologies: Supplemental Guidelines.

Box 4.3 The long-standing partnership between the European Economic and Social
Committee (EESC) and the SDSN to advance policies and data for the SDGs in the EU
Mr. Peter Schmidt
European Economic and Social Committee (EESC)
Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment (NAT) Section, President
The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) has been working together with
SDSN for several years now, even before the launch of the first edition of the Europe
Sustainable Development Report (ESDR) in 2019. The first ESDR report was based on
earlier EESC work developed in cooperation with SDSN, on “Indicators better suited to evaluate the SDGs – the civil society
contribution”. The ESDR was intended to identify SDG policy gaps within the European Union. It was developed in response
to the EESC’s call for a monitoring report, to be produced in close collaboration with civil society organizations, that would
complement Eurostat's annual SDG report.
Since 2019, the EESC has provided the SDSN with civil society perspectives and facilitated contacts and dialogues with
stakeholders and EU policymakers, thus contributing to both the preparation and the dissemination of the ESDR. Several
joint meetings and events have been organised in this context. The ESDR has served as a conversation-opener with
business, trade unions, and NGOs to advance sustainable development policies and make recommendations to EU
leadership, thereby promoting evidence-based discussions at the EU level. The ESDR has also provided a solid foundation
of data and information for EU policy-making – it has been cited in landmark documents, such as the first EECS EU-level
Voluntary Review of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, and has inspired strong and meaningful policy proposals in
the Committee’s issued opinions. We look forward to continuing our cooperation with SDSN in the future.

the final report is presented. Indicator selection and discuss results. As an illustration, the SDG Index for Europe
performance thresholds are informed by several rounds is prepared with and discussed among the members of
of consultations with SDSN experts, scientists, and the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) – a
the general public. Around a third of the indicators consultative body of the European Commission that gives
come from outside official statistics (for example, from representatives of Europe’s socio-occupational interest
scientific papers or NGOs). This helps fill data gaps in groups (such as business associations, trade unions, and
official statistics, for instance, in the areas of international NGOs) and others a formal platform to express their points
spillovers, sustainability of diets, or biodiversity. We of view on EU issues (Lafortune et al. 2022). See Box 4.3
are increasingly using space-based technologies to for additional information. Other data initiatives at SDSN,
strengthen data availability and timeliness (boxes 4.1 including the FABLE models for sustainable land-use
and 4.2). While it takes several years to standardize systems, also rely on inclusive participatory processes,
international statistics, especially when methods need such as “scenathons” conducted by and with local country
to be designed from scratch, our value-added is to fill teams (FABLE 2021; Mosnier et al. 2022).
existing gaps with third-party data where possible.
The SDG Index serves as a conversation opener within Frequent comments received on the SDG Index
the research and policy community. As emphasized in the throughout the years
World Development Report 2021, “data alone cannot solve
development problems: people … are the central actors The SDG Index, including its regional and local editions,
transforming data into useful information that can improve has been generally well received by the research and
livelihoods and lives” (World Bank 2021). We partner with policy communities, and it has become the backbone of
regional and local organizations to prepare indices and numerous collaborations with international institutions

and local organizations throughout the world. Comments countries. The rate of extreme poverty at US$2.15/day
submitted by governments, researchers, and practitioners is about 6 times higher in Bhutan than in Finland, while
either publicly or privately on the global SDG Index results poverty at US$3.65/day is 15 times higher; Bhutan’s
and methodology tend to revolve around four main maternal mortality rate (SDG target 3.1), at 60 in 100,000
perceived issues: (1) The high SDG Index scores and ranks live births, is more than 7 times that of Finland (8 in
obtained by high-income countries, including European 100,000 live births), while its neonatal mortality rate is
nations; (2) Data lags, gaps, and the treatment of national about 12 times that of Finland; and the incidence of
estimates; (3) Questions concerning the reliability of non- tuberculosis in Bhutan is 47 times higher than in Finland.
official statistics and their legitimacy in the context of the In Finland, 46 percent of parliamentarians are women,
SDGs; and (4) The absence of a material footprint indicator. which is almost three times the rate in Bhutan, where
only 17 percent of parliamentarians women. Overall,
On point (1), our results show that rich countries generally Bhutan performs lower than Finland on 14 of the 17 SDGs.
perform poorly and are not on track to achieving The SDG Index acknowledges Bhutan’s recent progress
environmental goals (SDGs 12–15), and that poor on many socioeconomic indicators, and calls for global
countries need help to combat poverty. Rich European partnerships to promote sustainable development
countries top the overall SDG Index. This reflects the progress and financing globally.
nature of the SDGs, as European countries, particularly the
Nordic economies, perform strongly on socioeconomic On point (2), national governments often argue that the
goals, relatively strongly on some local environmental SDG Index results are biased, due to missing data and
priorities (for example, wastewater treatment, air pollution, lags in data reporting. It is true that the results often
or deforestation), and strongly on public institutions and represent the performance of the previous governments.
the rule of law. Yet the SDG Dashboards rate rich countries, There are significant time lags in international statistics,
including Nordic countries, at “red” on several SDGs – that can exceed two or even three years, as well as
particularly those related to responsible consumption and persisting data gaps in certain countries and country
production, climate action, and biodiversity – meaning groups. This is partly due to the chronic underfinancing
major challenges remain (Lafortune, Sachs, and Schmidt- of statistics in LICs and LMICs.
Traub 2020). Many rich countries also face a significant
challenge in achieving SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), which From a methodological standpoint, we do have
includes unsustainable agriculture, unsustainable diets, techniques in our methodology to address missing-data
and obesity. The stringent grading method used for the bias and time lags. Countries are included in the SDG
SDG Dashboards highlights negative environmental Index ranking only if they have data for at least 80 percent
spillovers that affect climate, biodiversity, or water of the indicators (and one criterion for indicator inclusion
scarcity in other countries. Compared with other SDG is that data must be available for 80 percent of countries
monitoring reports, however, the SDG Index generates far that have at least 1 million inhabitants). Some national
more negative scores for rich countries on SDGs 12–15 authorities have in the past asked to incorporate their own
(Lafortune et al, 2020). The most recent European edition national estimates in the SDG Index, to address time lags
also highlights challenges related to the “leave-no-one- and gaps. However, national estimates cannot be included
behind” principle in Europe, as trends on several indicators in the SDG Index unless they have been submitted,
related to inclusion are not moving in the right direction. approved, and published by United Nations custodian
agencies or other data providers. This is essential to
Some commenters have recently pointed out that ensure data quality and comparability. We do include
a country like Bhutan, which shows remarkable some timelier, model-based estimates (for example, for
commitment to sustainable development and well- poverty or health outcomes) and geospatial data. We
being (characterized notably by its use of the Gross also review our indicator selection annually and exclude
National Happiness Index), performs less well on the particularly outdated data points and indicators that are
SDG Index than, for example, Finland or other Nordic not frequently updated.

Box 4.4 SDG Index and Dashboards: global, regional, and subnational editions (2016–2023)
The UN Secretary-General António Guterres has rightly stated that “cities are where the climate battle will largely be won or
lost.” Meeting the SDGs and the Paris Agreement goals requires ambitious policies, financing, and monitoring frameworks at
the subnational and urban levels. Working closely with its global network of scientists and practitioners, regional and local SDG
Centers, and other partners, the SDSN has established participatory processes to discuss SDG progress and priorities at regional
and subnational levels. In comparison to global editions, these allow for more specificity in terms of defining regional pathways (for
example, for Africa, Europe, or Latin America) and identifying local priorities and challenges to achieving the SDGs. Compared to the
global edition, the use of regional and national databases for these reports tends to reduce constraints related to data availability
and timeliness. In total, 30+ global, regional, and subnational editions of the SDG Index have been published, supporting stronger
monitoring and policy frameworks for the SDGs.
Global editions

Regional editions Subnational editions
Source: Authors’ analysis. Download the reports and databases at: www.sdgindex.org.

Box 4.5 Cooperation between SDSN and the Government of the Republic of Benin in
the context of the issuance of the first African SDG Bond
H.E. Minister Romuald Wadagni

Ministre d’Etat, Ministre de l’Economie et des Finances
In July 2021, to further the efforts it has made since 2016 to implement the SDGs,
the Government of the Republic of Benin issued the first African SDG Bond,
dedicated to financing projects that would have a significant positive impact on
achieving the SDGs. Through this innovative financing instrument, Benin mobilized
500 million euros, with an average maturity of 12.5 years. Within this framework, the
Ministry of Economics and Finance of the Government of the Republic of Benin has
called upon SDSN to assist in monitoring and evaluating Benin’s SDG progress and
the efforts it has made towards the SDGs.
The Benin Sustainable Development Report, which was launched at the 2022 HLPF, includes detailed analyses of Benin’s
performance, progress, and gaps on the SDGs in comparison to neighboring ECOWAS countries, as well as looking at
differences in SDG performance among Benin’s twelve departments under the “leave-no-one-behind” paradigm. The
SDG Index and SDSN’s survey of government efforts are two of the tools used in this analysis. The 2023 edition of the
Benin SDR will be released at the 2023 HLPF.
Furthering this technical partnership, the SDSN Benin network has been created, hence mobilizing the locally based
expertise to assist the government’s efforts towards sustainable development. The network is co-hosted by the University
of Abomey-Calavi and the Research and Strategic Studies Directorate of the Ministry of Economy and Finance.
Strategically, the SDSN is very much committed to sup- and international spillovers, the SDG Index includes
porting global efforts to promote high-quality and timely high-quality official and unofficial metrics that fill gaps
data for the SDGs. Regional SDG Index editions (for Africa, in the official SDG metrics. For example, the SDG Index
Europe, and Latin America) and subnational editions (for has included carbon dioxide emissions since its incep-
provinces, states, regions, and municipalities) allow the tion in 2016, even though a measure of greenhouse
indicator selection and policy discussion to be contextual- gas emissions under SDG 13 (Climate Action) was only
ized, and this data tends to be timelier (Box 4.4). In response added to the official list in 2020 (Lafortune, Sachs, and
to feedback, since 2018 we have supplemented the SDG Schmidt-Traub 2020). The SDG Index and Dashboards
Index with other qualitative instruments to gauge govern- also include unofficial measures of unsustainable
ment efforts and commitment to the SDGs, in cooperation fishing practices and spillovers embodied in trade and
with SDSN’s global network (Sachs et al. 2022; Lafortune, aim to incorporate more geospatial data to improve
Woelm, and Valentiny 2022). Finally, TReNDS and its Data timeliness and country coverage. In most cases, these
For Now initiative, along with other flagship initiatives at indicators went through some form of peer-reviewed
SDSN, such as SDGs Today, aim to foster partnerships across process and have been published in the literature
a variety of data providers and users to unlock the potential which provides some guarantees about their quality
of new technologies. and comparability. Others are widely recognized and
used measures compiled by Transparency International,
On point (3), in an effort to accurately measure often the World Justice Project, and Reporter Sans Frontières
overlooked issues, such as environmental challenges (among others).

On point (4), some advocate for greater use of material United Nations by national governments in 2021
footprint indicators and indicators of natural resource use mentioned the SDG Index. It was also listed by the
(Hickel 2020). While we agree that material resource use European Parliament among ten composite indicators
and consumption and their impacts on the environment useful for policy making (EPRS 2021) and was referenced
are important policy issues, we stand by the decision not in the Parliament’s first SDG resolution in July 2022
to include indicators of material footprint or “domestic (European Parliament 2022). Although it was not
material consumption” in the SDG Index. In their current developed to be a standalone tool to inform investment
form, these indicators present well-known weaknesses. decisions, the SDG Index is also increasingly used by
In particular, they combine by weight vastly different public and private financial institutions (BPCE 2018).
materials that each have different environmental impacts. Alongside other data sources, it is notably being used
Moreover, they do not correlate material flows by weight to monitor the implementation of the first African SDG
with environmental impacts, which vary tremendously bond, issued by the government of Benin in July 2021
across countries. For example, one kilogram of biomass (SDSN 2022). See Box 4.5.
used in a humid tropical country has a different footprint
from the same biomass consumption in a semi-arid The Index also helps shed light on certain key topics,
country. As a result, it is very difficult to compare material including international spillovers, and can serve as
consumption across countries or to define targets. a basis to identify drivers of success and failure on
We recommend instead using the spillover indicators SDG outcomes. For instance, our strong emphasis
included in the SDG Index and Dashboards to capture on quantifying domestic performance, as well as
unsustainable consumption (Lafortune, Sachs, and negative spillovers generated abroad via trade, has
Schmidt-Traub 2020). likely contributed (alongside many other initiatives) to
raising awareness in the EU about such spillover effects.
Our work has been referenced in policy briefs and in
Observed reuse and impact of the SDG Index the literature (Arunima Malik et al. 2021; A Malik et al.

2021), a in parliament resolutions and government
The SDG Index is a flagship instrument to promote processes. In Europe, we partnered with Eurostat to
awareness of the SDGs. The SDG Index ranking receives improve the availability of data to track such spillovers,
widespread attention from politicians and the media, building on Multi-Regional Input-Output models,
which further helps to raise awareness about the SDGs which is now a core chapter of Eurostat’s SDG report
and creates a “race to the top.” Increasing awareness at (Eurostat 2022). In addition, Box 4.6 describes how the
all levels is critical to the success of the SDGs, and the SDG Index has been used to explore linkages between
global ranking draws attention to countries’ challenges. structural vulnerabilities and SDG outcomes in SIDS (in
As noted in the 2005 World Bank staff report, the main cooperation with UN Resident Coordinators in SIDS,
advantage of rankings is that “as in sports, once you start as well as other partners), and to promote ambitious
keeping score everyone wants to win.” However, this policies and financing frameworks for SDG progress
also creates incentives to “game the system – or corrupt (See Box 4.6).
it,” (Washington Post Editorial Board 2021), which is why
the SDG Index is prepared by an independent group Finally, the SDG Index contributes to global efforts
of experts and researchers, and its methodology and to improve data availability. Over the years, countries
datasets are fully transparent. noted that certain key data points, notably on SDG10
(Reduced Inequalities), were missing in our report. This
The SDG Index is also an accountability tool that has led some of those countries to work with the World
helps monitor progress and identify areas that need Bank and other UN custodian agencies to compile
improvement. It is used extensively by national these data. In our experience, missing data in the SDG
governments, civil society, and academia. We estimate Index is often perceived by countries as a sign of weak
that around 40 percent of the VNRs presented at the data capacity.

Box 4.6 Partnership between SDSN and UN Resident Coordinators in SIDS
Simona Marinescu, Ph.D.

Senior Advisor Small Island Developing States
United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS)
At the request of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), the United Nations
Resident Coordinators serving in Small Island Developing States (SIDS) launched
an unprecedented cross-country and region joint project to develop the first
Multidimensional Vulnerability Index (MVI) and to capture inherent vulnerabilities
hindering SDG progress in SIDS. The MVI is intended to define special
development contexts such as SIDS and to complement measures of per-capita
gross national income (GNI) to enable vulnerable countries to access development financing without income graduation.
The MVI project was coordinated by the UN Resident Coordinator in Samoa. To ensure consistency in measuring countries’
development progress and to strengthen the robustness of the MVI, the UN Resident Coordinators in SIDS entered into a
partnership with the SDSN team in Paris that expanded to include other analytical products for SIDS. The MVI was structured
to capture sources of vulnerabilities that are non-self-inflicted and that generate human and economic losses and hinder
development progress. The SDSN experts analyzed correlations between the value of a country’s MVI and its SDG progress
across the 17 SDGs as well as goal-specific results. The findings confirmed that the MVI designed in collaboration with SDSN
captures with high precision the vulnerabilities that impede sustainable development progress as measured through the
SDG Index, with the highest correlations in the areas of poverty, health and education outcomes, food insecurity, climate-
change response, and biodiversity loss.
The partnership with SDSN continued with the creation of the first SDG financing gap measure to link the MVI to the actual
financing needs of SIDS, and to the finance that must be made available to these countries if they are to be able to achieve
sustainable development by 2030.
The triangle of the MVI, the SDG Index, and the SDG financing gap measure allows the United Nations Resident
Coordinators in SIDS to identify policies and practices that have led to better SDG progress in countries with similar levels
of multidimensional vulnerability. Furthermore, measuring SDG financing gaps of countries with similar MVI levels informs
the analysis of a country’s development finance model and the quality of the external financing it receives in terms of the
areas targeted, the programme tools utilized, and the content of work.
The collaboration with SDSN is ongoing, with the first SIDS SDG Progress Report to be presented at the SDG Summit in
September this year. Several iterations of a methodology being developed to measure losses and damages caused by
climate change will also inform the upcoming Convention of Parties (COP28) in Dubai in December.
4.2 Have the SDGs increased data have helped to mobilize VNRs and peer learning, as well
cooperation and innovation? as spurring innovations in how progress is monitored,
through the efforts of the IAEG-SDG. These indicators are
The SDGs’ positive impact on fostering now an important part of the evidence underpinning the
knowledge exchange and raising awareness more than 330 Voluntary National Reviews conducted to
Although the SDGs have not yet completely transformed date to track countries’ performance towards the SDGs.
how policy is designed and implemented, as discussed
in Part 3 and as is well-documented in the literature The contribution of the SDGs towards a universally
(Biermann et al. 2022; Kotzé et al. 2022; IGS 2023), they accepted framework for monitoring progress is critical.

4.2 Have the SDGs increased data cooperation and innovation?
Prior to the SDGs, countries lacked a standardized method Performance Indicators (SPI), the world progressed on
of comparing their development performance with average by 2.1 points over the period 2016–2022. The
that of their peers across a broad array of development annual rate of progress for LICs and LMICs was faster than
objectives (for example, health, education, climate, ending the world average and the HICs average, which denotes
poverty, reducing inequalities, etc.). Nor did countries have some degree of convergence. Using population-weighted
a common language to discuss and share experiences averages, LMICs are now performing better than UMICs
when tackling these development issues. Furthermore, on the Statistical Performance Indicators. Progress in
the SDGs have positively impacted discourse and LMICs since 2016 has been driven by significant improve-
knowledge exchange beyond government officials. Many ments in the SPI in some of the largest of these countries,
civil-society and private-sector actors have become SDG- including Bangladesh, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Nigeria,
conversant, facilitating greater discourse within countries Pakistan, and the Philippines. Part of this progress might
across government and non-government actors. be due to investments in data capacities and statistics
made during the MDG period. SIDS continue to be, by
It is difficult to assess whether the adoption of the SDGs far, the group of countries with the greatest number of
has in itself had a positive impact on the quantity and missing data points on the SDG Index – SIDS are missing
quality of international data available for sustainable 22 percent of SDG Index data on average, with some
development. According to the World Bank Statistical missing more than 50 percent.
Figure 4.4
Statistical Performance Indicators (SPI): Overall Score, 2016-2022
100

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
HICs UMICs LMICs LICs World
Note: From 0 (worst) to 100 (best).

Source: Authors’ calculations, based on World Bank Statistical Performance Indicators (2023).

The impact of COVID-19 (and other crises?) on 4.3. Conclusions and next steps
data innovation
Building on the past ten years of work, including the SDG
One hypothesis, previously documented by TReNDS Index, TReNDS, and a number of SDSN’s initiatives, we
in the SDR 2022, is that the COVID-19 pandemic and draw five major lessons, which can serve as priorities to
possibly other crises may be important drivers of inform SDG policies and financing.
data innovation and collaboration. The pandemic
triggered new intra-governmental collaborations to 1. Science-based instruments are needed at all
provide decision-makers with evidence to manage levels to guide SDG action and strengthen
the crisis. Furthermore, having timely and high-quality accountability. There are no magic numbers, but
data became a foundation for resilient and effective rather a suite of tools – including indices, integrated
governments throughout the pandemic, forcing assessment models, policy trackers, science panels,
governments to adopt new processes to overcome and geospatial tools – that when combined can
the numerous obstacles that COVID-19 presented. strengthen government capacity to implement
the SDGs and to target investments. SDSN’s new
Across countries, pragmatic decisions have been flagship initiative – the SDG Transformation Center
made: to reprioritize staff and resources in order to – aims precisely to provide a suite of science-based
modernize data capture methods and processes; instruments and serve as a platform for peer-to-peer
to use non-traditional data sources to fill data gaps, learning and exchange among scientists, practitioners,
including citizen science, social media, mobile, and and investors on the next generation of SDG policy
satellite data; and to enhance data dissemination tools, analytics, and long-term pathways.
schemes to make it easier for policymakers and the
general public to consume data. To achieve this 2. Additional investments are needed in capacity-
feat, countries have embarked on a range of multi- building for statistics. The SDG Index and TReNDS’
disciplinary and cross-sector partnerships. In many initiatives have, for some years now, highlighted
countries, National Statistics Offices (NSOs), were the acute and persisting data gaps that prevail at
innovators during the pandemic. They engaged in the global level for the SDGs, as well as the need to
partnership activities that were previously few and far accelerate partnerships and investments in statistical
between – working with stakeholders across sectors, capacity (TReNDS 2019). Although the World Bank’s
including civil society, the private sector, academia, Statistical Performance Indicators show signs of
and NGOs – to accelerate data innovations for improvements in statistical systems since 2016, poor
policymaking and SDG attainment. and vulnerable countries (including SIDS) still lack
the necessary resources to implement the vision of
Policymakers responding to ongoing cascading crises the 2017 Cape Town Global Action Plan for Sustainable
are likely to continue the experimental and reactive Development Data (HLG-PCCB, 2017). According to
approach to policy development that they adopted PARIS21, funding for data and statistics fell by almost
during the pandemic, including placing a premium on US$100 million between 2019 and 2021, representing
timelier and higher-quality data. As such, these crises the most significant drop in funding since the start
are likely to be the primary driver of future innovations of the SDG era (OECD 2022b). And as highlighted at
in data, to design and test public policies and the UN World Data Forum in April 2023 and reiterated
programs moving forward. Thus, multilateralism and in the 27 April Hangzhou declaration: statistical
investments in global capacity-building and funding capacity in the poorer and most vulnerable countries
for statistics remain critical for short- and long-term requires “an urgent and sustained increase in the level
improvements in information and data for sustainable and scale of investments in data and statistics from
development. domestic and international actors, from the public,
private, and philanthropic sectors” (HLG-PCCB 2023).

4.3. Conclusions and next steps
3. We need to invest in data and science literacy to assessments of countries’ ambitions and actions taken
strengthen the science-policy interface. According to further key SDG transformations. These types of
to major international studies, few 15-year-old assessments, as well as science-based decarbonization
students can tell the difference between a fact and targets and food and land pathways, can be further
an opinion (OECD 2019b). In an information-rich leveraged in the design and assessment of public and
and post-truth environment, citizens and decision- private investment programs for the SDGs, including
makers need knowledge and tools to transform data sustainability-themed bonds.
and science into evidence, actions, and long-term
policies. Yet UNESCO estimates that there is a nearly 5. Space-based technologies help address data
US$100 billion finance gap for countries to reach gaps and timeliness, including supporting the
their education targets (UNESCO 2023). The SDSN “leave no one behind” principle; they can be
and its partners are increasingly collaborating with further leveraged via global partnerships. Time
governments and parliaments – and also working lags in international data reporting can exceed two
closely with business associations, private financial to three years, including for key SDG indicators. With
institutions, trade unions, and academic organizations the elevated focus on and interest in data, COVID-
– to improve data literacy and support science-based 19 has set the stage for new user expectations, with
policy discussions to advance the SDGs at the national many users – especially the general public – now
and local levels. Strengthening the science-policy expecting to obtain data in real time (Sachs et al. 2022).
interface is key for implementing long-term pathways The global community has mobilized space-based
for sustainable development. technologies to help provide more timely and granular
information on the state of the global commons, or
4. Non-traditional statistics and science-based on access to key services (among others). In Europe,
pathways help to address shortfalls in official for instance, Copernicus, the EU’s flagship Earth
statistics; they could be further leveraged to Observation and Monitoring program, was mobilized

inform investment decisions. Developing official early on to improve SDG data availability, timeliness,
international statistics takes time. Especially when no and granularity. And the new SDGs-EYES program
suitable methodologies or data-collection methods will establish “an integrated scientific, technological
exist. Halfway into the SDGs, for instance, we lack a and user engagement framework, overcoming the
good-quality international metric, available to most knowledge and technical barriers that prevent the
countries, to track “mechanisms in place to enhance exploitation, combination and cross-feeding of data
policy coherence of sustainable development” – and tools” to support SDG action. At the global level,
indicator 17.14.1. Nevertheless, building on the UN-GGIM and the Group on Earth Observations (GEO)
improvements in the field of industrial ecology, the aim to reduce the technical and legal barriers to using
SDSN and its partners have included an evaluation geospatial data and to strengthen multistakeholder
of negative international spillovers (one component partnerships. And TReNDS’ Data for Now initiative is
of sustainable development policy coherence) in the working to support countries’ capacity to deliver robust
SDG Index since 2017. Non-official sources of statistics, and timely data to achieve the SDGs through user-
such as citizen science, social media, earth observation centric approach, multistakeholder partnerships, and
data, artificial intelligence (AI), model-based estimates, use of alternative data sources, including space-based
and other pathways produced by academics and technologies. The “TReNDS Data for Now” initiative
researchers, support greater accountability and can draws on a user-centric approach, multistakeholder
provide a forward-looking evaluation of efforts to partnerships, and the use of alternative data sources
implement the SDGs, complementing official statistics. such as space-based technologies to build countries’
Additionally, initiatives like the Climate Action Tracker capacities to deliver accurate and timely data to
help provide science-based and forward-looking achieve the SDGs.

References
Arrow, Kenneth J., Partha Dasgupta, Lawrence H. Goulder, HLG-PCCB. (2023). Hangzhou declaration: Accelerating progress
Kevin J. Mumford, and Kirsten Oleson (2013). Sustainability in the implementation of the Cape Town Global Action Plan
and the measurement of wealth: further reflections. for Sustainable Development Data. World Data Forum.
Environment and Development Economics 18 (4): 504–16.
IGS. (2023). Global Sustainable Development Report 2023.
Biermann, Frank, Thomas Hickmann, Carole-Anne Sénit, Independent Group of Scientists. https://sdgs.un.org/gsdr/gsdr2023.
Marianne Beisheim, Steven Bernstein, Pamela Chasek, Leonie
Grob, et al. (2022). Scientific evidence on the political impact Jackson, Paul, and Louis Meuleman. (2022). Magic Numbers?
of the Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Sustainability Why the Politics of Indices Are a Problem Rather Than a Solution.
5 (9): 795‑800. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-00909-5. SDG Knowledge Hub, IISD (blog). https://sdg.iisd.org:443/
commentary/guest-articles/magic-numbers-why-the-
BPCE. (2018). Solving Sustainable Development Goals Rubik’s politics-of-indices-are-a-problem-rather-than-a-solution/.
Cube. Asset & Wealth - Management and Corporate &
Investment Banking (blog). https://natixis.groupebpce.com/ Kotzé, Louis J., Rakhyun E. Kim, Peter Burdon, Louise du Toit,
articles/solving-sustainable-development-goals-rubiks-cube/. Lisa-Maria Glass, Prakash Kashwan, Diana Liverman,
et al. (2022). Planetary Integrity. In The Political Impact
Brundtland, G.H. (1987). Our Common Future: Report of the World of the Sustainable Development Goals: Transforming
Commission on Environment and Development. Geneva, Governance Through Global Goals? Carole-Anne Sénit,
United Nations General Assembly document A/42/427. Frank Biermann, and Thomas Hickmann (Eds), 140–71.
Dasgupta, Partha, and Karl-Göran Mäler. (2000). Net national Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.
product, wealth, and social well-being. Environment and org/10.1017/9781009082945.007.
Development Economics 5 (01): 69‑93. Lafortune, Guillaume, Grayson Fuller, Leslie Bermont Diaz,
EPRS. (2021). Ten Composite Indices for Policy-Making. European Adolf Kloke-Lesch, Phoebe Koundouri, and Angelo
Parliamentary Research Service. https://www.europarl. Riccaboni. (2022). Europe Sustainable Development Report
europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_IDA(2021)696203. 2022: Achieving the SDGs: Europe’s Compass in a Multipolar
World. SDSN and SDSN Europe. France: Paris.
European Parliament. (2022). Implementation and Delivery of
the Sustainable Development Goals. Texts Adopted. https:// Lafortune, Guillaume, Grayson Fuller, Jorge Moreno, Guido
www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2022- Schmidt-Traub, and Christian Kroll. (2018). SDG Index and
0263_EN.html. Dashboards: Detailed Methodological Paper. Paris: Bertelsmann
Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
Eurostat. (2022). Sustainable Development in the European http://sdgindex.org/assets/files/2018/Methodological%20
Union: Monitoring Report on Progress Towards the SDGs Paper_v1_gst_jmm_Aug2018_FINAL.pdf.
in an EU Context, 2022 Edition, Luxembourg: European
Commission, Statistical Office of the European Union. Lafortune, Guillaume, Grayson Fuller, Guido Schmidt-Traub,
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/products-flagship- and Christian Kroll. (2020). How is progress towards the
publications/-/ks-09-22-019. Sustainable Development Goals Measured? Comparing
four approaches for the EU. Sustainability 12 (18): 7675.
FABLE. (2021). Environmental and Agricultural Impacts https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187675.
of Dietary Shifts at Global and National Scales. Food,
Agriculture, Biodiversity, Land-Use, and Energy (FABLE) Lafortune, Guillaume, Jeffrey Sachs, and Guido Schmidt-
Consortium. https://fableconsortium.org/publications/ Traub. (2020). It’s called the Sustainable Development Goals
environmental-and-agricultural-impacts-of-dietary-shifts- Index for a reason. Foreign Policy (blog). (2020). https://
at-global-and-national-scales/. foreignpolicy.com/2020/10/26/its-called-the-sustainable-
development-goals-index-for-a-reason/.
Hickel, Jason. (2020). The world’s Sustainable Development
Goals aren’t sustainable. Foreign Policy (blog). https:// Lafortune, Guillaume, and Guido Schmidt-Traub. (2019).
foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/30/the-worlds-sustainable- Exposing EU policy gaps to address the Sustainable Development
development-goals-arent-sustainable/. Goals. Study prepared by SDSN for the European Economic
and Social Committee (EESC). Brussels, Belgium.
HLG-PCCB. (2017). Cape Town Global Action Plan for Sustainable
Development Data. High-level Group for Partnership, Lafortune, Guillaume, Finn Woelm, and Rosalie Valentiny.
Coordination and Capacity-Building for Statistics for the (2022). Towards a Sound Measure of Government Efforts and
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. https://unstats. Commitments for the SDGs? SDSN Working Paper. https://
un.org/sdgs/hlg/cape-town-global-action-plan/. resources.unsdsn.org/towards-a-sound-measure-of-
government-efforts-and-commitments-for-the-sdgs.

References
Malik, A, G Lafortune, S Dahir, Zachary Wendling, S Carter, Schmidt-Traub, Guido, Christian Kroll, Katerina Teksoz, David
M Li, and M Lenzen. (2021). Making Globalisation and Durand-Delacre, and Jeffrey D. Sachs. (2017). National
Trade Work for People and Planet: International Spillovers baselines for the Sustainable Development Goals assessed
Embodied in the European Union’s (EU’s) Food Supply in the SDG Index and Dashboards. Nature Geoscience 10 (8):
Chains. SDSN, University of Sydney and GIZ Policy Brief. 547‑55. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2985.
Malik, Arunima, Guillaume Lafortune, Sarah Carter, Mengyu SDSN. (2015). Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for
Li, Manfred Lenzen, and Christian Kroll. (2021). International Sustainable Development Goals: Launching a Data Revolution
spillover effects in the EU’s textile supply chains: a global for the SDGs. Paris and New York: Sustainable Development
SDG assessment. Journal of Environmental Management Solutions Network. http://unsdsn.org/resources/
295 (October): 113037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. publications/indicators/.
jenvman.2021.113037.
SDSN. (2022). Benin Sustainable Development Report 2022.
Mosnier, Aline, Guido Schmidt-Traub, Michael Obersteiner, Paris. https://www.unsdsn.org/communique-de-presse-
Sarah Jones, Valeria Javalera-Rincon, Fabrice DeClerck, le-reseau-de-solution-pour-le-developpement-durable-
Marcus Thomson, et al. (2022). How can diverse sdsn-publie-son-premier-rapport-de-reference-sur-les-
national food and land-use priorities be reconciled with politiques-les-progres-et-tendances-des-odd-au-benin.
global sustainability targets? lessons from the FABLE
Stiglitz, Joseph, E., Amartya Sen, and Jean-Paul Fitoussi. (2009).
initiative. Sustainability Science 18 (1): 335‑45. https://doi.
Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic
org/10.1007/s11625-022-01227-7.
Performance and Social Progress. Paris. http://www.
Nicoletti, L., Sirenko, M., and Verma, T. (2023). stiglitzsen-fitoussi.fr/en/index.htm.
Disadvantaged communities have lower access to
TReNDS. (2019). Show me the money. Chapter 5 in Counting
urban infrastructure. Environment and Planning B: Urban
on the World. https://countingontheworld.sdsntrends.org.
Analytics and City Science, 50(3), 831–849. https://doi.
org/10.1177/23998083221131044 UNESCO. (2023). Can Countries Afford Their National SDG 4
Benchmarks? https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/
OECD. 2019a. Measuring Distance to the SDG Targets 2019:
pf0000385004.

An Assessment of Where OECD Countries Stand. OECD
Publishing. United Nations. (2015). Transforming Our World: The 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development. A/RES/70/1. New York:
OECD. 2019b. PISA 2018 Results (Volume II): Where All Students
United Nations. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/
Can Succeed. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation
post2015/transformingourworld.
and Development. https://doi.org/10.1787/b5fd1b8f-en.
Washington Post Editorial Board. (2021). We should take
OECD. 2022a. Better Life Index. OECD Publishing. Paris. https://
the World Bank’s Doing Business report with a grain of
www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/#/11111111111.
salt. Washington Post, 26 septembre 2021. https://www.
OECD. 2022b. The PARIS21 Partner Report on Support to washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/09/26/cost-doing-
Statistics 2022: A Wake-Up Call to Finance Better Data. business-world-bank/.
https://paris21.org/node/3541.
Wolf, M. J., Emerson, J. W., Esty, D. C., de Sherbinin, A., Wendling,
OECD and JRC. (2008). Handbook on Constructing Composite Z. A., et al. (2022). 2022 Environmental Performance Index. New
Indicators: Methodology and User Guide. Paris: OECD, Haven, CT: Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy. epi.
Joint Research Committee. https://www.oecd.org/ yale.edu
std/42495745.pdf.
Workman, R. and McPherson, K. (2019). Measuring Rural Access
Papadimitriou, Eleni, Ana Neves, and William Becker. (2019). Using New Technologies: Supplemental Guidelines. ReCAP
JRC Statistical Audit of the Sustainable Development Goals GEN2033D. London: ReCAP for DFID.
Index and Dashboards. European Commission, Joint
World Bank. (2021). World Development Report 2021: Data for
Research Centre. doi:10.2760/723763, JRC116857.
Better Lives. Washington D.C. https://www.worldbank.org/
Sachs, Jeffrey, Christian Kroll, Guillame Lafortune, Grayson en/publication/wdr2021.
Fuller, and Finn Woelm. (2022). Sustainable Development
World Bank. (2022). Statistical Performance Indicators. https://
Report 2022. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
www.worldbank.org/en/programs/statistical-performance-
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009210058.
indicators.

Annex
Methods Summary and Data Tables
A.1 Interpreting the SDG Index and

Dashboards results
The Sustainable Development Report 2023 provides an The SDG Trend Dashboards indicate whether a country
assessment of progress made towards the SDGs by all is on track to achieve the goals by 2030, based on past
UN Member States. The Report includes the SDG Index, performance. Trends are calculated for each indicator,
in which scores are presented on a scale of 0 to 100 and building on annual growth rates since 2015 which are
can be interpreted as a percentage towards optimal SDG extrapolated to 2030. The country’s resultant indicator
performance. Therefore, the difference between 100 and trends are then aggregated at the goal level, to give an
a country’s SDG Index score is the distance, in percentage indication of how it is progressing towards each SDG.
points, that must be overcome to reach optimum SDG
performance. The same basket of indicators and similar This section provides a summary of the methods used
performance thresholds are used for all countries, to to compute the SDG Index and Dashboards. More
generate comparable scores and rankings. To minimize information can be found online in SDG Index and
missing-data bias, we do not calculate overall SDG Index Dashboards: Detailed Methodological Paper (Lafortune
scores or ranks for countries that are missing data on more et al., 2018). In 2019, the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of
than 20% of the indicators. the European Commission conducted an independent
statistical audit of the report’s methodology and results,
Substantial differences in rankings may result from small examining the conceptual and statistical coherence of the
differences in aggregate SDG Index scores. This calls for index’s structure. Their audit report and additional data
caution when comparing country rankings. Differences tables are available on our website: www.sdgindex.org
of two or three positions between countries should not
be interpreted as “significant”, whereas a differences of Due to time lags in international statistics, this year’s edition
10 places may be ascribed to meaningful differences in does not capture most of the multiple impacts that the war
performance. For further details, see the statistical audit by in Ukraine has had on the SDGs, nor the impacts of other
Papadimitriou et al. (2019) conducted on behalf of the EU geopolitical and security crises that have emerged over the
Joint Research Centre (JRC). past 12–18 months. The data for Ukraine correspond to the
situation before February 2022, as many data points have
The SDG Dashboards provide visual representations of not been able to be updated since then. The inclusion of an
countries’ performance on the 17 SDGs. The “traffic light” indicator on exports of major conventional weapons should
color scheme (green, yellow, orange, and red) illustrates not be interpreted as a value judgment in the context of
how far a country is from achieving a particular goal. The current conflicts, but rather as an effort to evaluate more
SDG Dashboards are presented for all countries where generally the trend towards disarmament recognized by
data permits, including those that are not included in the the United Nations and by civil society organizations as
SDG Index. As in previous years, the SDG Dashboards and an important priority for peace, socio-economic stability,
country profiles for OECD countries incorporate additional and sustainable development (UN Office for Disarmament
metrics that are not available for non-OECD members. Affairs, 2018; Amnesty International, 2008).

A.2 Changes to the 2023 edition and limitations
A.2 Changes to the 2023 edition and For the first time, we present an overview of where the
limitations world as a whole stands on SDG progress, calculated
using a population-weighted average for all UN Member
The 2023 SDG Index covers 166 countries. This year, States. Also included for the first time in this year’s edition
the Report integrates further indicators that build on is an estimation of the percentage of SDG targets that are
geographic information systems (GIS), to increase data on track to be met by 2030 for all countries with sufficient
availability and the timeliness of indicators related to data to be included in the SDG Index. More details on this
access to road infrastructure and to key urban services. calculation can be found in Section 3.A.
More information on these new geospatial indicators can
be found in Part 3 of the report and in the online materials.
This edition also incorporates one new spillover indicator Limitations
– on modern slavery in international supply chains (Malik Due to changes in the indicators and refinements in
et al, 2022). Table A.1 summarizes these additions and the methodology, SDG Index rankings and scores from
identifies indicators that have been replaced or modified one edition cannot be compared with the results from
due to changes in the methodologies used and estimates previous editions. However, Part 2 provides time series
produced by data providers. We have also introduced a for the SDG Index, calculated retroactively using this
refinement to the methodology used to evaluate trends year’s indicators and methods, providing results that are
for countries already exceeding SDG targets (explained in comparable across time. The full time series for the SDG
Section 3.A. below, the methodology overview). Index are available for download online.
Table A.1
New indicators and modifications
SDG Indicator Modification Source

Modification: New global poverty line for low-
1 Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) World Data Lab
income countries
Modification: New global poverty line for

1 Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) World Data Lab
lower-middle-income countries
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports (per

8 New indicator Malik et al (2022)
100,000 population)
SDSN (2023), based

9 Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) New indicator on Workman, R. &
McPherson, K., TRL (2019)
SDSN (2023), based on

Proportion of population with access to points of
11 New indicator Nicoletti, L., Sirenko, M.,
interest within a 15min walk (%)
& Verma, T. (2023)
Modification: now sourced from different

12 Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) UNEP
Multi-regional input-output database, Gloria.
Modification: now sourced from different

12 Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) UNEP
Multi-regional input-output database, Gloria.
Expropriations are lawful and adequately

16 Replaces "Property Rights (worst 1-7 best)" World Justice Project
compensated (worst 0 - 1 best)
16 Property Rights (worst 1-7 best) Removed due to suspension of future updates World Economic Forum

Annex. Methods Summary and Data Tables
Despite our best efforts to identify data for the SDGs, national statistical offices. Data providers may adjust
several indicator and data gaps persist at the international national data to ensure international comparability. As
level (Table A.2). Governments and the international a result, some data points presented in this report may
community must increase investments in SDG data and differ from data available from national sources. Moreover,
monitoring systems, and build strong data partnerships to the length of the validation processes of international
support informed SDG decisions and strategies. organizations can lead to significant delays in publishing
some data. National statistical offices may therefore have
To ensure the results are comparable across countries, more recent data for some indicators than presented in
we do not incorporate estimates received directly from this report.
Table A.2
Major indicator and data gaps for the SDGs
SDG Issue Desired metrics

Food loss and food waste
2 Agriculture and nutrition
Global yield gap statistics
Health care system resilience and preparedness to face global health risks
3 Health
Internationally comparable survey data on unmet care needs
Internationally comparable measures of the quality of primary and secondary education

4 Education
Early childhood development (access and quality)
Gender pay gap and other empowerment measures

5 Women empowerment
Violence against women
6 Water Quality of drinking water and surface waters
8 Decent work Decent work
Wealth inequality
10 Inequality
Vertical mobility
Environmental impact of transboundary physical flows (e.g. air pollution through wind,
water pollution through rivers)
12 Sustainable consumption
Recycling and re-use (circular economy)
Hazardous chemicals
13 Climate Action Robust indicators of climate adaptation
Maximum sustainable yields for fisheries

14 Marine ecosystems
Impact of high-sea and cross-border fishing
Leading indicators for ecosystem health

15 Terrestrial ecosystems
Trade in endangered species
16 Peace and justice Violence against children
Climate finance
17 Means of implementation Development impact of trade practices
Lead international indicator to track Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development

A.3 Methodology (overview)
A.3 Methodology (overview) Data sources

The data included in this report come from a mix of
The Sustainable Development Report provides a official and non-official sources. Most (around two-
comprehensive assessment of distance from targets thirds) are drawn from the databanks of international
based on the most current data available covering all organizations (FAO, ILO, OECD, UNICEF, WHO, World
193 UN Member States. This year’s report includes 97 Bank, and other sources) which follow extensive and
global indicators, with 27 additional indicators included rigorous data-validation processes. Other data sources
specifically for OECD countries (due to better data (around one-third) include less traditional statistics,
coverage in these countries). such as household surveys (Gallup World Poll), civil
society organizations and networks (including Oxfam,
The following sections provide an overview of the Tax Justice Network, World Justice Project, or Reporters
methodology used to select, normalize and aggregate sans Frontières), peer-reviewed journals (for example, to
indicators, and to generate indications of trends over time. track international spillovers) and geographic information
Additional information is available online, including raw systems (GIS). These non-official sources complement
data, additional data tables and sensitivity tests. other data sources and help increase data availability and
timeliness for key SDG indicators and targets. The full list
of indicators and data sources is available online. The data
1. Data selection for this year’s edition were extracted between February
and April 2023.
Where possible, the Sustainable Development Report uses
official SDG indicators endorsed by the UN Statistical
Commission. Where there are data gaps or insufficient 2. Missing data and imputations
data for an official indicator, we include other metrics from
official and unofficial providers. Five criteria for indicator To minimize biases from missing data, the SDG Index

selection were used to determine suitable metrics for only includes countries that have data for at least 80%
inclusion in the report: of the indicators or that have been in previous editions
of the SDG Index and have data for at least 75% of the
1. Global relevance and applicability to a broad range of indicators.2 The list of countries not included in the SDG
country settings. Index due to missing data is presented in Table A.3 below.
2. Statistical adequacy: The indicators selected represent We do, however, include all UN Member States in the
valid and reliable measures. SDG Dashboards and we feature country profiles for each
one. These profiles also indicate any gaps in a country’s
3. Timeliness: The indicators selected are up-to-date and available SDG data.
published on a reasonably prompt basis.
4. Coverage: There must be data available for at least Due to the lack of widely accepted statistical models for
80% of UN Member States with a population greater imputing country-level data for many SDG priorities, we
than one million.1 do not generally impute or model missing data apart from
a few exceptional circumstances. The list of indicators
5. Measurability of distance to targets: This must be able
where imputations have been performed is available
to be measured so that optimal performance can be
online in the Codebook.
determined.
1. There are two exceptions to this rule: (i) Exports of hazardous 2. This applies to Barbados, Cabo Verde, Comoros, the Maldives, and Sao
pesticides; (ii) Children involved in child labor. Tome and Principe.

Table A.3
Countries excluded from the 2023 SDG Index due to insufficient data
Country Missing Values Percentage of Missing Values
Andorra 51 55%
Antigua and Barbuda 31 32%
Dominica 43 44%
Equatorial Guinea 27 28%
Eritrea 22 23%
Grenada 36 37%
Guinea-Bissau 22 23%
Kiribati 38 39%
Korea, Dem. Rep. 31 32%
Libya 24 25%
Liechtenstein 63 68%
Marshall Islands 53 55%
Micronesia, Fed. Sts. 45 46%
Monaco 64 66%
Nauru 50 52%
Palau 52 54%
Samoa 28 29%
San Marino 62 64%
Seychelles 34 35%
Solomon Islands 30 31%
St. Kitts and Nevis 43 44%
St. Lucia 25 26%
St. Vincent and the Grenadines 32 33%
Timor-Leste 25 26%
Tonga 33 34%
Tuvalu 50 52%
Vanuatu 27 28%

3. Method used to construct the SDG Index and Normalization

Dashboards After establishing the upper and lower bounds, variables
The procedure for calculating the SDG Index comprises were transformed linearly to a scale between 0 and 100
three steps: (i) establish performance thresholds and using the following rescaling formula for the range [0; 100]:
censor extreme values from the distribution of each
x – min(x)
indicator; (ii) rescale the data to ensure comparability x´ = x 100
across indicators (normalization); (iii) aggregate the max(x) – min(x)
indicators within and across SDGs.
where x is the raw data value; max/min denote the upper
and lower bounds, respectively; and x’ is the normalized
Establishing performance thresholds value after rescaling.
To make the data comparable across indicators, each
variable was rescaled from 0 to 100 – with 0 denoting The rescaling equation ensured that all rescaled variables
the worst performance and 100 describing the optimum. were expressed as ascending variables (i.e., higher values
Rescaling is sensitive to the choice of limits, as extreme denoted better performance). In this way, the rescaled
values (outliers) risk becoming unintended thresholds data became easy to interpret and compare across all
that can introduce spurious variability in the data. indicators: a country that scores 50 on a variable is halfway
Consequently, the choice of upper and lower bounds can towards achieving the optimum value, whereas a country
affect the relative ranking of countries in the index. with a score of 75 has covered three quarters of the
distance from worst to best.
The upper bound for each indicator was determined
using the following decision tree:
Weighting and aggregation
1. Use the absolute quantitative thresholds of the Several rounds of expert consultations on earlier drafts of

SDGs and targets: e.g., zero poverty, universal school the SDG Index made it clear that there is little consensus
completion, universal access to water and sanitation, across different epistemic communities on assigning
full gender equality. higher weights to some SDGs over others. As a normative
2. Where no explicit SDG target is available, apply the assumption, we therefore opted to assign a fixed, equal
principle of “leave no one behind” to set the upper weight to every SDG, to reflect policymakers’ commitment
bound to universal access, or zero deprivation. to treat all SDGs equally and as an integrated and
indivisible set of goals. This implies that countries need
3. Where science-based targets exist that must be to pay attention to all goals to improve their SDG Index
achieved by 2030 or later, use these to set the 100% score, but focus particularly on those where they are
upper bound (e.g., zero greenhouse gas emissions furthest from achieving the SDGs and where incremental
from CO₂ as required by no later than 2050 to progress might therefore be expected to be fastest.
limit global warming to 1.5°C, 100% sustainable
management of fisheries). To compute SDG Index scores, we first estimate scores on
4. For all other indicators, use the average of the top five each goal using the arithmetic mean of indicators for that
performers. goal. These goal scores are then averaged across all 17 SDGs
to obtain the final Index score. Various sensitivity tests were
These principles interpret the SDGs as “stretch targets” and carried out, with the results available online, including com-
focus attention on those indicators where a country is parisons of arithmetic mean versus geometric mean and
lagging behind. The lower bound was defined at the 2.5th Monte-Carlo simulations at the Index and Goal level. Monte-
percentile of the distribution. Each indicator distribution Carlo simulations call for prudence in interpreting small
was censored, so that all values exceeding the upper bound differences between countries’ Index scores and rankings,
scored 100, and values below the lower bound scored 0. however, as these may be sensitive to the weighting scheme.

Dashboards thresholds were similarly rescaled, and for all indicators

We introduced additional quantitative thresholds for the yellow/orange threshold was set as the value halfway
each indicator to group countries in a “traffic light” between the red and green thresholds (1.5 after rescaling).
table. Thresholds were established based on statistical Each interval between 0 and 3 is continuous. We then took
techniques and through various rounds of consultations the average of the two rescaled variables on which the
with experts conducted since 2016. country performed worst to identify the rating for the goal.
We added the rule that a red rating is applied only if both
Averaging across all indicators for an SDG might hide the worst-performing indicators score red. Similarly, to
areas of policy concern if a country performs well on score green, both of the best-performing indicators must
most indicators but faces serious shortfalls on one or two be green. If the country has less than 50% of the indicators
metrics within one SDG (this is often referred to as the available under a goal the dashboard color for that goal is
issue of “substitutability” or “compensation”). This applies “grey”. The quantitative thresholds used to generate the
particularly to high-income and upper-middle-income dashboards are available in Table A.5.
countries that have made significant progress on many
SDG dimensions but may face serious shortfalls on indi-
vidual variables, for example on the sustainability of diets SDG Trends
and agriculture within SDG 2. Using historic data, we estimate how fast a country
has been progressing towards an SDG and determine
As a result, the SDG Dashboards focus exclusively on the whether – if extrapolated into the future – this pace will be
two variables on which a country or region performs worst. sufficient to achieve the SDG by 2030. For each indicator,
To this end, the indicator values were first rescaled from 0 SDG achievement is defined by the green threshold set for
to 3 according to how they compared to the thresholds. the SDG Dashboards. The difference in percentage points
Values worse than the red threshold were rescaled (using a between the green threshold and the normalized country
min-max formula) from 0 to 1 where 0 corresponds to the score denotes the gap that must be closed to meet that
lower bound and 1 to the value of the red threshold. Values goal. To estimate trends at the indicator level, we calcu-
better than the green threshold were rescaled from 2 to 3 lated the linear annual growth rates (annual percentage
where 2 corresponds to the value of the green threshold improvements) needed to achieve the target by 2030
and 3 to the upper bound. The values between these two (growth from 2015 to 2030), which we compared to the
Figure A.1
The Four-arrow system for denoting SDG trends
p 5 D L
On track or Maintaining
Decreasing Stagnating Moderately improving
SDG achievement
Decreasing score, i.e. Score remains stagnant or Score increases at a rate Score increases at the rate
country moves in the increases at a rate below 50% above 50% of the required needed to achieve the SDG
wrong direction of the growth rate needed to growth rate but below the by 2030 or performance
achieve the SDG by 2030. Also rate needed to achieve the has already exceeded SDG
denotes scores that currently SDG by 2030 achievement threshold
exceed the target but have
decreased since 2015

Figure A.2
Graphic representation of the methodology for SDG trends
Goal achievement
Green threshold
Performance in 2015
Extrapolated linear
annual growth rate
2015–2030
2015 2022 2030
average annual growth rate over the most recent period is continuous. The trend for an SDG was calculated as the

since the adoption of the SDGs in 2015 (2015–2022). arithmetic average of all the re-scaled values of the trend
Progress towards achievement on a particular indicator is indicators for that goal. An average between 0 and 1 corre-
described using a four-arrow system (Figure A.1). Figure A.2 sponds to a “decreasing” goal trend, between 1 and 2 to a
illustrates the methodology graphically. Because time-se- “stagnating” goal trend, between 2 and 3 to a “moderately
ries data is required for these calculations, indicators with improving goal trend”, and finally between 3 and 4 to an
only one or very few data points across time could not be “on track” goal trend. Overall goal trends were not calcu-
used for these analyses. The list of indicators used to gener- lated for countries missing a goal-level dashboard.
ate the trend indications is available in Table A.6.
Since the projections are based on past growth rates
To estimate the overall trend for an SDG, each indicator over several years, a country might have observed a
trend was assigned a value on a scale from 0 to 4 based decline in performance in the past year (for instance due
on its growth rate. Indicators with decreasing growth rates to the impact of COVID-19) but still be considered as
were rescaled (using a min-max formula) from 0 to 1 where being on track. This methodology emphasizes long-term
0 corresponds to the worst decrease across countries on structural changes that have occurred since the adoption
an indicator and 1 corresponds to an absolute stagnation of the SDGs in 2015, rather than focusing on annual
over time (growth rate of 0). Increasing growth rates were changes that may be temporary or cyclical. This year we
similarly rescaled into intervals of 1 to 2, 2 to 3, and 3 to 4, introduced a refinement to the methodology whereby
where 2 corresponds to half the growth rate necessary to countries that currently exceed the target for an indicator
achieve the green threshold, 3 corresponds to exactly the but have seen a decrease since 2015 are assigned an
growth rate needed to achieve the green threshold, and orange arrow. This is because if the decreasing trend
4 to the highest growth rate among the countries on a continues, the country may no longer meet the SDG
given indicator. Each of the four intervals between 0 and 4 target in the future.

Status of SDG targets

In this year’s edition, we introduce an assessment of the
status of SDG targets both for every country and for the
world overall. We based this assessment solely on trend
indicators (Table A.6) since time-series data was needed
to calculate rates of progress. Indicators that we featured
in the Index and country profiles for OECD countries only
were excluded from this global calculation, to provide
comparable results across countries.
Where the past rate of progress is sufficient to meet the

target by 2030 (corresponding to the green arrow “On
track or maintaining SDG achievement”) the indicator
was counted as being on track. Indicators where past
rates of progress will be insufficient to meet the SDG
target (corresponding to the orange “stagnating” or yellow
“moderately improving” arrows) were counted as showing
limited progress. Finally, indicators heading in the wrong
direction (the red “decreasing” arrow) were counted as
worsening. Indicators for which a country has already met
the target but has decreased its score since 2015 were also
considered to be worsening. For the assessment of the
status of SDG targets for the World (population-weighted
average), we only considered as on track those indicators
that showed consistent progress both in the long term
(since 2015) and in the short term (since 2019 or 2020).

Table A.4
Indicators included in the Sustainable Development Report 2023
Legend
[a] denotes OECD-only indicators
[b] denotes indicators not used in OECD dashboard but that are used in the calculation of OECD countries’ index scores.
Related
Reference
SDG Notes Indicator SDG Source Description
year
Target
Estimated percentage of the population that is living under the
Poverty headcount ratio at World Data poverty threshold of US$2.15 a day. Estimated using historical
1 1.1.1 2023
$2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) Lab estimates of the income distribution, projections of population
changes by age and educational attainment, and GDP projections.
Estimated percentage of the population that is living under the
Poverty headcount ratio at World Data poverty threshold of US$3.65 a day. Estimated using historical
1 1.1.1 2023
$3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) Lab estimates of the income distribution, projections of population
changes by age and educational attainment, and GDP projections.
The share of the population whose incomes fall below half the
Poverty rate after taxes and median disposable income for the entire population. The income
1 1.2.1 2020 OECD
transfers (%) threshold for relative poverty changes over time with changes in
median disposable income.
The percentage of the population whose food intake is insufficient

to meet dietary energy requirements for a minimum of one year.
Dietary energy requirements are defined as the amount of dietary
Prevalence of
2 [a] 2.1.1 2020 FAO energy required by an individual to maintain body functions, health
undernourishment (%)
and normal activity. Due to uncertainty in the estimates, the lowest
value FAO attributes to countries is 2.5%. We therefore assume 2.5%
in all high-income countries with missing data.
The percentage of children up to the age of 5 years that are stunted,

measured as the percentage that fall below minus two standard
Prevalence of stunting in
deviations from the median height for their age, according to the
2 children under 5 years of 2.2.1 2022 UNICEF et al.
WHO Child Growth Standards. UNICEF et al. (2016) report an average
age (%)
prevalence of stunting in high-income countries of 2.58%. We
assumed this value for high-income countries with missing data.
The percentage of children up to the age of 5 years whose weight
falls below minus two standard deviations from the median weight
Prevalence of wasting in
for their age, according to the WHO Child Growth Standards. UNICEF
2 children under 5 years of 2.2.2 2021 UNICEF et al.
et al. (2016) report an average prevalence of wasting in high-
age (%)
income countries of 0.75%. We assumed this value for high-income
countries with missing data.
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ The percentage of the adult population that has a body mass index
2 2.2 2016 WHO
30 (% of adult population) (BMI) of 30kg/m² or higher, based on measured height and weight.
Bonhommeau Trophic levels are a measure of the energy intensity of diet

Human Trophic Level (best et al. (2013) composition and reflect the relative amounts of plants as opposed
2 - 2017
2-3 worst) data updated to animals eaten in each country. A higher trophic level represents a
to 2017 greater level of consumption of energy-intensive animals.
Cereal yield, measured as tonnes per hectare of harvested land.
Cereal yield (tonnes per Production data on cereals relate to crops harvested for dry grain
2 2.3 & 2.4 2021 FAO
hectare of harvested land) only and excludes crops harvested for hay or green for food, feed, or
silage and those used for grazing.
The Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (SNMI) is a one-
Sustainable Nitrogen Zhang and
dimensional ranking score that combines two efficiency measures
2 [a] Management Index (best 2.4 2018 Davidson
in crop production: Nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) and land use
0-1.41 worst) (2019)
efficiency (crop yield).

Table A.4
(continued)
Related
Reference
year
Target
A country's yield expressed as a percentage of its potential yield in
Yield gap closure (% of Global Yield
2 [a] 2.3 & 2.4 2021 the three annual crops using the most land area, weighted for the
potential yield) Gap Atlas
relative importance of each crop in terms of surface area.
Exports of hazardous Exports of pesticides deemed hazardous to human health,

2 pesticides (tonnes per million 3.9 2020 FAO standardized by population. Due to volatility, the calculation uses
population) the average value over the last 5 years.
The estimated number of women, between the age of 15 and 49,

Maternal mortality rate
3 3.1.1 2020 WHO et al. who die from pregnancy-related causes while pregnant or within 42
(per 100,000 live births)
days of termination of pregnancy, per 100,000 live births.
Neonatal mortality rate The number of newborn infants (neonates) who die before reaching
3 3.2.2 2021 UNICEF et al.
(per 1,000 live births) 28 days of age, per 1,000 live births.
The probability that a newborn baby will die before reaching age
Mortality rate, under-5
3 3.2.1 2021 UNICEF et al. five, if subject to age-specific mortality rates of the specified year,
(per 1,000 live births)
per 1,000 live births.
The estimated rate of new and relapse cases of tuberculosis each

Incidence of tuberculosis
3 3.3.2 2021 WHO year, expressed per 100,000 people. All forms of tuberculosis are
(per 100,000 population)
included, including cases of people living with HIV.
New HIV infections (per 1,000 Number of people newly infected with HIV per 1,000 uninfected
3 3.3.1 2021 UNAIDS
uninfected population) population.
The probability of dying between the ages of 30 and 70 years from
Age-standardized death rate
cardiovascular diseases, cancer, diabetes or chronic respiratory
due to cardiovascular disease,
diseases, defined as the percent of 30-year-old-people who would
3 cancer, diabetes, or chronic 3.4.1 2019 WHO
die before their 70th birthday from these diseases, assuming current
respiratory disease in adults
mortality rates at every age and that individuals would not die from
aged 30–70 years (%)
any other cause of death (e.g. injuries or HIV/AIDS).
Age-standardized death rate
attributable to household
Mortality rate that is attributable to the joint effects of fuels used for
3 [b] air pollution and ambient 3.9.1 2019 WHO
cooking indoors and ambient outdoor air pollution.
air pollution (per 100,000
population)
Traffic deaths (per 100,000
3 3.6.1 2019 WHO Estimated number of fatal road traffic injuries per 100,000 people.
population)
The average number of years that a newborn could expect to live,

if he or she were to pass through life exposed to the sex- and age-
3 Life expectancy at birth (years) 3.1–3.9 2019 WHO
specific death rates prevailing at the time of his or her birth, for a
specific year, in a given country, territory, or geographic area.
Adolescent fertility rate (births

3 3.7.2 2020 WHO The number of births per 1,000 females between the age of 15 and 19.
per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19)
The percentage of births attended by personnel trained to give the

Births attended by skilled necessary supervision, care, and advice to women during pregnancy,
3 [a] 3.1.2 2020 UNICEF
health personnel (%) labor, and the postpartum period, to conduct deliveries on their
own, and to care for newborns.
Estimated national routine immunization coverage of infants,

expressed as the percentage of surviving infants, children under
Surviving infants the age of 12 months, who received two WHO-recommended
WHO and
3 [a] who received 2 WHO- 3.b.1 2021 vaccines (3rd dose of DTP and 1st dose of measles). Calculated as
UNICEF
recommended vaccines (%) the minimum value between the percentage of infants who have
received the 3rd dose of DTP and the percentage who have received
the 1st dose of measles.

Table A.4
(continued)
Related
Reference
year
Target
Coverage of essential health services (defined as the average
coverage of essential services based on tracer interventions that
include reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health, infectious
Universal health coverage
diseases, non-communicable diseases and service capacity and
3 (UHC) index of service 3.8.1 2019 WHO
access, among the general and the most disadvantaged population).
coverage (worst 0-100 best)
The indicator is an index reported on a unitless scale of 0 to 100,
which is computed as the geometric mean of 14 tracer indicators of
health service coverage.
Subjective well-being Subjective self-evaluation of life, where respondents are asked to

3 (average ladder score, worst 3.4 2022 Gallup evaluate where they feel they stand on a ladder where 0 represents
0-10 best) the worst possible life and 10 the best possible life.
Gap in life expectancy at birth Difference between maximum and minimum regional life
3 3.8 2021 OECD
among regions (years) expectancy at birth among regions.
Gap in self-reported health Gap in percentage of people who perceive their health status as
3 status by income (percentage 3.8 2020 OECD good or very good between the poorest 20% and the richest 20% of
points) the population.
Daily smokers (% of The percentage of the population aged 15 years and older who are
3 3.a.1 2021 OECD
population aged 15 and over) reported to smoke daily.
Participation rate in pre- Participation rate in organized learning one year before the official
4 primary organized learning (% 4.2.2 2021 UNESCO primary entry age measured by the adjusted net enrollment rate in
of children aged 4 to 6) organized learning.
The percentage of children of the official school age population who

4 Net primary enrollment rate (%) 4.1.2 2021 UNESCO
are enrolled in primary education.
Lower secondary education completion rate measured as the gross

intake ratio to the last grade of lower secondary education (general
Lower secondary completion and pre-vocational). It is calculated as the number of new entrants
4 [a] 4.1.2 2021 UNESCO
rate (%) in the last grade of lower secondary education, regardless of age,
divided by the population at the entrance age for the last grade of
lower secondary education.
Literacy rate (% of population The percentage of youth, aged 15 to 24, who can both read and
4 [a] 4.6.1 2021 UNESCO
aged 15 to 24) write a short simple statement on everyday life with understanding.
Tertiary educational
The percentage of the population, aged 25 to 34, who have
4 [a] attainment (% of population 4.3 2021 OECD
completed tertiary education.
aged 25 to 34)
National scores in the Programme for International Student

Assessment (PISA), an internationally standardized assessment
that is administered to 15-year-olds in schools. It assesses how far
4 PISA score (worst 0-600 best) 4.6.1 2018 OECD students near the end of compulsory education have acquired some
of the knowledge and skills that are essential for full participation in
society. Country PISA scores for reading, mathematics, and science
were averaged to obtain an overall PISA score.
Variation in science
Percentage of variation in science performance explained by
4 performance explained by 4.5.1 2018 OECD
students' socio-economic status.
socio-economic status (%)
Underachievers in science (% Percentage of students with a performance in science below level 2

4 [a] 4.6.1 2018 OECD
of 15-year-olds) (less than 409.54 score points).
Demand for family planning The percentage of women of reproductive age whose demand
5 [a] satisfied by modern methods 3.7.1 2023 UNDESA for family planning has been met using modern methods of
(% of females aged 15 to 49) contraception.

Table A.4
(continued)
Related
Reference
year
Target
Modeled estimate: Demand
5 for family planning satisfied by 3.7.1 UNDESA
any modern method
The mean years of education received by women aged 25 and older
Ratio of female-to-male mean
5 4.5.1 2021 UNDP divided by the mean years of education received by men aged 25
years of education received (%)
and older.
Modeled estimate of the proportion of the female population aged

Ratio of female-to-male labor
5 5.5 2022 ILO 15 years and older that is economically active, divided by the same
force participation rate (%)
proportion for men.
The number of seats held by women in single or lower chambers
Seats held by women in of national parliaments, expressed as a percentage of all occupied
5 5.5.1 2021 IPU
national parliament (%) seats. Seats refer to the number of parliamentary mandates, or the
number of members of parliament.
Gender wage gap (% of male The difference between male and female median wages of full-time
5 [a] 8.5 2021 OECD
median wage) employees and those self-employed, divided by the male median wage.
The percentage of the population using at least a basic drinking

Population using at least basic water service, such as drinking water from an improved source,
6 6.1.1 2020 JMP
drinking water services (%) provided that the collection time is not more than 30 minutes for a
round trip, including queuing.
The percentage of the population using at least a basic sanitation
Population using at least basic
6 [b] 6.2.1 2020 JMP service, such as an improved sanitation facility that is not shared with
sanitation services (%)
other households.
The level of water stress: freshwater withdrawal as a proportion of

available freshwater resources is the ratio between total freshwater
Freshwater withdrawal withdrawn by all major sectors and total renewable freshwater
6 (% of available freshwater 6.4.2 2019 FAO resources, after taking into account environmental water requirements.
resources) Main sectors, as defined by ISIC standards, include agriculture, forestry
and fishing, manufacturing, electricity industry, and services. This
indicator is also known as water withdrawal intensity.
The proportion of wastewater that undergoes at least primary

Anthropogenic wastewater
6 6.3.1 2020 EPI treatment in each country, multiplied by the proportion of the
that receives treatment (%)
population connected to a wastewater collection system.
Water scarcity is measured as water consumption weighted by
scarcity indices. In order to incorporate water scarcity into the virtual
Scarce water consumption
water flow calculus, water use entries are weighted so that they
6 embodied in imports (m3 H2O 6.4 2018 UNEP
reflect the scarcity of the water being used. The weight used is a
eq/capita)
measure of water withdrawals as a percentage of the existing local
renewable freshwater resources.
The percentage of the population using a safely managed drinking
water service. A safely managed drinking water service is one
where people use an improved source meeting three criteria: it is
Population using safely
6 6.1.1 2020 JMP accessible on premises, water is available when needed, and the
managed water services (%)
water supplied is free from contamination. Improved sources are
those that have the potential to deliver safe water by nature of their
design and construction.
The percentage of the population using safely managed sanitation

services. Safely managed sanitation services are improved sanitation
facilities that are not shared with other households, and where
Population using safely
the excreta produced should either be treated and disposed of in
6 managed sanitation services 6.1.1 2020 JMP
situ, stored temporarily and then emptied, transported and treated
(%)
off-site, or transported through a sewer with wastewater and then
treated off-site. Improved sanitation facilities are those designed to
hygienically separate excreta from human contact.
IEA, IRENA,
Population with access to
7 7.1.1 2020 UNSD, WB, The percentage of the population who has access to electricity.
electricity (%)
WHO

Table A.4
(continued)
Related
Reference
year
Target
Population with access to The percentage of the population primarily using clean cooking
7 [a] clean fuels and technology for 7.1.2 2020 WHO fuels and technologies for cooking. Under WHO guidelines, kerosene
cooking (%) is excluded from clean cooking fuels.
CO₂ emissions from fuel A measure of the carbon intensity of energy production, calculated
7 combustion per total electricity 7.2 2019 IEA by dividing CO₂ emissions from the combustion of fuel by electricity
output (MtCO₂/TWh) output. The data are reported in Megatonnes per billion kilowatt hours.
The share of renewable energy in the total final energy consumption.

Renewable energy includes hydro, solid biofuels, liquid biofuels,
Renewable energy share IEA, IRENA, biogases, modern biomass, wind, solar, geothermal, tide/wave/
7 in total final energy 7.2.1 2019 UNSD, WB, oceans and renewable municipal waste. It does not include
consumption (%) WHO traditional biomass — local solid biomass resources (e.g. wood,
charcoal, dung, agricultural residues) used in low-income households
that do not have access to modern cooking fuels or technologies.
The growth rate of GDP adjusted to income levels (where rich

countries are expected to grow less) and expressed relative to the
average growth rate of high income countries. The growth rate
over the last 3-year period (t-3 to t) was calculated where GRa=(At/
At-3)^(1/3)-1 and where GRa is the growth rate for country A and
8 Adjusted GDP growth (%) 8.1.1 2021 World Bank
At is the GDP per capita data for the year t in country A. Then our
adjustment is as follows: ADJa= [GRa-(GRhic - 0,015*log(At-3/hict-
3))] * 100, where GRhic is the average growth rate of high-income
countries and hict-3 is the average GDP per capita of high-income
countries three years ago.
Estimation of the number of people in modern slavery. Modern

Walk Free
Victims of modern slavery (per slavery is defined as people in forced labor or forced marriage. It
8 [a] 8.7 2018 Foundation
1,000 population) is calculated based on standardized surveys and Multiple Systems
(2018)
Estimation (MSE).
Adults with an account at
The percentage of adults, 15 years and older, who report having an
a bank or other financial
Global Findex account (by themselves or with someone else) at a bank or another

8 institution or with a mobile- 8.10.2 2021
Database type of financial institution, or who have personally used a mobile
money-service provider (% of
money service within the past 12 months.
population aged 15 or over)
Modeled estimate of the share of the labor force that is without work
Unemployment rate (% of but is available and actively seeking employment. The indicator
8 8.5.2 2023 ILO
total labor force, ages 15+) reflects the inability of an economy to generate employment for
people who want to work but are not doing so.
Measures the effective enforcement of fundamental labor rights,
Fundamental labor rights are
World Justice including freedom of association and the right to collective
8 effectively guaranteed (worst 8.8.2 2021
Project bargaining, the absence of discrimination with respect to
0–1 best)
employment, and freedom from forced labor and child labor.
Alsamawi et al.
Fatal work-related accidents The number of fatal work-related accidents associated with
(2017)
8 embodied in imports (per 8.8.1 2018 imported goods. Calculated using extensions to a multiregional
data updated
100,000 population) input-output table.
to 2018
Victims of modern slavery Victims of forced labor embodied in supply chains. Calculated using
Malik et al
8 embodied in imports (per 8.7 2018 a multi-regional input-output table (Gloria) extended with a slavery
(2022)
100,000 population) satellite account
The ratio of the employed to the working age population. Employed

Employment-to-population people are those aged 15 or older who were in paid employment
8 8.5 2022 OECD
ratio (%) or self-employed during a specified period. The working age
population refers to people aged 15 to 64.

Table A.4
(continued)
Related
Reference
year
Target
The percentage of young people who are not in employment,
education or training (NEET). Education includes part-time or full-
Youth not in employment,
time education but excludes those in non-formal education and in
education or training (NEET)
8 8.6.1 2021 OECD educational activities of very short duration. Employment is defined
(% of population aged 15
according to the ILO Guidelines and covers all those who have been
to 29)
in paid work for at least one hour in the reference week or were
temporarily absent from such work.
SDSN (2023),
based on Proportion of the rural population that lives within 2 km of an all-
Rural population with access
9 9.1.1 2022 Workman, R. & season road. An all-season road is one that is motorable throughout
to all-season roads (%)
McPherson, K., the year but may be temporarily unavailable during inclement weather.
TRL (2019)
The percentage of the population who used the Internet from any
Population using the internet
9 17.8.1 2021 ITU location in the last three months. Access could be via a fixed or
(%)
mobile network.
The number of mobile broadband subscriptions per 100 population.
Mobile broadband Mobile broadband subscriptions refer to subscriptions to mobile
9.c.1 &
9 subscriptions (per 100 2021 ITU cellular networks with access to data communications (e.g. the
17.6.1
population) Internet) at broadband speeds, irrespective of the device used to
access the internet.
Logistics Performance Index:
Survey-based average assessment of the quality of trade and
Quality of trade and transport-
9 9.1 2018 World Bank transport related infrastructure, e.g. ports, roads, railroads and
related infrastructure (worst
information technology, on a scale from 1 (worst) to 5 (best).
1-5 best)
The average score of the top three universities in each country
that are listed in the global top 1,000 universities in the world. For
The Times Higher Education countries with at least one university on the list, only the score of
Universities Ranking: Average Times Higher the ranked university was taken into account. When a university
9 - 2022
score of top 3 universities Education score was missing in the Times Higher Education World University
(worst 0-100 best) Ranking, an indicator from the Global Innovation Index on the top
3 universities in Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) University Ranking was
used as a source when available.
Articles published in Number of citable documents published by a journal in the three

Scimago
9 academic journals (per 1,000 9.5 2021 previous years (selected year documents are excluded). Exclusively
Jounal Rank
population) articles, reviews and conference papers are considered.
Gross domestic expenditure on scientific research and experimental
Expenditure on research and development (R&D) expressed as a percentage of Gross Domestic
9 9.5.1 2020 UNESCO
development (% of GDP) Product (GDP). We assumed zero R&D expenditure for low-income
countries that do not report any data.
The number of researchers per thousand employed people.
Researchers (per 1,000 Researchers are professionals engaged in the conception or creation
9 9.5.2 2020 OECD
employed population) of new knowledge, products, processes, methods and systems, as
well as in the management of the projects concerned
A triadic patent family is defined as a set of patents registered in various
countries (i.e. patent offices) to protect the same invention. Triadic
Triadic patent families filed patent families are a set of patents filed at three of these major patent
9 9.5 2020 OECD
(per million population) offices: the European Patent Office (EPO), the Japan Patent Office
(JPO) and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The
number of triadic patent families is nowcast for timeliness.
Gap in internet access by The difference in the percentage of household Internet access
9 9.c 2020 OECD
income (percentage points) between the top and bottom income quartiles.
Female share of graduates

Female share of graduates from Science, Technology, Engineering
9 from STEM fields at the 4.3 2018 World Bank
and Mathematics (STEM) programs, tertiary (%)
tertiary level (%)

Table A.4
(continued)
Related
Reference
year
Target
The Gini coefficient measures the extent to which the distribution
10 Gini coefficient 10.1 2020 World Bank of income among individuals or households within an economy
deviates from a perfectly equal distribution.
The share of all income received by the 10% people with highest
10 Palma ratio 10.1 2020 OECD & UNDP disposable income divided by the share of all income received by
the 40% people with the lowest disposable income.
Elderly poverty rate (% of The percentage of people of 66 years of age or more whose income
10 10.2.1 2020 OECD
population aged 66 or over) falls below half the median household income of the total population.
Population living in slums is the proportion of the urban
population living in slum households. A slum household is defined
Proportion of urban as a group of individuals living under the same roof lacking one or
11 11.1.1 2020 UN Habitat
population living in slums (%) more of the following conditions: access to improved water, access
to improved sanitation, sufficient living area, housing durability,
and security of tenure.
Air pollution measured as the population-weighted mean annual
Annual mean concentration
concentration of PM2.5 for the urban population in a country.
of particulate matter of less
11 [a] 11.6.2 2019 IHME PM2.5 is suspended particles measuring less than 2.5 microns in
than 2.5 microns in diameter
aerodynamic diameter, which are capable of penetrating deep into
(PM2.5) (μg/m³)
the respiratory tract and can cause severe health damage.
The percentage of the urban population with access to improved
Access to improved water drinking water piped on premises. An improved drinking-water
WHO and
11 source, piped (% of urban 11.1 2020 source is one that, by the nature of its construction and when
UNICEF
population) properly used, adequately protects the source from outside
contamination, particularly fecal matter.
The percentage of the surveyed population that responded satisfied
Satisfaction with public

11 11.2.1 2022 Gallup to the question In the city or area where you live, are you satisfied or
transport (%)
dissatisfied with the public transportation systems?.
Population with rent Percentage of the population living in households where the total
11 11.1 2019 OECD
overburden (%) housing costs represent more than 40 % of disposable income.
SDSN (2023),
The percentage of the population in urban areas living within
based on
Proportion of population with 15-minute walking distance from a point of interest (i.e. hospitals,
Nicoletti, L.,
11 access to points of interest - 2022 schools, supermarkets, restaurants, etc.) Distance is established
Sirenko, M.,
within a 15min walk (%) through pedestrian street network data and the percentage of
& Verma, T.
population in the radius is estimated using gridded population density.
(2023)
The amount of waste collected by or on behalf of municipal
Municipal solid waste (kg/
12 [a] 12.5 2019 World Bank authorities and disposed of through the waste management system.
capita/day)
Waste from agriculture and from industries are not included.
Waste from electrical and electronic equipment, estimated based on

12 [a] Electronic waste (kg/capita) 12.4.2 2019 UNU-IAS figures for domestic production, imports and exports of electronic
products, as well as product lifespan data.
Production-based SO₂ Lenzen et al. SO₂ emissions associated with the production of goods and services,
12 9.4 2018
emissions (kg/capita) (2022) which are then either exported or consumed domestically.
Emissions of SO₂ embodied in imported goods and services. SO₂

SO₂ emissions embodied in Lenzen et al.
12 9.4 2018 emissions have severe health impacts and are a significant cause of
imports (kg/capita) (2022)
premature mortality worldwide.
Reactive nitrogen emitted during the production of commodities,
which are then either exported or consumed domestically. Reactive
Production-based nitrogen nitrogen corresponds to emissions of ammonia, nitrogen oxides and
12 9.4 2018 UNEP
emissions (kg/capita) nitrous oxide to the atmosphere, and of reactive nitrogen potentially
exportable to water bodies, all of which can be harmful to human
health and the environment.

Table A.4
(continued)
Related
Reference
year
Target
Emissions of reactive nitrogen embodied in imported goods and
services. Reactive nitrogen corresponds here to emissions of
Nitrogen emissions embodied
12 9.4 2018 UNEP ammonia, nitrogen oxides and nitrous oxide to the atmosphere, and
in imports (kg/capita)
of reactive nitrogen potentially exportable to water bodies, all of
which can be harmful to human health and the environment.
Exports of plastic waste (kg/ The average annual amount of plastic waste exported over the last 5
12 12.4 2021 UN Comtrade
capita) years expressed per capita.
Non-recycled municipal solid The amount of municipal solid waste (MSW), including household
12 11.6.1 2021 OECD
waste (kg/capita/day) waste, that is neither recycled nor composted.
CO₂ emissions from fossil Emissions from the combustion and oxidation of fossil fuels and
Global Carbon
13 fuel combustion and cement 13.2.2 2021 from cement production. The indicator excludes emissions from
Project
production (tCO₂/capita) fuels used for international aviation and maritime transport.
CO₂ emissions embodied in Lenzen et al.

13 13.2 2018 CO₂ emissions embodied in imported goods and services.
imports (tCO₂/capita) (2022)
CO₂ emissions embodied in the exports of coal, gas, and oil.

CO₂ emissions embodied in Calculated using a 5-year average of fossil fuel exports and
13 13.2 2021 UN Comtrade
fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) converting exports into their equivalent CO₂ emissions. Exports for
each fossil fuel are capped at the country's level of production.
The Carbon Pricing Score (CPS) measures the extent to which
countries have attained the goal of pricing all energy related carbon
emissions at certain benchmark values for carbon costs. The more
Carbon Pricing Score at EUR60/ progress that a country has made towards a specified benchmark
13 13.2 2018 OECD
tCO₂ (%, worst 0-100 best) value, the higher the CPS. For example, a CPS of 100% against a
EUR 60 per tonne of CO₂ benchmark means that the country (or the
group of countries) prices all carbon emissions in its (their) territory
from energy use at EUR 60 or more.
Mean area that is protected Birdlife The mean percentage area of marine Key Biodiversity Areas (sites
14 in marine sites important to 14.5.1 2022 International that are important for the global persistence of marine biodiversity)
biodiversity (%) et al. that are protected.
The clean waters subgoal of the Ocean Health Index measures to
Ocean Health Index: Clean
Ocean Health what degree marine waters under national jurisdictions have been
14 Waters score (worst 0-100 14.1.1 2022
Index contaminated by chemicals, excessive nutrients (eutrophication),
best)
human pathogens, and trash.
Fish caught from The percentage of a country’s total catch, within its exclusive
14 overexploited or collapsed 14.4.1 2018 Sea around Us economic zone (EEZ), that is comprised of species that are
stocks (% of total catch) overexploited or collapsed, weighted by the quality of fish catch data.
The percentage of fish caught by bottom trawling, a method of
Fish caught by trawling or fishing in which industrial fishing vessels drag large nets (trawls)
14 14.4 2019 Sea Around Us
dredging (%) along the seabed. This indicator is the sum of the series for bottom
trawling, shrimp trawling, and dredging.
Fish caught that are then

14 14.4 2019 Sea around Us The percentage of fish that are caught only to be later discarded.
discarded (%)
Marine biodiversity threats Lenzen et al.

Threats to marine species embodied in imports of goods and
14 embodied in imports (per 14.4 2018 (2012) data
services.
million population) updated to 2018
Mean area that is protected in Birdlife The mean percentage area of terrestrial Key Biodiversity Areas (sites
15 terrestrial sites important to 15.1.2 2022 International that are important for the global persistence of biodiversity) that are
biodiversity (%) et al. protected.
Mean area that is protected in Birdlife The mean percentage area of freshwater Key Biodiversity Areas (sites
15 freshwater sites important to 15.1.2 2022 International that are important for the global persistence of biodiversity) that are
biodiversity (%) et al. protected.
IUCN and The change in aggregate extinction risk across groups of species. The
Red List Index of species
15 15.5.1 2023 Birdlife index is based on genuine changes in the number of species in each
survival (worst 0-1 best)
International category of extinction risk on The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

Table A.4
(continued)
Related
Reference
year
Target
The mean annual percentage of permanent deforestation over the
last 3-year period. Permanent deforestation refers to tree cover
Curtis et al. removal for urbanization, commodity production and certain types
Permanent deforestation (% (2018) of small-scale agriculture whereby the previous tree cover does not
15 15.2 2021
of forest area, 3-year average) data updated return. It does not include temporary forest loss due to cuttings
to 2021 within the forestry sector or wildfires. Since data on tree cover gains
are not available, the annual net loss cannot be calculated, thus the
indicator is an estimate for gross permanent deforestation.
Terrestrial and freshwater Lenzen et al.
biodiversity threats embodied (2012) Threats to terrestrial and freshwater species embodied in imports of
15 15.5 2018
in imports (per million data updated goods and services.
population) to 2018
The number of intentional homicides per 100,000 people.
Intentional homicides are estimates of unlawful homicides
purposely inflicted as a result of domestic disputes, interpersonal
Homicides (per 100,000
16 16.1.1 2021 UNODC violence, violent conflicts over land resources, intergang violence
population)
over turf or control, and predatory violence and killing by armed
groups. Intentional homicide does not include all intentional killing,
such as killing in armed conflict.
Unsentenced prisoners as a percentage of overall prison population.
Persons held unsentenced or pre-trial refers to persons held in
Unsentenced detainees (% of
16 16.3.2 2020 UNODC prisons, penal institutions or correctional institutions who are
prison population)
untried, pre-trial or awaiting a first instance decision on their case
from a competent authority regarding their conviction or acquittal.
Population who feel safe
The percentage of the surveyed population that responded Yes to
walking alone at night in
16 16.1.4 2022 Gallup the question Do you feel safe walking alone at night in the city or
the city or area where they
area where you live?
live (%)
Birth registrations with civil
The percentage of children under the age of five whose births are
16 authority (% of children under 16.9.1 2022 UNICEF
reported as being registered with the relevant national civil authorities.

age 5)
The perceived levels of public sector corruption, on a scale from 0
Corruption Perceptions Index 16.5.1 & Transparency (highest level of perceived corruption) to 100 (lowest level of perceived
16 2022
(worst 0-100 best) 16.5.2 International corruption). The CPI aggregates data from a number of different sources
that provide perceptions of business people and country experts.
The percentage of children, between the age of 5 and 14 years old,
involved in child labor at the time of the survey. A child is considered
to be involved in child labor under the following conditions: (a)
Children involved in child children 5-11 years old who, during the reference week, did at least
16 labor (% of population aged 8.7.1 2021 UNICEF one hour of economic activity or at least 28 hours of household
5 to 14) chores, or (b) children 12-14 years old who, during the reference
week, did at least 14 hours of economic activity or at least 28 hours
of household chores. We assumed 0% child labor for high-income
countries for which no data was reported.
Volume of major conventional weapons exported, expressed in

constant 1990 US$ millions (TIV) per 100,000 population. The
Exports of major conventional Stockholm trend-indicator value is based on the known unit production cost of
16 weapons (TIV constant million 16.1 2021 Peace Research a core set of weapons and does not reflect the financial value of the
USD per 100,000 population)* Institute exports. Small arms, light weapons, ammunition and other support
material are not included. Values were calculated using a 5-year
average on the latest ten years of data.
Degree of freedom available to journalists in 180 countries and

Press Freedom Index (worst Reporters sans
16 16.1 2023 regions, determined by pooling the responses of experts to a
0-100 best) frontières
questionnaire devised by RSF.
Measures the accessibility and affordability of civil courts, including
whether people are aware of available remedies; can access and afford
Access to and affordability of 16.3.1 & World Justice
16 2021 legal advice and representation; and can access the court system
justice (worst 0–1 best) 16.3.3 Project
without incurring unreasonable fees, encountering unreasonable
procedural hurdles, or experiencing physical or linguistic barriers.

Table A.4
(continued)
Related
Reference
year
Target
Timeliness of administrative World Justice Measures whether administrative proceedings at the national and
16 16.6 2021
proceedings (worst 0 - 1 best) Project local levels are conducted without unreasonable delay.
Measures whether the government respects the property rights of

Expropriations are lawful and
World Justice people and corporations, refrains from the illegal seizure of private
16 adequately compensated 16.6 2021
Project property, and provides adequate compensation when property is
(worst 0 - 1 best)
legally expropriated.
Persons held in prison (per The prison population is composed of persons held in prisons, penal
16 - 2020 UNODC
100,000 population) institutions, or correctional institutions.
The sum of public expenditure on health from domestic sources and
general government expenditure on education (current, capital, and
Government spending on transfers) expressed as a percentage of GDP. This indicator is based
17 health and education (% of 1.a.1 2021 UNESCO on the World Bank health and education spending datasets, sourced
GDP) from WHO & UNESCO respectively. Values are carried forward for both
health and education, but a value in a given year is only reported if at
least one data point is a real observation (not carried forward).
The amount of official development assistance (ODA) as a share of

For high-income and all OECD gross national income (GNI). It includes grants, soft loans (where the
DAC countries: International grant element is at least 25% of the total) and the provision of technical
17 concessional public finance, 17.2.1 2022 OECD assistance and excludes grants and loans for military purposes. There
including official development is a break in the series because from 2019, the ODA grant-equivalent
assistance (% of GNI) methodology is used whereby only the grant portion of the loan, i.e.
the amount given by lending below market rates, counts as ODA.
Government revenue measured as cash receipts from taxes,

Other countries: Government
social contributions, and other revenues such as fines, fees, rent,
17 revenue excluding grants (% 17.1.1 2020 IMF
and income from property or sales. Grants are also considered as
of GDP)
revenue but are excluded here.
The Corporate Tax Haven Score measures a jurisdiction’s potential
to poach the tax base of others, as enshrined in its laws, regulations
Corporate Tax Haven Score Tax Justice
17 - 2021 and documented administrative practices. For countries with
(best 0-100 worst) Network
multiple jurisdictions, the average value across the jurisdictions was
assigned to the country.
The Index measures the contribution of each jurisdiction to financial
secrecy, on a scale from 0 (best) to 100 (worst). It is calculated using
qualitative data to prepare a secrecy score for each jurisdiction
Financial Secrecy Score (best Tax Justice
17 - 2022 and quantitative data to create a global scale weighting for each
0-100 worst) Network
jurisdiction according to its share of offshore financial services
activity in the global total. For countries with multiple jurisdictions,
the average score of the jurisdictions was used.
Estimation of how much profit is shifted into tax havens and how
Shifted profits of Zucman et al. much non-haven countries lose in profits from such shifting. Based
17 - 2019
multinationals (US$ billion) (2019) on macroeconomic data known as foreign affiliates statistics.
Negative values indicate profit shifting.
The Statistical Performance Index is a weighted average of the

statistical performance indicators that evaluate the performance
Statistical Performance Index 17.18.1
17 2022 World Bank of national statistical systems. It aggregates five pillars of statistical
(worst 0-100 best) - 17.19.2
performance: data use, data services, data products, data sources,
and data infrastructure.

*Note: The inclusion of an indicator on export of major conventional weapons should not be interpreted as a value judgment on the context of current conflicts
but rather as an effort to evaluate more generally the trend towards disarmament recognized by the UN and civil society organizations as an important priority
for peace, socio-economic stability and sustainable development (UN Office for Disarmament Affairs, 2018; Amnesty International, 2008).

Table A.5
Indicator thresholds and justifications for optimal values
Optimum Lower Justification for

SDG Indicator Green Yellow Orange Red
(value = 100) bound optimum
1 Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) 0 ≤2 2 < x ≤ 7.5 7.5 < x ≤ 13 > 13 72.6 SDG Target
1 Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 0 ≤2 2 < x ≤ 7.5 7.5 < x ≤ 13 > 13 51.5 SDG Target
Average of best
1 Poverty rate after taxes and transfers (%) 6.1 ≤ 10 10 < x ≤ 12.5 12.5 < x ≤ 15 > 15 17.7
performers
2 Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 2.5 ≤ 7.5 7.5 < x ≤ 11.25 11.25 < x ≤ 15 > 15 42.3 SDG Target
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years
2 0 ≤ 7.5 7.5 < x ≤ 11.25 11.25 < x ≤ 15 > 15 50.2 SDG Target
of age (%)
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years
2 0 ≤5 5 < x ≤ 7.5 7.5 < x ≤ 10 > 10 16.3 SDG Target
of age (%)
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult Average of best
2 2.8 ≤ 10 10 < x ≤ 17.5 17.5 < x ≤ 25 > 25 35.1
population) performers
Average of best
2 Human Trophic Level (best 2-3 worst) 2.04 ≤ 2.2 2.2 < x ≤ 2.3 2.3 < x ≤ 2.4 > 2.4 2.45
performers
Average of best
2 Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 7 ≥ 2.5 2.5 > x ≥ 2 2 > x ≥ 1.5 < 1.5 0.2
performers
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best
2 0 ≤ 0.3 0.3 < x ≤ 0.5 0.5 < x ≤ 0.7 > 0.7 1.2 Technical Optimum
0-1.41 worst)
Average of best
2 Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) 77 ≥ 75 75 > x ≥ 62.5 62.5 > x ≥ 50 < 50 28
performers
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per
2 0 ≤1 1 < x ≤ 25.5 25.5 < x ≤ 50 > 50 250 Technical Optimum
million population)
Average of best
3 Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) 3.4 ≤ 70 70 < x ≤ 105 105 < x ≤ 140 > 140 814
performers
Average of best
3 Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 1.1 ≤ 12 12 < x ≤ 15 15 < x ≤ 18 > 18 39.7
performers
Average of best
3 Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) 2.6 ≤ 25 25 < x ≤ 37.5 37.5 < x ≤ 50 > 50 130.1
performers
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000
3 0 ≤ 10 10 < x ≤ 42.5 42.5 < x ≤ 75 > 75 561 SDG Target
population)

New HIV infections (per 1,000 uninfected
3 0 ≤ 0.2 0.2 < x ≤ 0.6 0.6 < x ≤ 1 >1 5.5 SDG Target
population)
Age-standardized death rate due to cardiovascular
Average of best
3 disease, cancer, diabetes, or chronic respiratory 9.3 ≤ 15 15 < x ≤ 20 20 < x ≤ 25 > 25 31
performers
disease in adults aged 30–70 years (%)
Age-standardized death rate attributable to
3 household air pollution and ambient air pollution 0 ≤ 18 18 < x ≤ 84 84 < x ≤ 150 > 150 368.8 Technical Optimum
Average of best
3 Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 3.2 ≤ 8.4 8.4 < x ≤ 12.6 12.6 < x ≤ 16.8 > 16.8 33.7
performers
Average of best
3 Life expectancy at birth (years) 83 ≥ 80 80 > x ≥ 75 75 > x ≥ 70 < 70 54
performers
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females Average of best
3 2.5 ≤ 25 25 < x ≤ 37.5 37.5 < x ≤ 50 > 50 139.6
aged 15 to 19) performers
3 Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 100 ≥ 98 98 > x ≥ 94 94 > x ≥ 90 < 90 23.1 Leave no one behind
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-
3 100 ≥ 90 90 > x ≥ 85 85 > x ≥ 80 < 80 41 Leave no one behind
recommended vaccines (%)
Universal health coverage (UHC) index of service
3 100 ≥ 80 80 > x ≥ 70 70 > x ≥ 60 < 60 38.2 Leave no one behind
coverage (worst 0-100 best)
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, Average of best
3 7.6 ≥6 6 > x ≥ 5.5 5.5 > x ≥ 5 <5 3.3
worst 0-10 best) performers
3 Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 0 ≤3 3<x≤5 5<x≤7 >7 11 Leave no one behind

Table A.5
(continued)

Gap in self-reported health status by income

3 0 ≤ 20 20 < x ≤ 30 30 < x ≤ 40 > 40 45 Leave no one behind
(percentage points)
Average of best
3 Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 10.1 ≤ 18 18 < x ≤ 25 25 < x ≤ 32 > 32 35
performers
Participation rate in pre-primary organized
4 100 ≥ 90 90 > x ≥ 80 80 > x ≥ 70 < 70 35 SDG Target
learning (% of children aged 4 to 6)
4 Net primary enrollment rate (%) 100 ≥ 97 97 > x ≥ 88.5 88.5 > x ≥ 80 < 80 53.8 SDG Target
4 Lower secondary completion rate (%) 100 ≥ 90 90 > x ≥ 82.5 82.5 > x ≥ 75 < 75 18 SDG Target
4 Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 100 ≥ 95 95 > x ≥ 90 90 > x ≥ 85 < 85 45.2 Leave no one behind
Tertiary educational attainment (% of population Average of best
4 52.2 ≥ 40 40 > x ≥ 25 25 > x ≥ 10 < 10 0
aged 25 to 34) performers
Average of best
4 PISA score (worst 0-600 best) 525.6 ≥ 493 493 > x ≥ 446.5 446.5 > x ≥ 400 < 400 350
performers
Variation in science performance explained by Average of best
4 8.3 ≤ 10.5 10.5 < x ≤ 15.25 15.25 < x ≤ 20 > 20 21.4
socio-economic status (%) performers
Average of best
4 Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 10 ≤ 15 15 < x ≤ 22.5 22.5 < x ≤ 30 > 30 48
performers
Demand for family planning satisfied by modern
methods (% of females aged 15 to 49)
Modeled estimate: Demand for family planning
5 100 ≥ 80 80 > x ≥ 70 70 > x ≥ 60 < 60 17.5 Technical Optimum
satisfied by any modern method
Ratio of female-to-male mean years of education
5 100 ≥ 98 98 > x ≥ 86.5 86.5 > x ≥ 75 < 75 41.8 SDG Target
received (%)
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation
5 100 ≥ 70 70 > x ≥ 60 60 > x ≥ 50 < 50 21.5 SDG Target
rate (%)
5 Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 50 ≥ 40 40 > x ≥ 30 30 > x ≥ 20 < 20 1.2 SDG Target
5 Gender wage gap (% of male median wage) 0 ≤8 8 < x ≤ 14 14 < x ≤ 20 > 20 36.7 Technical Optimum
Population using at least basic drinking water
services (%)
Population using at least basic sanitation services
(%)
Freshwater withdrawal (% of available freshwater
6 12.5 ≤ 25 25 < x ≤ 50 50 < x ≤ 75 > 75 100 Technical Optimum
resources)
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives
6 100 ≥ 50 50 > x ≥ 37.5 37.5 > x ≥ 25 < 25 15 Technical Optimum
treatment (%)
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports > Average of best
6 100 ≤ 1000 1000 < x ≤ 2500 2500 < x ≤ 4000 11000
(m3 H2O eq/capita) 4000 performers
6 Population using safely managed water services (%) 100 ≥ 95 95 > x ≥ 87.5 87.5 > x ≥ 80 < 80 10.5 Leave no one behind
Population using safely managed sanitation
6 100 ≥ 90 90 > x ≥ 77.5 77.5 > x ≥ 65 < 65 14.1 Leave no one behind
services (%)
7 Population with access to electricity (%) 100 ≥ 98 98 > x ≥ 89 89 > x ≥ 80 < 80 9.1 Leave no one behind
Population with access to clean fuels and Average of best
7 100 ≥ 85 85 > x ≥ 67.5 67.5 > x ≥ 50 < 50 2
technology for cooking (%) performers
7 CO₂ emissions from fuel combustion per total 0 ≤1 1 < x ≤ 1.25 1.25 < x ≤ 1.5 > 1.5 5.9 Technical Optimum
electricity output (MtCO₂/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy Average of best
7 55 ≥ 32 32 > x ≥ 21 21 > x ≥ 10 < 10 3
consumption (%) performers

Table A.5
(continued)

Average of best
8 Adjusted GDP growth (%) 5 ≥0 0 > x ≥ -1.5 -1.5 > x ≥ -3 < -3 -14.7
performers
8 Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 0 ≤4 4<x≤7 7 < x ≤ 10 > 10 22 Leave no one behind
Adults with an account at a bank or other
8 financial institution or with a mobile-money- 100 ≥ 80 80 > x ≥ 65 65 > x ≥ 50 < 50 8 Technical Optimum
service provider (% of population aged 15 or over)
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages Average of best
8 0.5 ≤5 5 < x ≤ 7.5 7.5 < x ≤ 10 > 10 25.9
15+) performers
Fundamental labor rights are effectively Average of best
8 0.85 ≥ 0.7 0.7 > x ≥ 0.6 0.6 > x ≥ 0.5 < 0.5 0.3
guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) performers
Fatal work-related accidents embodied in imports
8 0 ≤1 1 < x ≤ 1.75 1.75 < x ≤ 2.5 > 2.5 6 Technical Optimum
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports
8 0 ≤ 20 20 < x ≤ 135 135 < x ≤ 250 > 250 300 Technical Optimum
Average of best
8 Employment-to-population ratio (%) 77.8 ≥ 60 60 > x ≥ 55 55 > x ≥ 50 < 50 50
performers
Youth not in employment, education or training Average of best
8 8.1 ≤ 10 10 < x ≤ 12.5 12.5 < x ≤ 15 > 15 28.2
(NEET) (% of population aged 15 to 29) performers
9 Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 100 ≥ 90 90 > x ≥ 75 75 > x ≥ 60 < 60 35 Leave no one behind
9 Population using the internet (%) 100 ≥ 80 80 > x ≥ 65 65 > x ≥ 50 < 50 2.2 Leave no one behind
Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100

population)
Logistics Performance Index: Quality of trade and Average of best
9 3.8 ≥3 3 > x ≥ 2.5 2.5 > x ≥ 2 <2 1.6
transport-related infrastructure (worst 1-5 best) performers
The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average of best
9 50 ≥ 30 30 > x ≥ 15 15 > x ≥ 0 <0 0
Average score of top 3 universities (worst 0-100 best) performers
Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 Average of best
9 1.2 ≥ 0.7 0.7 > x ≥ 0.375 0.375 > x ≥ 0.05 < 0.05 0
Expenditure on research and development Average of best
9 3.7 ≥ 1.5 1.5 > x ≥ 1.25 1.25 > x ≥ 1 <1 0
(% of GDP) performers
Average of best
9 Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 15.6 ≥8 8 > x ≥ 7.5 7.5 > x ≥ 7 <7 0.8
performers
Triadic patent families filed (per million Average of best
9 115.7 ≥ 20 20 > x ≥ 15 15 > x ≥ 10 < 10 0.1
Gap in internet access by income
9 0 ≤7 7 < x ≤ 26 26 < x ≤ 45 > 45 63.6 Leave no one behind
(percentage points)
Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the
tertiary level (%)
Average of best
10 Gini coefficient 27.5 ≤ 30 30 < x ≤ 35 35 < x ≤ 40 > 40 63
performers
Average of best
10 Palma ratio 0.9 ≤1 1 < x ≤ 1.15 1.15 < x ≤ 1.3 > 1.3 2.5
performers
Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 Average of best
10 3.2 ≤5 5 < x ≤ 15 15 < x ≤ 25 > 25 45.7
or over) performers
Proportion of urban population living in slums
11 0 ≤5 5 < x ≤ 15 15 < x ≤ 25 > 25 90 Leave no one behind
(%)
Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of Average of best
11 6.3 ≤ 10 10 < x ≤ 17.5 17.5 < x ≤ 25 > 25 87
less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) (μg/m³) performers

Table A.5
(continued)

Access to improved water source, piped (% of

urban population)
Average of best
11 Satisfaction with public transport (%) 82.6 ≥ 72 72 > x ≥ 57.5 57.5 > x ≥ 43 < 43 21
performers
Average of best
11 Population with rent overburden (%) 4.6 ≤7 7 < x ≤ 12 12 < x ≤ 17 > 17 25.6
performers
Proportion of population with access to points of Average of best
11 98 ≥ 90 90 > x ≥ 70 70 > x ≥ 50 < 50 15
interest within a 15min walk (%) performers
Average of best
12 Municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 0.1 ≤1 1 < x ≤ 1.5 1.5 < x ≤ 2 >2 3.7
performers
Average of best
12 Electronic waste (kg/capita) 0.2 ≤5 5 < x ≤ 7.5 7.5 < x ≤ 10 > 10 23.5
performers
Average of best
12 Production-based SO₂ emissions (kg/capita) 0 ≤ 30 30 < x ≤ 65 65 < x ≤ 100 > 100 525
performers
12 SO₂ emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 0 ≤5 5 < x ≤ 7.5 7.5 < x ≤ 10 > 10 30 Technical Optimum
Average of best
12 Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 2 ≤ 20 20 < x ≤ 35 35 < x ≤ 50 > 50 100
performers
12 Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 0 ≤ 10 10 < x ≤ 15 15 < x ≤ 20 > 20 70 Technical Optimum
12 Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0 ≤1 1<x≤3 3<x≤5 >5 12 Technical Optimum
Average of best
12 Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 0.6 ≤ 0.8 0.8 < x ≤ 0.9 0.9 < x ≤ 1 >1 1.5
performers
13 CO₂ emissions from fossil fuel combustion and 0 ≤2 2<x≤3 3<x≤4 >4 20 Technical Optimum
cement production (tCO₂/capita)
13 CO₂ emissions embodied in imports (tCO₂/capita) 0 ≤ 0.5 0.5 < x ≤ 1 1 < x ≤ 1.5 > 1.5 4.5 Technical Optimum
13 CO₂ emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports 0 ≤ 100 100 < x ≤ 4050 4050 < x ≤ 8000
>
44000 Technical Optimum
(kg/capita) 8000
13 Carbon Pricing Score at EUR60/tCO₂ 100 ≥ 70 70 > x ≥ 50 50 > x ≥ 30 < 30 0 Technical Optimum
(%, worst 0-100 best)
Mean area that is protected in marine sites
14 100 ≥ 85 85 > x ≥ 75 75 > x ≥ 65 < 65 0 Technical Optimum
important to biodiversity (%)
Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score
14 100 ≥ 80 80 > x ≥ 75 75 > x ≥ 70 < 70 28.6 Technical Optimum
(worst 0-100 best)
Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed
14 0 ≤ 25 25 < x ≤ 37.5 37.5 < x ≤ 50 > 50 90.7 Technical Optimum
stocks (% of total catch)
Average of best
14 Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 1 ≤7 7 < x ≤ 33.5 33.5 < x ≤ 60 > 60 90
performers
14 Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 0 ≤5 5 < x ≤ 10 10 < x ≤ 15 > 15 20 Technical Optimum
Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports
14 0 ≤ 0.2 0.2 < x ≤ 0.6 0.6 < x ≤ 1 >1 2 Technical Optimum
(per million population)
Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites
Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites
15 Red List Index of species survival (worst 0-1 best) 1 ≥ 0.9 0.9 > x ≥ 0.85 0.85 > x ≥ 0.8 < 0.8 0.6 Technical Optimum
Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year
15 0 ≤ 0.05 0.05 < x ≤ 0.275 0.275 < x ≤ 0.5 > 0.5 1.5 SDG Target
average)

Table A.5
(continued)

Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity threats

15 0 ≤1 1<x≤2 2<x≤3 >3 10 Technical Optimum
embodied in imports (per million population)
Average of best
16 Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.3 ≤ 1.5 1.5 < x ≤ 2.75 2.75 < x ≤ 4 >4 38
performers
Average of best
16 Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 7 ≤ 30 30 < x ≤ 40 40 < x ≤ 50 > 50 75
performers
Population who feel safe walking alone at night in Average of best
16 90 ≥ 70 70 > x ≥ 60 60 > x ≥ 50 < 50 33
the city or area where they live (%) performers
Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children
16 100 ≥ 98 98 > x ≥ 86.5 86.5 > x ≥ 75 < 75 11 Leave no one behind
under age 5)
Average of best
16 Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0-100 best) 88.6 ≥ 60 60 > x ≥ 50 50 > x ≥ 40 < 40 13
performers
Children involved in child labor (% of population
16 0 ≤2 2<x≤6 6 < x ≤ 10 > 10 39.3 Leave no one behind
aged 5 to 14)
Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV
16 0 ≤1 1 < x ≤ 1.75 1.75 < x ≤ 2.5 > 2.5 3.4 Technical Optimum
constant million USD per 100,000 population)
Average of best
16 Press Freedom Index (worst 0-100 best) 90 ≥ 70 70 > x ≥ 60 60 > x ≥ 50 < 50 40
performers
Average of best
16 Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.75 ≥ 0.65 0.65 > x ≥ 0.575 0.575 > x ≥ 0.5 < 0.5 0.1
performers
Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst Average of best
16 0.85 ≥ 0.7 0.7 > x ≥ 0.55 0.55 > x ≥ 0.4 < 0.4 0.15
0 - 1 best) performers

Expropriations are lawful and adequately Average of best
16 0.85 ≥ 0.7 0.7 > x ≥ 0.6 0.6 > x ≥ 0.5 < 0.5 0.4
compensated (worst 0 - 1 best) performers
Average of best
16 Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 25 ≤ 100 100 < x ≤ 175 175 < x ≤ 250 > 250 475
performers
Government spending on health and education Average of best
17 15 ≥ 10 10 > x ≥ 7.5 7.5 > x ≥ 5 <5 0
(% of GDP) performers
For high-income and all OECD DAC countries:
Average of best
17 International concessional public finance, including 1 ≥ 0.7 0.7 > x ≥ 0.525 0.525 > x ≥ 0.35 < 0.35 0.1
performers
official development assistance (% of GNI)
Other countries: Government revenue excluding Average of best
17 40 ≥ 30 30 > x ≥ 23 23 > x ≥ 16 < 16 10
grants (% of GDP) performers
Average of best
17 Corporate Tax Haven Score (best 0-100 worst) 40 ≤ 60 60 < x ≤ 65 65 < x ≤ 70 > 70 100
performers
Average of best
17 Financial Secrecy Score (best 0-100 worst) 42.7 ≤ 45 45 < x ≤ 50 50 < x ≤ 55 > 55 76.5
performers
17 Shifted profits of multinationals (US$ billion) 0 ≥0 0 > x ≥ -15 -15 > x ≥ -30 < -30 -70 Technical Optimum
17 Statistical Performance Index (worst 0-100 best) 100 ≥ 80 80 > x ≥ 65 65 > x ≥ 50 < 50 25 Technical Optimum

Table A.6
Indicators used for SDG Trends and period for trend estimation
Period
SDG Indicator covered Notes
1 Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) 2015–2023
1 Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 2015–2023
1 Poverty rate after taxes and transfers (%) 2015–2020 OECD only
2 Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 2015–2020
2 Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 2015–2022
2 Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 2015–2021
2 Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 2013–2016
2 Human Trophic Level (best 2-3 worst) 2014–2017
2 Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 2015–2021
2 Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 2015–2018
3 Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) 2015–2020
3 Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 2015–2021
3 Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) 2015–2021
3 Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 2015–2021
3 New HIV infections (per 1,000 uninfected population) 2015–2021

Age-standardized death rate due to cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, or chronic respiratory
3 2015–2019
disease in adults aged 30–70 years (%)
3 Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 2015–2019
3 Life expectancy at birth (years) 2015–2019
3 Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 2015–2020
3 Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 2015–2020
3 Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 2015–2021
3 Universal health coverage (UHC) index of service coverage (worst 0–100 best) 2015–2019
3 Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 2015–2022
3 Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 2015–2021 OECD only
3 Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 2015–2020 OECD only
3 Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 2015–2021 OECD only
4 Participation rate in pre-primary organized learning (% of children aged 4 to 6) 2015–2021
4 Net primary enrollment rate (%) 2015–2021
4 Lower secondary completion rate (%) 2015–2021
4 Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 2015–2021
4 Tertiary educational attainment (% of population aged 25 to 34) 2015–2021 OECD only
4 PISA score (worst 0-600 best) 2015–2018 OECD only
4 Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 2015–2018 OECD only
4 Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 2015–2018 OECD only

Table A.6
(continued)
Period
5 Demand for family planning satisfied by modern methods (% of females aged 15 to 49) 2015–2022
5 Ratio of female-to-male mean years of education received (%) 2015–2021
5 Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 2015–2022
5 Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 2015–2021
5 Gender wage gap (% of male median wage) 2015–2021 OECD only
6 Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 2015–2020
6 Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 2015–2020
6 Population using safely managed water services (%) 2015–2020 OECD only
6 Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 2015–2020 OECD only
7 Population with access to electricity (%) 2015–2020
7 Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 2015–2020
7 CO₂ emissions from fuel combustion per total electricity output (MtCO₂/TWh) 2015–2019
7 Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 2015–2019

Adults with an account at a bank or other financial institution or with a mobile-money-service
8 2014–2021
provider (% of population aged 15 or over)
8 Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) 2015–2023 Global only
8 Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 2015–2021
8 Fatal work-related accidents embodied in imports (per 100,000 population) 2015–2018

8 Employment-to-population ratio (%) 2015–2022 OECD only
8 Youth not in employment, education or training (NEET) (% of population aged 15 to 29) 2015–2021 OECD only
9 Population using the internet (%) 2015–2021
9 Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 2015–2021

Logistics Performance Index: Quality of trade and transport-related infrastructure
9 2014–2018
(worst 1-5 best)
9 Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 2015–2021
9 Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 2015–2020
9 Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 2015–2020 OECD only
9 Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 2015–2020 OECD only
9 Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 2015–2020 OECD only
9 Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 2014–2018 OECD only
10 Gini coefficient 2015–2020
10 Palma ratio 2015–2020
10 Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 2015–2020 OECD only
11 Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 2016–2020
11 Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) (μg/m³) 2015–2019
11 Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 2015–2020

Table A.6
(continued)
Period
11 Satisfaction with public transport (%) 2015–2022
11 Population with rent overburden (%) 2015–2019 OECD only
12 Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 2015–2018
12 Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 2015–2018
12 Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 2016–2021
12 Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 2015–2021 OECD only
13 CO₂ emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 2015–2021
13 CO₂ emissions embodied in imports (tCO₂/capita) 2015–2018
13 Carbon Pricing Score at EUR60/tCO₂ (%, worst 0–100 best) 2015–2018 OECD only
14 Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 2015–2022
14 Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 2015–2022
14 Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 2015–2018
14 Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 2015–2019
14 Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 2015–2019
15 Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 2015–2022
15 Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 2015–2022
15 Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 2015–2023
15 Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 2015–2021
16 Homicides (per 100,000 population) 2015–2021
16 Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 2015–2020
16 Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where they live (%) 2015–2022
16 Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 2015–2022
16 Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 2015–2023
16 Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 2015–2021
16 Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 2015–2021
16 Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 2015–2021
16 Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 2015–2020 OECD only
17 Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 2015–2021

For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional public finance, including
17 2019–2022
official development assistance (% of GNI)
17 Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 2015–2020
17 Financial Secrecy Score (best 0–100 worst) 2018–2022 OECD only
17 Shifted profits of multinationals (US$ billion) 2015–2019 OECD only
17 Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 2016–2022

References
References
Forti V., Baldé C.P., Kuehr R., and Bel G. (2020). The Global
Alsamawi, A., Murray, J., Lenzen, M., and Reyes, R. C. (2017).
E-waste Monitor 2020: Quantities, Flows and the Circular
Trade in occupational safety and health: Tracing the
Economy Potential. United Nations University (UNU),
embodied human and economic harm in labour along
United Nations Institute for Training and Research
the global supply chain. Journal of cleaner production, 147,
(UNITAR) – co-hosted SCYCLE Programme, International
187––96.
Telecommunication Union (ITU), and the International Solid
Amnesty International (2008). Blood at the Crossroads: Waste Association (ISWA), Bonn/Geneva/Rotterdam.
Making the Case for a Global Arms Trade Treaty. London, UK:
Friedlingstein, P., et al. (2020). Global carbon budget 2020.
Amnesty International Publications. https://controlarms.
Earth System Science Data, 2020. https://doi.org/10.5194/
org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/act300112008en.pdf
essd-12-3269-2020
Ates L., Cobham A., Harari M., Janský P., Meinzer M., Millan-
Gallup (2022). Gallup World Poll.
Narotzky L., abd Palanský M. (2021). The corporate tax
haven index: a new geography of profit shifting. In B. Global Findex Database (2022). World Bank, Washington,
Unger, L. Russel, J. Ferwerda (eds.), Combatting Fiscal Fraud D.C. Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/
and Empowering Regulators. Oxford, UK: Oxford University FX.OWN.TOTL.ZS
Press.
Wageningen University and the University of Nebraska-
BirdLife International, IUCN, and UNEP-WCMC (2022). Lincoln (2015). Global Yield Gap Atlas. Available from: http://
Resources and Data. BirdLife International, International www.yieldgap.org
Union for Conservation of Nature, and the United Nations
Environment Programme–World Conservation Monitoring Halpern BS, Longo C, Hardy D, McLeod KL, Samhouri JF,
Centre. Available from: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/ Katona SK, et al. (2012) An index to assess the health and
indicators/database/ benefits of the global ocean. Nature. 2012;488: 615–620.
Bonhommeau, S., Dubroca, L., Le Pape, O., Barde, J., Kaplan, IEA (2019). CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion 2019. International
D. M., Chassot, E., and Nieblas, A. E. (2013). Eating up the Energy Agency, Paris. Available from: https://www.iea.org/
world’s food web and the human trophic level. Proceedings reports/co2-emissions-from-fuel-combustion-2019
of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(51), 20617––20. IEA, IRENA, UNSD, WB, WHO (2022). Tracking SDG7: The Energy
Available from: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1305827110 Progress Report, 2022. Available from: https://trackingsdg7.

Cuaresma, J. C., Fengler, W., Kharas, H., Bekhtiar, K., Brottrager, esmap.org/time
M., and Hofer, M. (2019). Will the Sustainable Development IHME (2020). Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in
Goals be fulfilled? Assessing present and future global 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic
poverty. Palgrave Communications, 4(1), 29. analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The
Curtis et al. (2018). Classifying drivers of global forest loss. Lancet, 17 October 2020, Volume 396, Issue 10258, Pages
Science, Vol. 361-6407, pp. 1108–11. Data updated in 2020. 1129–1306
FAO (2022). Level of water stress: freshwater withdrawal ILO (2022). Ratio of female to male labor force participation
as a proportion of available freshwater resources (%). In rate (%) (modeled ILO estimate). International Labour
AQUASTAT. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Organization, Geneva. Available from: https://data.
Available from: http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/ worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.CACT.FM.ZS
data/query/index.html?lang=en ILO (2022). Unemployment, total (% of total labor force)
FAO (2022). Cereal yield (kg per hectare). Food and (modeled ILO estimate). International Labour Organization,
Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available from: http://data. Geneva. Available from: http://data.worldbank.org/
worldbank.org/indicator/AG.YLD.CREL.KG indicator/SL.UEM.TOTL.ZS
FAO (2022). Prevalence of undernourishment (% of population). International Monetary Fund (2022). Government Finance
Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available from: Statistics Yearbook. Available from: https://data.worldbank.
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SN.ITK.DEFC.ZS org/indicator/GC.REV.XGRT.GD.ZS?view=chart
FAO (2022). Trade in hazardous peseticides. Food and IPU (2022). Proportion of seats held by women in national
Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available from: http:// parliaments (%). Inter-Parliamentary Union, Geneva.
www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/RT/metadata Available from: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/
SG.GEN.PARL.ZS

References
ITU (2022). World Telecommunication/ICT Indicators database. Pauly D, Zeller D, and Palomares M.L.D. (Editors) (2020) Sea
International Telecommunication Union, Geneva. Available Around Us Concepts, Design and Data (www.seaaroundus.org)
from: http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/
Reporters sans frontières (2020). World Press Freedom Index
publications/wtid.aspx
2020. Available from: https://rsf.org/en/ranking
IUCN, BirdLife International (2022). IUCN Red List. International
SCImago Journal & Country Rank (2022). Available from
Union for Conservation of Nature and Birdlife International.
http://www.scimagojr.com
Available from: http://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/
database/?indicator=15.5.1 SDSN (2023) Pedestrian Accessibility Indicators by Country.
Based on Nicoletti, L., Sirenko, M., and Verma, T. (2023).
Kaza, Silpa; Yao, Lisa C.; Bhada-Tata, Perinaz; Van Woerden,
Disadvantaged communities have lower access to urban
Frank. 2018. What a waste 2.0: A global snapshot of
infrastructure. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics
solid waste management to 2050. Urban Development,
and City Science, 50(3), 831–849.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
SDSN (2023) Rural Access Index 2022 by Country. Based on
Lafortune, G., Fuller, G., Moreno, J., Schmidt-Traub,
Workman, R. and McPherson, K., TRL (2019). Measuring Rural
G., and Kroll, C. (2018). SDG Index and Dashboards
Access Using New Technologies: Supplemental Guidelines.
Detailed Methodological Paper. Sustainable
ReCAP GEN2033D. London: ReCAP for DFID.
Development Solutions Network. https://raw.
githubusercontent.com/sdsna/2018GlobalIndex/ Shilling, H.-J., Wiedmann, T., and Malik, A. (2021). Modern
master/2018GlobalIndexMethodology.pdf slavery footprints in global supply chains. Journal of
Industrial Ecology, 25(7), 1518–28
Lenzen, M., Geschke, A., West, J., Fry, J., Malik, A., Giljum, S.,
Milà i Canals, L., Piñero, P., Lutter, S., Wiedmann, T., Li, M., SIPRI (2022). SIPRI Arms Transfers Database. Stockholm
Sevenster, M., Potočnik, J., Teixeira, I., Van Voore, M., Nansai, International Peace Research Institute, Stockholm. Available
K. and Schandl, H. (2022) Implementing the material from: https://www.sipri.org/ databases/armstransfers.
footprint to measure progress towards Sustainable
Development Goals 8 and 12. Nature Sustainability, 5, Tax Justice Network (2020). Financial Secrecy Index 2020. Tax
157–66. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00811-6 Justice Network, London. Available from: https://www.
financialsecrecyindex.com/introduction/fsi-2018-results
Lenzen, M., Moran, D., Kanemoto, K., Foran, B., Lobefaro, L., and
Geschke, A. (2012). International trade drives biodiversity The World justice project: Rule of Law Index 2020. Washington,
threats in developing nations. Nature, 486, 109-12. (Dataset D.C: The World Justice Project, 2020. Available from: https://
updated to 2018 by Isaac Russell Peterson, Matthew worldjusticeproject.org/our-work/research-and-data/wjp-
Selinkske and colleagues). Doi: 10.1038/nature11145 rule-law-index-2020
Malik, A., Lafortune, G., Mora, C., Carter, S., and Lenzen M. Times Higher Education (2022). World University Rankings 2022.
(2022). International spillovers embodied in the EU’s supply Transparency International (2021). Corruption Perceptions
chains. GIZ, SDSN, and the University of Sydney. https://irp. Index 2020. Transparency International, Berlin. Available
cdn-website.com/be6d1d56/files/uploaded/56690-1%20 from: https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/
-%20SDSN%20Study%20-%20v3.pdf
UN Comtrade Database (2022). Available from: https://
OECD (2021). Environmental Policy: Effective Carbon Rates comtrade.un.org/data/
(Edition 2021). OECD Environment Statistics (database),
https://doi.org/10.1787/108c55c1-en UN Habitat (2022). Proportion of Urban Population Living in
Slums. United Nations Human Settlements Programme,
OECD (2022). OECD Statistics. Organisation for Economic Nairoibi, Kenya. Available from: https://data.unhabitat.org/
Cooperation and Development, Paris. Available from: datasets/52c52084f31a403397e2c3bbee37f378_0/data
http://stats.oecd.org/
UNAIDS (2022). Aidsinfo. HIV incidence per 1000 population
OECD (2022). PISA Database. Organisation for Economic (15–49). Joint United Nations Programme on HIV and AIDS,
Cooperation and Development, Paris. Available from: Geneva. Available from: http://aidsinfo.unaids.
http://pisadataexplorer.oecd.org/ide/idepisa/dataset.aspx.
Papadimitriou, E., Fragoso Neves, A., & Becker, W. E. (2019). JRC
Statistical Audit of the Sustainable Development Goals Index
and Dashboards. European Commission. https://ec.europa.
eu/jrc/en/publication/jrc-statistical-audit-sustainable-
development-goals-index-and-dashboards

5
Part 5
Country Profiles
AFGHANISTAN Eastern Europe and Central Asia
OVERALL PERFORMANCE AVERAGE PERFORMANCE BY SDG
158
100
STATUS OF
SDG SDG
17 100
1
SDG TARGETS (%)
SDG SDG
90
COUNTRY 16
75
2
RANKING 80
/166
SDG SDG
15 50 3
70
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 SDG
Afghanistan SDG
SCORE 13 5
30
49.0
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
Worsening
10
Limited progress
REGIONAL AVERAGE: 71.8 0 Achieved or on track SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
9
SDG DASHBOARDS AND TRENDS
G D D D S S
D D D • D A
D • S D S
Major challenges Significant challenges Challenges remain SDG achieved Information unavailable
p Decreasing 5 Stagnating D Moderately improving L On track or maintaining SDG achievement • Information unavailable
Note: The full title of each SDG is available here: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics/sustainabledevelopmentgoals
INTERNATIONAL SPILLOVER INDEX

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Eastern Europe and Central Asia 91.1
Middle East and North Africa 94.5
Latin America and the Caribbean 96.2
East and South Asia 97.8
Sub-Saharan Africa 98.3
Afghanistan 99.0
Oceania 99.8
STATISTICAL PERFORMANCE INDEX MISSING DATA IN SDG INDEX
0
0 (worst) to 100 (best)
100
A 5%
58.0 42.0

AFGHANISTAN Performance by Indicator
SDG1 – No Poverty Value Year RatingTrend SDG9 – Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure Value Year RatingTrend
Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) 54.6 2023 •G Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 50.4 2022 • •
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 77.3 2023 •G Population using the internet (%) 18.4 2020 • D
SDG2 – Zero Hunger Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 18.5 2021 • D
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 29.8 2020 • G Logistics Performance Index: Quality of trade and transport-related
infrastructure (worst 1–5 best)
1.8 2018 • G
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 33.1 2022 • D
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 5.1 2018 • • The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best)
* 0.0 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 5.5 2016 • D Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.0 2021 • D
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2017 • A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) * 0.0 2021 • D
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 2.2 2021 • D
SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 1.1 2018 • G
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) NA NA • • Gini coefficient NA NA • •
SDG3 – Good Health and Well-Being
Palma ratio NA NA • •
SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities
Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) 620.4 •
2020 S
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 34.1 •
2021 S Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 73.3 2020 • G
Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) 55.7 •
2021 S Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) (μg/m³)
55.0 2019 • S
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 189.0 •
2021 D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 41.9 2020 • D
New HIV infections (per 1,000 uninfected population) 0.0 •
2021 D Satisfaction with public transport (%) 22.0 2022 • G
Age-standardized death rate due to cardiovascular disease, cancer,
35.3 2019 • D SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
diabetes, or chronic respiratory disease in adults aged 30–70 years (%)
Age-standardized death rate attributable to household air pollution and
265.7 2019 • •
Municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 0.4 2016 • •
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) Electronic waste (kg/capita) 0.6 2019 • •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 15.9 2019 • G Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) 1.7 2018 • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) 63.2 2019 • D SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 0.1 2018 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 62.0 2017 • • Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 9.2 2018 • A
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 61.8 2020 • S Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 2.8 2018 • A
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 63 2021 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.0 2019 • •
Universal health coverage (UHC) index of service coverage
37 2019 • D SDG13 – Climate Action
(worst 0–100 best)
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 1.3 2022 • G
CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 0.3 2021 •D
CO2 emissions embodied in imports (tCO2/capita) 0.1 2018 •D
SDG4 – Quality Education
Participation rate in pre-primary organized learning
CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) 37.7 2019 • •
(% of children aged 4 to 6)
NA NA• • SDG14 – Life Below Water
Net primary enrollment rate (%) NA NA • • Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 58.3 2019 • S Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 55.9 2021 • G Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
SDG5 – Gender Equality Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) NA NA • •
Demand for family planning satisfied by modern methods
Fish caught that are then discarded (%) NA NA • •
(% of females aged 15 to 49)
42.1 2015 • D Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.0 2018 • •
Ratio of female-to-male mean years of education received (%) 67.9 2021 • A SDG15 – Life on Land
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 24.7 2020 • • Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 46.4 •
2022 A
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 27.0 2021 • G Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 60.9 •
2022 A
SDG6 – Clean Water and Sanitation Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.84 •
2023 D
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 75.1 2020 • A Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 •
2021 A
Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 50.5 2020 • D Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity threats embodied in imports
0.0 2018 • •
Freshwater withdrawal (% of available freshwater resources) 54.8 2019 • •
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) 0.0 2020 • • SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 453.6 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 4.0 •
2021 A
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 31.3 •
2014 • 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Population with access to electricity (%) 97.7 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 52 •
2022 A
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 33.2 2020 • D Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 42.3 •
2015 •
CO2 emissions from fuel combustion per total electricity output
8.8 2019 •
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 24 •
2022 S
(MtCO2/TWh) G Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) 13.0 •
2020 •
10.5 2019 • Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD
0.0 2021 •
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) D per 100,000 population) •
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 39.8 2023 • G
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -15.1 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • D
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 22.2 2018 • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • G
Adults with an account at a bank or other financial institution or with a
9.7 2021 • G Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • G
mobile-money-service provider (% of population aged 15 or over)
11.7 2020 • SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • S Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 4.1 2020 •D
For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
0.0 2018 • D public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA NA••
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 13.0 2017 • •
5.8 2018 • •
(per 100,000 population) Corporate Tax Haven Score (best 0–100 worst) * 0 2021 • •
Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 58.0 2022 • A
* Imputed data point

ALBANIA Eastern Europe and Central Asia
54
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG
90 SDG TARGETS (%) 17 1

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Albania
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
73.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
REGIONAL AVERAGE: 71.8 0 Achieved or on track
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
SDG DASHBOARDS AND TRENDS 9
A S S G S A
S D S A D D
S D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Albania 92.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 3%
83.4 17.0

ALBANIA Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) 0.6 2023 •A Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 96.3 2022 • •
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 1.0 2023 •A Population using the internet (%) 79.3 2021 • A
SDG2 – Zero Hunger Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 72.0 2021 • A
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 3.9 2020 • A Logistics Performance Index: Quality of trade and transport-related
2.3 2018 • •
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 8.3 2022 • A
* 0.0 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 21.7 2016 • G Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.3 2021 • S
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.2 2008 • •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 5.1 2021 • A
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 1.0 2018 • D
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) NA NA • • Gini coefficient 30.8 2019 •A
Palma ratio 1.1 2019 • •
2020 D
2021 D Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 2.8 2020 • A
2021 A Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
17.5 2019 • S
2021 D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 83.7 2020 • G
2021 A Satisfaction with public transport (%) 48.0 2022 • G
11.4 2019 • A SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
92.5 2019 • •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 11.7 2019 • A Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) 3.9 2018 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 14.2 2019 • A Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 39.3 2018 • D
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.8 2018 • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 14.3 2018 • D
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 87 2021 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.9 2016 • •
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 5.2 2022 • S
CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 1.6 2021 •A
CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
81.4 2021 • G SDG14 – Life Below Water
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 92.2 2021 • G Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 67.3 2022 • D
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 94.9 2021 • D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 78.1 2022 • A
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 99.4 2021 • • Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
SDG5 – Gender Equality Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 75.2 2019 • D
Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 23.8 2019 • D
6.3 2017• D Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.0 2018 • •
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 78.5 2022 • A Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 48.7 •
2022 D
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 35.7 2021 • A Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 96.6 •
2022 A
2023 G
2021 A
Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 99.3 2020 • A Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity threats embodied in imports
0.6 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 2,528.0 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 2.3 •
2021 D
2020 G 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
2022 A
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 81.3 2020 • A Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 98.4 •
2018 •
0.9 2019 •
2022 D
(MtCO2/TWh) D Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) 3.3 •
2010 •
0.0 2011 •
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) A per 100,000 population) •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 0.7 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 6.9 2018• • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D
44.2 2021 • D Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • G
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) 12.5 2023 • S SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 6.0 2020 •G
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 23.9 2020 • G
26.9 2018 • •

ALGERIA Middle East and North Africa
71
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Algeria
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
70.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S A D D
S D S • D A
S D G G S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Algeria 96.9
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
63.2 37

ALGERIA Performance by Indicator
2.4 2018 • G
30.3 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 27.4 2016 • G Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.2 2021 • D
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2017 • A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.5 2017 • •
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) NA NA • • Gini coefficient 27.6 2011 • •
2020 A
41.3 2019 • G
2021 S Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 76.1 2020 • G
49.8 2019 • •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 20.9 2019 • D Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) 2.1 2018 • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) 77.1 2019 • S SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 1.0 2018 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 98.8 2019 • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 7.0 2018 • A
CO2 emissions embodied in imports (tCO2/capita) 0.3 2018 •A
CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) 3,160.6 2017 • •
67.3 2022 • • SDG14 – Life Below Water
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 99.4 2022 • A Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 74.5 2022 • D
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 82.9 2019 • A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 45.7 2022 • D
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 74.0 2019 • • Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 19.6 2018 • A
SDG5 – Gender Equality Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 21.9 2019 • G
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 25.6 2022 • D Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 43.5 •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 94.4 2020 • S Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.9 •
2021 G
0.3 2018 • •
2021 G
2019 D 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
2022 •
2019 •
2.2 2019 •
2022 G
2019 •
0.0 2016 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -4.6 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 2.7 2018 • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • •
44.1 2021 • G Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • •
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) 11.6 2023 • G SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 11.0 2020 •D
0.0 2018 • A public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA NA••
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) * 40.4 2011 • •
11.0 2018 • •

ANDORRA Western Europe
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Andorra
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
REGIONAL AVERAGE: 71.8 0 Insufficient Data
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• G • • S A
S • S • A •
D • D • A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Andorra INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
55%
na
ANDORRA Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) NA NA • • Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 97.9 2022 • •
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) NA NA • • Population using the internet (%) 93.9 2021 • A
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) * 2.5 2020 • • Logistics Performance Index: Quality of trade and transport-related
NA NA • •
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) * 2.6 2022 • •
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) * 0.7 2021 • • The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) NA NA • • Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) NA NA • •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) NA NA • • SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) NA NA • •
Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) NA NA • •
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 1.4 2021 • A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) * 0.0 2020 • A
Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) 2.8 2021 • A Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
11.2 2019 • A
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 2.9 2021 • A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 100.0 2020 • A
New HIV infections (per 1,000 uninfected population) NA NA • • Satisfaction with public transport (%) NA NA • •
NA NA • • SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
NA NA • •
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) Electronic waste (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) NA NA • • Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) NA NA • • SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 2.7 2018 • • Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 100.0 2017 • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 99 2021 • A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 15.6 2021 • G
NA NA • • SDG13 – Climate Action
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) NA NA • •
CO2 emissions embodied in imports (tCO2/capita) NA NA • •
NA NA • • SDG14 – Life Below Water
Lower secondary completion rate (%) NA NA • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) NA NA • • Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
NA NA• • Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
Ratio of female-to-male mean years of education received (%) 98.6 2021 • D SDG15 – Life on Land
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) NA NA • • Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 26.2 2022 • D
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 46.4 2021 • A Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
SDG6 – Clean Water and Sanitation Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.91 2023 • D
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 100.0 2020 • A Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 2021 • A
0.6 2018 • •
Freshwater withdrawal (% of available freshwater resources) NA NA • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) NA NA • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 2.6 2020 • G
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 46.0 2020 • G 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Population with access to electricity (%) 100.0 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) NA NA • •
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 100.0 2020 • A Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 2022 • •
NA NA •
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
(MtCO2/TWh) • Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA NA • •
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) G per 100,000 population)
0.0 2021 • •
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth
Adjusted GDP growth (%) NA NA • •
Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 75.1 2023 • D
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) NA NA • •
Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
NA NA • • Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
NA • SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) NA •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 9.5 2021•A
NA NA • • public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA ••
NA
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) NA NA • •
NA NA • •
(per 100,000 population) Corporate Tax Haven Score (best 0–100 worst) 61 2021 • •
Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •

ANGOLA Sub-Saharan Africa
155
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Angola
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
50.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D D S D D
S D D • G A
A D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Angola 97.2
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 1%
53.5 47.0

ANGOLA Performance by Indicator
1.9 2018 • G
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 43.6 2022 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) 0.0 2020 • • Gini coefficient 51.3 2018 • •
2020 S
32.3 2019 • D
2021 A Satisfaction with public transport (%) 32.0 2014 • •
142.8 2019 • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 36 2021 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.0 2021 • A
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 3.8 2014 • •
CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) * NA NA • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 81.6 2011 • • Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 66.6 2022 • D
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 20.7 2011 • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 53.5 2022 • G
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 82.8 2021 • S Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 11.5 2018 • A
Ratio of female-to-male mean years of education received (%) 60.7 2021 • G SDG15 – Life on Land
2022 D
2022 D
2023 A
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 57.2 2020 • D Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.2 •
2021 D
0.6 2018 • •
2016 •
Population with access to electricity (%) 46.9 2020 • D Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 46 •
2014 •
2016 •
1.6 2019 •
2022 S
(MtCO2/TWh) A Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) 18.7 •
2016 •
0.0 2021 •
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) S per 100,000 population) •
29.3 2014 • • Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 3.6 2020 •G
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 21.8 2019 • A
9.2 2018 • •
Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 53.5 2022 • S

Latin America
ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA and the Caribbean
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Antigua and
SCORE SDG
13 Barbuda
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S A D •
S • S • S •
D D D S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Antigua and Barbuda INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
32%
48.2 51.9

ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • D Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) NA NA • •
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) 0.0 2020 • • Gini coefficient NA NA • •
2020 A
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) * 0.0 2020 • A
17.6 2019 • S
2021 D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA • •
New HIV infections (per 1,000 uninfected population) NA •
NA • Satisfaction with public transport (%) NA NA • •
17.6 2019 • S SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
19.3 2019 • •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 0.0 2019 • A Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) 76.5 2019 • D SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 30.4 2020 • A Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.0 2020 • D Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) * 0.0 2021 • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) NA NA • • Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 20.7 2018 • A
SDG5 – Gender Equality Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 0.0 2019 • •
Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 0.0 2019 • •
* 76.6 2023 • S Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.9 2018 • •
Ratio of female-to-male mean years of education received (%) NA NA • • SDG15 – Life on Land
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 11.1 2021 • D Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 96.7 2017 • • Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.1 2021 • G
Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 87.5 2017 • • Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity threats embodied in imports
0.3 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) NA NA • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 17.2 2021 • •
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 38.5 2016 • • 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 100.0 2020 • A Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) NA NA • •
1.6 2019 •
(MtCO2/TWh) D Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA NA • •
0.0 2021 •
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -6.4 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • A
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) NA NA • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D
NA NA • • Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • A
NA NA • SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.8 2021 • A Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 7.2 2021 • S
NA NA • • public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA NA••
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) * NA NA • •
NA NA • •
Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 48.2 2022 • •

ARGENTINA Latin America and the Caribbean
51
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Argentina
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
73.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D D S A •
S S D G S S
S D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Argentina 96.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
71.8 28.2

ARGENTINA Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) 1.1 2023 •D Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 92.4 2022 • •
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 2.5 2023 •G Population using the internet (%) 87.2 2021 • A
SDG2 – Zero Hunger Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 72.9 2021 • G
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 3.7 2020 • D Logistics Performance Index: Quality of trade and transport-related
2.8 2018 • G
19.2 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • D Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.5 2019 • G
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) 0.2 2020 • • Gini coefficient 42.3 2020 •G
2020 D
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 15.9 2012 • •
12.6 2019 • A
2021 D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 98.9 2020 • A
29.7 2019 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 98.8 2020 • D Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 5.7 2018 • A
73 2019 • G SDG13 – Climate Action
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 6.3 2022 • D
100.0 2020 • A SDG14 – Life Below Water
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 99.8 2020 • D Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 45.1 2022 • D
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 94.0 2020 • A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 86.9 2022 • A
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 99.5 2018 • • Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 61.0 2018 • G
80.3 2019 • A Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.0 2018 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 99.0 2016 • • Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.4 •
2021 S
0.5 2018 • •
2021 S
2020 S 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
2022 D
2020 •
1.3 2019 •
2022 D
(MtCO2/TWh) S Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA •
NA •
0.0 2011 •
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 73.4 2023 • D
71.6 2021 • A Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • G
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • G Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 11.6 2020 •D
12.1 2018 • •

ARMENIA Eastern Europe and Central Asia
56
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Armenia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
73.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S D S A
D D S A D D
G • D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Armenia 94.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 7%
82.8 17.0

ARMENIA Performance by Indicator
2.5 2018 • S
* 0.0 2022 • •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 2.2 2021 • G
2020 D
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 8.4 2020 • D
32.2 2019 • D
2021 A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 100.0 2020 • A
NA • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 48.0 2022 • D
74.6 2019 • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) 76.0 2019 • A SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 1.5 2018 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 18.9 2018 • • Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 25.2 2018 • D
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.8 2016 • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 12.4 2018 • G
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 93 2021 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.0 2021 • A
69 2019 • A SDG13 – Climate Action
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 5.4 2022 • A
CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 2.4 2021 •G
CO2 emissions embodied in imports (tCO2/capita) 0.6 2018 •G
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 89.3 2021 • G Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 87.8 2021 • D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 99.9 2020 • A Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 A
0.1 2018 • •
2021 S
2022 D
2016 •
0.8 2019 •
2022 S
2015 •
0.0 2021 •
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) G per 100,000 population) •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 0.1 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 5.3 2018• • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
55.4 2021 • A Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 5.1 2021 •D
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 24.1 2020 • D
34.5 2018 • •

AUSTRALIA OECD Countries
40
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Australia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
75.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D S D S S
S S S G S S
D D G D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Australia 68.5
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
89.9 10.0

AUSTRALIA Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 0.4 2023 •D Population using the internet (%) 96.2 2021 • A
Poverty rate after taxes and transfers (%) 12.6 2020 •G Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 122.7 2021 • A
Logistics Performance Index: Quality of trade and transport-related
SDG2 – Zero Hunger 4.0 2018 • A
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 2.5 2020 • A The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
72.6 2022 •
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 3.4 2022 • D top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best) •
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 0.2 2007 • • Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 4.4 2021 • A
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 29.0 2016 • G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 1.8 2019 • D
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.5 2017 • D Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 9.0 2010 • •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 2.5 2021 • A Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 14.1 2020 • G
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 0.8 2018 • G Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) NA NA • •
Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) 47.7 2021 • • Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 32.1 2017 • A
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) 26.1 2020 • • SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities
SDG3 – Good Health and Well-Being Gini coefficient 34.3 2018 •G
2020 A Palma ratio 1.3 2020 •D
2021 D Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 22.6 2020 •D
2021 A SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities
2021 D
• A
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%)
Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
* 0.0 2020
diabetes, or chronic respiratory disease in adults aged 30–70 years (%) 8.6 2019 • A 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) (μg/m³)
8.1 2019 • A
9.8 2019 •
Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 92.4 2019 • D
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 60.0 2022 • D
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 4.9 2019 • A Population with rent overburden (%) 7.7 2019 • A
Life expectancy at birth (years) 83.0 2019 • A Proportion of population with access to points of interest within a 15min walk (%) 84.0 2022 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 8.7 2019 • A SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 98.8 2019 • A Electronic waste (kg/capita) 21.7 2019 • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 93 2021 • A Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) 36.6 2018 • •
Universal health coverage (UHC) index of service coverage (worst 0–100 best) 87 2019 • A SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 10.3 2018 • •
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 7.0 2022 • D Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 134.4 2018 • D
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 10.0 2019 • G Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 24.4 2018 • S
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 8.9 2017 • • Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 3.1 2021 • A
Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 11.2 2019 • A Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 0.8 2019 • •
SDG4 – Quality Education SDG13 – Climate Action
82.1 2020• G CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 15.2 2021 • D
98.5 2020 • D
CO2 emissions embodied in imports (tCO2/capita) 3.3 2018 • S
Net primary enrollment rate (%)
* 99.6 2020 • D
Lower secondary completion rate (%)
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) NA NA • •
Carbon Pricing Score at EUR60/tCO2 (%, worst 0–100 best) 20.4 2018 • D
Tertiary educational attainment (% of population aged 25 to 34) 54.3 2021 • A SDG14 – Life Below Water
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 499.0 2018 • D Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 66.0 2022 • D
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 10.0 2018 • A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 77.1 2022 • D
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 18.9 2018 • G Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 38.8 2018 • A
SDG5 – Gender Equality
Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 15.5 2019 • D
2022 D
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 31.1 2021 • S Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 37.6 •
2022 D
Gender wage gap (% of male median wage) 15.3 2019 • G Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.81 •
2023 G
SDG6 – Clean Water and Sanitation Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.1 •
2021 G
Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity threats embodied in imports
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 100.0 2020 • A (per million population)
2.7 2018 • •
Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 100.0 2020 • A
Freshwater withdrawal (% of available freshwater resources) 3.9 2019 • • SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
• • •
5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) 92.9 2020 Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.7 2021 A
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 2,508.41 2018 • • Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 31.2 •
2020 G
Population using safely managed water services (%) * 100.0 2020 • • Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 69 •
2022 A
Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 74.3 2020 • S Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 •
2022 •
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy
2022 D
Population with access to electricity (%) 100.0 2020 • A Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14)
Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD
* 0.0 •
2021 •
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 100.0 2020 • A per 100,000 population) 0.7 2021 • •
1.5 2019 • S Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 78.2 2023 • D
(MtCO2/TWh)
Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • D
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 10.1 2019 • D Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • D
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.8 2021 • D
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 0.9 2021 • • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 164.4 2020 • D
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population)
0.6 2018 • • SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
99.3 2021 • A Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 14.1 2020 • A
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • A For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
0.2 2022 • G
Fatal work-related accidents embodied in imports public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI)
0.3 2018 • NA NA •
(per 100,000 population) D Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) •
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports (per 100,000 population) 87.1 2018 • • Corporate Tax Haven Score (best 0–100 worst) * 0 2021 • •
Employment-to-population ratio (%) 77.2 2022 • A Financial Secrecy Score (best 0–100 worst) 56.2 2022 • G
Youth not in employment, education or training (NEET) Shifted profits of multinationals (US$ billion) 30.2 2019 • A
10.4 2021 • A
(% of population aged 15 to 29) Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 89.9 2022 • A
AUSTRIA OECD Countries
5
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Austria
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
82.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S S A S
S D S S S D
S • D S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Austria 59.8
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 3%
90.0 10.0

AUSTRIA Performance by Indicator
Poverty rate after taxes and transfers (%) 10.0 2019 •D Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 105.3 2021 • A
54.9 2022 •
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) * 2.6 2022 • • top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best) •
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) * 0.7 2021 • • Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 3.4 2021 • A
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 20.1 2016 • G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 3.2 2020 • A
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • G Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 11.6 2020 • A
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 7.1 2021 • A Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 49.1 2020 • A
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 0.6 2018 • G Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 14.2 2020 • A
Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) 70.0 2021 • • Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 25.9 2016 • G
SDG3 – Good Health and Well-Being Gini coefficient 30.2 2019 •A
2020 A Palma ratio 1.0 2019 •A
2021 D Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 10.1 2019 •G
2021 A
• A
NA • Proportion of urban population living in slums (%)
0.0 2006
11.9 2019 • A
Age-standardized death rate attributable to household air pollution and Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA • •
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) 17.5 2019 • • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 73.0 2022 • A
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 4.9 2019 • A Population with rent overburden (%) 5.8 2019 • D
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 98.1 2020 • D Electronic waste (kg/capita) 18.8 2019 • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 85 2021 • G Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) 11.1 2018 • •
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 2.3 2020 • D Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 41.3 2018 • G
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 20.9 2020 • A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 19.7 2021 • G
99.4 2020 • A CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 7.3 2021 • D
99.7 2020 • A
CO2 emissions embodied in imports (tCO2/capita) 4.1 2018 • D
96.1 2020 • D
Carbon Pricing Score at EUR60/tCO2 (%, worst 0–100 best) 47.6 2018 • A
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 491.0 2018 • D Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 14.8 2018 • S Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 21.9 2018 • G Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) NA NA • •
* 88.8 2023 • A Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.1 2018 • •
Ratio of female-to-male mean years of education received (%) 95.4 2021 • S SDG15 – Life on Land
2022 D
2022 D
Gender wage gap (% of male median wage) 12.4 2020 • A Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.90 •
2023 D
2021 D
4.5 2018 • •
Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 100.0 2020 • D
• • •
5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) 94.0 2020 Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.7 2021 D
2020 A
Population using safely managed water services (%) 98.9 2020 • D Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 85 •
2022 A
Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 99.6 2020 • A Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 •
2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
0.9 2019 • A Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 77.3 2023 • D
(MtCO2/TWh)
Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • A
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 33.8 2019 • D Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • G
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.8 2021 • A
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -1.1 2021 • • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 94.2 2020 • A
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best)
0.8 2021 • D For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.4 2022 • S
(per 100,000 population) 0.5 2018 • D Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) NA NA • •
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports (per 100,000 population) 137.9 2018 • • Corporate Tax Haven Score (best 0–100 worst) 56 2021 • •
Employment-to-population ratio (%) 72.4 2021 • A Financial Secrecy Score (best 0–100 worst) 54.6 2022 • D
(% of population aged 15 to 29)
11.4 2021 • D Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 90.0 2022 • A
AZERBAIJAN Eastern Europe and Central Asia
53
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Azerbaijan
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
73.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S D A
D D S • S S
S • S D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Azerbaijan 96.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 7%
73.5 27.0

AZERBAIJAN Performance by Indicator
2.7 2014 • •
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 13.3 2022 • S
16.5 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2017 • D Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.2 2020 • D
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 0.7 2018 • S
2020 D
19.2 2019 • S
125.2 2019 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.9 2020 • A Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 9.1 2018 • A
65 2019 • S SDG13 – Climate Action
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 107.8 2021 • A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 99.9 2019 • D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
2022 D
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 18.2 2021 • D Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 14.5 •
2022 D
2023 A
2021 A
0.1 2018 • •
2021 S
2020 A 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
2019 •
2006 •
1.5 2019 •
2022 G
(MtCO2/TWh) D Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA •
NA •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -1.7 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
28.6 2017 • • Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 5.9 2020 • S
16.7 2018 • •

THE BAHAMAS Latin America and the Caribbean
124
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG
17 1
COUNTRY 90 SDG TARGETS (%) SDG 100 SDG
16 2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 The Bahamas
SCORE
SDG SDG
30 13 5
60.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S • S S
S S S • A G
S D G D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Bahamas, The 53.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 19%
54.1 45.9

THE BAHAMAS Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) * NA NA • • Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 94.8 2022 • •
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) * NA NA • • Population using the internet (%) 94.3 2021 • A
2.4 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • S Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) NA NA • •
2020 A
16.3 2019 • A
2021 A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA • •
2021 A Satisfaction with public transport (%) NA NA • •
19.9 2019 • G SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
10.4 2019 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.0 2019 • A Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 76.7 2018 • G
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 75 2021 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.3 2019 • D
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 92.2 2010 • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 62.3 2022 • D
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.4 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 11,758.3 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 29.2 2021 • S
1.0 2019 •
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 64 2022 • D
(MtCO2/TWh) A Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA NA • •
0.0 2015 •
NA NA • • Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • A Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 7.4 2021 •A
110.0 2018 • •

BAHRAIN Middle East and North Africa
111
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Bahrain
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
63.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S D D A
S D S • D S
G D G D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Bahrain 78.0
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 21%
59.4 41

BAHRAIN Performance by Indicator
2.7 2018 • G
* 4.5 2019 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 29.8 2016 • G Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 1.0 2021 • A
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) NA NA • • Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.1 2014 • •
2020 D
72.8 2019 • G
68.1 2019 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 12.5 2018 • • Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 34.4 2018 • S
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.6 2019 • D Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 33.2 2018 • S
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 98 2021 • A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.6 2020 • A
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 93.5 2019 • D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 57.5 2022 • G
Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 17.7 2019 • G
* 58.9 2023 • D Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.0 2018 • •
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 51.2 2022 • D Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 0.0 2022 • D
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 15.0 2021 • S Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
SDG6 – Clean Water and Sanitation Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.75 2023 • G
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 100.0 2020 • A Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) NA NA • •
0.1 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 5,166.9 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.1 2021 • A
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) NA NA • • 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Population with access to electricity (%) 100.0 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 60 2011 • •
0.8 2019 •
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 44 2022 • G
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) D per 100,000 population)
0.0 2021 • •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -0.1 2021 • •
Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 30.6 2023 • G
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) * NA NA • •
SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) 1.4 2023 • D
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 4.6 2020 •G
117.4 2018 • •
(per 100,000 population) Corporate Tax Haven Score (best 0–100 worst) * NA NA • •

BANGLADESH East and South Asia
101
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Bangladesh
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
65.9
20
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S S S A D S
S D S • D A
D G G G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Bangladesh 97.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
69.7 30

BANGLADESH Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 18.9 2023 • S Population using the internet (%) 38.9 2021 • S
2.4 2018 • A
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 9.8 2019 • A The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
23.6 2022 • •
2020 A
59.5 2019 • S
2021 A Satisfaction with public transport (%) 76.0 2022 • A
143.9 2019 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 74.0 2019 • A Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 12.4 2018 • A
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 97 2021 • A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.2 2015 • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 94.5 2020 • A Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 3.2 2018 • D
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 G
0.0 2018 • •
2018 •
2022 D
2019 •
1.2 2019 •
2022 D
2019 •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 1.2 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • D
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 3.7 2018• • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.3 2021 • G
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) 4.7 2023 • D SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
7.2 2018 • •

BARBADOS Latin America and the Caribbean
84
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Barbados
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
69.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• S S G S A
S D A • S •
S S G D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Barbados 89.0
Oceania 99.8
0
100
23%
64.6 35.4

BARBADOS Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
21.6 2019 • S
18.8 2019 • •
CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 4.0 2021 • S
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 101.7 2021 • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 68.6 2022 • S
Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 1.3 2019 • A
70.0 2012 • S Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.5 2018 • •
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 90.3 2022 • A Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 1.8 2022 • D
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 98.5 2020 • A Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.3 2021 • G
0.6 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) NA NA • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 11.4 •
2021 D
Population with access to electricity (%) 100.0 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) NA •
NA •
2012 •
1.2 2019 •
2022 A
2012 •
0.0 2021 •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 2.7 2018 • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • D
NA NA • • Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • G
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • D Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 10.2 2021 •A
NA NA • •

BELARUS Eastern Europe and Central Asia
34
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Belarus
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
77.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S G S S
S D S A S D
D • S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Belarus 81.7
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
86.7 13.0

BELARUS Performance by Indicator
2.4 2018 • G
16.5 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • S Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.5 2020 • D
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) 0.0 2020 • • Gini coefficient 24.4 2020 •A
2020 A
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 2.3 2020 • A
18.3 2019 • S
69.9 2019 • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 98 2021 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 1.4 2021 • G
96.1 2021 • D SDG14 – Life Below Water
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 9.2 2018 • • 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
1.6 2019 •
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 39 2022 • S
(MtCO2/TWh) S Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) 4.1 2019 • •
0.9 2021 • •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 10.9 2018 • •
Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • G
81.2 2017 • • Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.3 2021 • G
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) 4.4 2023 • A SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • G Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 9.2 2021 •A
126.7 2018 • •

BELGIUM OECD Countries
19
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Belgium
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
79.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D S S D A A
S S S A S G
D S S S D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Belgium 50.6
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 4%
88.9 11.0

BELGIUM Performance by Indicator
Poverty rate after taxes and transfers (%) 8.1 2019 • • Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 93.2 2021 • A
64.7 2022 •
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 2.4 2022 • A top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best) •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • S Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 13.1 2020 • A
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 7.9 2021 • A Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 34.8 2020 • D
2020 A Palma ratio 0.9 2019 • •
2021 D Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 10.5 2019 • •
2021 D SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
12.3 2019 • A
Age-standardized death rate attributable to household air pollution and Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 100.0 2020 • A
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) 15.3 2019 • • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 58.0 2022 • G
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) NA NA • • Electronic waste (kg/capita) 20.4 2019 • •
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 6.9 2022 • A Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 40.7 2018 • D
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 3.2 2020 • G Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 61.4 2018 • G
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 31.4 2020 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 28.7 2021 • G
Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 15.4 2018 • • Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 1.0 2021 • •
96.8 2020• D CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 8.3 2021 • D
98.9 2020 • D
CO2 emissions embodied in imports (tCO2/capita) 5.2 2018 • G
94.5 2020 • D
Carbon Pricing Score at EUR60/tCO2 (%, worst 0–100 best) 33.6 2018 • S
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 500.0 2018 • D Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 96.9 2022 • A
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 20.0 2018 • G Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 58.8 2022 • A
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 D
4.7 2018 • •
• • • •
5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) 68.2 2020 Homicides (per 100,000 population) 1.1 2021
2018 •
Population using safely managed water services (%) 99.9 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 70 •
2022 A
2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 10.2 2019 • D Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • A
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 1.5 2021 • • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 89.6 2020 • A
0.8 2021 • A For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
Youth not in employment, education or training (NEET) Shifted profits of multinationals (US$ billion) -37.8 2019 • G
11.3 2021 • A Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 88.9 2022 • A
BELIZE Latin America and the Caribbean
107
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG
17 1
16 2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Belize
SCORE
SDG SDG
30 13 5
64.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G S D D S S
S G S • S A
A D G D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Belize 88.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 7%
61.9 38.2

BELIZE Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2017 • G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) NA NA • •
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 0.6 2018 • A
2020 G
21.3 2019 • S
2021 D Satisfaction with public transport (%) 49.0 2014 • •
41.0 2019 • •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 22.6 2019 • S Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) 13.8 2018 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 55.4 2020 • S Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 34.1 2018 • A
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 76.5 2021 • S Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 66.4 2022 • D
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 G
0.2 2018 • •
2021 D
2014 •
2016 •
0.8 2019 •
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) NA •
NA •
2013 •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -3.1 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D
26.4 2018 • •

BENIN Sub-Saharan Africa
140
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG 100 SDG
2
16
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
60
25
SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Benin
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
55.1
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D D D D D
G S S A D S
D D D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Benin 98.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 4%
62.6 37.0

BENIN Performance by Indicator
2.5 2018 • S
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.1 2017 • A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) NA NA • •
2020 D
2021 D Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 67.9 2020 • D
2021 D Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
41.9 2019 • G
2021 A Satisfaction with public transport (%) 40.0 2022 • D
201.8 2019 • •
Municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) NA NA • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 36.8 2021 • G Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 15.2 2022 • G
SDG5 – Gender Equality Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 0.5 2019 • A
2022 D
2022 D
2023 A
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 462.6 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) NA •
NA •
Population with access to electricity (%) 41.4 2020 • S Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 55 •
2022 S
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 4.0 2020 • G Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 85.6 •
2018 •
34.1 2019 •
2022 S
2018 •
0.0 2021 •
48.6 2021 • A Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • •
11.5 2018 • •

BHUTAN East and South Asia
61
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Bhutan
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
72.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S A S S
S D S • S A
S • G D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Bhutan 91.5
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 12%
59.6 40

BHUTAN Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 4.7 2023 • S Population using the internet (%) 85.6 2021 • A
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) NA NA • • Logistics Performance Index: Quality of trade and transport-related
1.9 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 6.4 2016 • D Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.3 2021 • S
2020 A
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) NA NA• •
33.1 2019 • D
94.3 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 97.5 2021 • A Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 76.5 2020 • S Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity threats embodied in imports
0.2 2018 • •
2020 D
2015 •
2010 •
0.1 2019 •
2022 A
2010 •
0.0 2021 •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) NA NA • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 10.4 2021 •A
32.9 2018 • •

BOLIVIA Latin America and the Caribbean
87
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Bolivia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
68.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D D S D S
S D S S S S
S • G D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Bolivia 97.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
71.2 28.8

BOLIVIA Performance by Indicator
2.2 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • D Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.2 2009 • •
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) 0.0 2020 • • Gini coefficient 43.6 2020 • S
2020 D
19.7 2019 • S
77.1 2019 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 81.1 2019 • G Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 5.1 2018 • D
67 2019 • • SDG13 – Climate Action
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 89.2 2020 • S Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 G
0.2 2018 • •
2021 A
2022 D
2016 •
2.0 2019 •
2022 G
2019 •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -4.7 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • G
8.7 2018 • •

Eastern Europe
BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA and Central Asia
47
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Bosnia and
SCORE SDG
13 Herzegovina SDG
5
30
74.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S • S D
S S S • D D
D S S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Bosnia and Herzegovina 89.3
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 8%
70.6 29.0

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA Performance by Indicator
2.4 2018 • G
* 7.0 2019 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • S Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.2 2020 • G
2020 A
26.8 2019 • S
2021 A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 97.6 2018 • •
NA • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 40.0 2022 • G
113.9 2019 • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 68 2021 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 1.8 2021 • S
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 94.2 2018 • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 69.5 2022 • A
21.9 2011 • D Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 65.3 2022 • S Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 37.1 2022 • D
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 26.2 2021 • S Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 100.0 2022 • A
SDG6 – Clean Water and Sanitation Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.90 2023 • A
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 96.1 2020 • D Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 2021 • A
0.5 2018 • •
2021 A
2022 G
2006 •
1.4 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.2 2013 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 1.6 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • S
79.3 2021 • A Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • D
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • G Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) NA NA• •
31.1 2018 • •

BOTSWANA Sub-Saharan Africa
118
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Botswana
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
62.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D • S S
D D A • D D
S • S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Botswana 86.2
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
61.2 39.0

BOTSWANA Performance by Indicator
3.0 2016 • •
16.5 2022 • •
2020 D
2021 S Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 39.6 2020 • D
22.6 2019 • D
2021 S Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 96.4 2020 • D
140.7 2019 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 53.3 2019 • G Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 27.5 2018 • A
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 95 2021 • A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.2 2021 • D
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 91.1 2017 • • Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 89.5 2018 • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 A
2021 A
2.5 2018 • •
2021 •
2022 G
2017 •
2.3 2019 •
2022 D
NA •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -2.5 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • S
51.0 2017 • • Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • D
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • S Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 13.4 2020 •A
27.3 2018 • •

BRAZIL Latin America and the Caribbean
50
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Brazil
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
73.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A G S S S A
A D D D S D
A D D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Brazil 98.2
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
80.5 19.5

BRAZIL Performance by Indicator
2.9 2018 • D
43.2 2022 • •
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) 0.3 2020 • • Gini coefficient 48.9 2020 •D
2020 G
11.8 2019 • A
2021 D Satisfaction with public transport (%) 50.0 2022 • D
28.9 2019 • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 99.4 2021 • A Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 14.1 2018 • A
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.3 2018 • •
2020 S
2022 S
2015 •
0.7 2019 •
2022 D
2015 •
0.0 2021 •
6.5 2018 • •

BRUNEI DARUSSALAM East and South Asia
102
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Brunei
SCORE SDG
13 Darussalam SDG
5
30
65.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• S D D D A
S D A • A D
G D D G S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Brunei Darussalam 58.8

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
18%
64.4 36

BRUNEI DARUSSALAM Performance by Indicator
2.5 2018 • •
45.1 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2013 • • Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.3 2018 • •
2020 A
2021 D Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) * 0.0 2020 • A
5.1 2019 • A
19.6 2019 • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) 74.3 2019 • G SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 9.5 2018 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 9.9 2018 • • Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 10,793.7 2018 • G
NA NA• • Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.0 2018 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 S
0.4 2018 • •
2013 •
NA •
2020 •
2.8 2019 •
2020 •
NA •
4.4 2016 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 0.2 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 10.9 2018 • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 6.7 2020 • S
151.6 2018 • •

BULGARIA Eastern Europe and Central Asia
44
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Bulgaria
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
74.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S G S D
D S S G D D
D D S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Bulgaria 88.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 5%
83.9 16.0

BULGARIA Performance by Indicator
2.8 2018 • G
16.5 2022 • •
2020 A
18.5 2019 • S
2021 A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 99.5 2020 • D
62.9 2019 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 39.3 2019 • D Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 46.8 2018 • D
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.8 2015 • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 13.0 2018 • S
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 89 2021 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 1.9 2021 • G
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 84.6 2020 • G Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 99.7 2022 • A
Lower secondary completion rate (%) NA NA • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 56.3 2022 • S
2022 A
2022 A
2023 D
2021 A
1.1 2018 • •
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 10.8 2020 • D 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Population with access to electricity (%) 99.7 2020 • D Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 67 2022 • A
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) NA NA • • Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 2022 • •
1.0 2019 •
(MtCO2/TWh) G Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA NA • •
0.2 2021 • •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 2.9 2021 • •
45.5 2018 • •

BURKINA FASO Sub-Saharan Africa
153
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Burkina Faso
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
52.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D S D G
D D D G S S
D • S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Burkina Faso 99.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
64.8 35.0

BURKINA FASO Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 63.3 2023 •D Population using the internet (%) 21.6 2021 • S
2.4 2018 • S
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 10.6 2021 • G The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
45.9 2019 • D
201.3 2019 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 123.7 2019 • D Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 18.5 2018 • A
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 88 2021 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.1 2021 • D
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 75.1 2021 • D Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 65.5 2021 • S Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 A
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 47.2 2020 • G Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 •
2021 A
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
2021 G
2010 •
2.1 2019 •
2022 D
2010 •
0.0 2021 •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 4.5 2018 • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • S
36.1 2021 • S Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • G
6.8 2018 • •

BURUNDI Sub-Saharan Africa
147
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Burundi
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
53.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D D S S D
D A G • S D
S • D G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Burundi 99.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
D 5%
50.7 49.0

BURUNDI Performance by Indicator
2.0 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 1.5 2021 • S
2020 D
2021 S Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 36.8 2020 • S
37.4 2019 • D
2021 D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 90.9 2020 • S
205.9 2019 • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 30.0 2021 • G Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 45.7 2020 • G Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity threats embodied in imports
0.0 2018 • •
2016 •
2018 •
2017 •
1.5 2019 •
2022 G
2017 •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -8.3 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) * 17.6 2021 • S
1.5 2018 • •
Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 50.7 2022 • D

CABO VERDE Sub-Saharan Africa
89
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Cabo Verde
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
68.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S D S S
S • S • S •
D D S S A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Cabo Verde 99.5
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 25%
65.7 34.0

CABO VERDE Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) NA NA • • The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
36.5 2019 • D
2021 S Satisfaction with public transport (%) NA NA • •
91.2 2019 • •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 26.8 2019 • G Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) 74.0 2019 • G SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 93 2021 • A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) NA NA • •
73.2 2005 • S Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 88.8 2020 • S Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 2021 • A
0.2 2018 • •
2020 S
NA •
2010 •
1.6 2019 •
2022 A
NA •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

CAMBODIA East and South Asia
103
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Cambodia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
64.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• S D S S S
S D S • S D
D D D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Cambodia 97.0
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 4%
64.3 36

CAMBODIA Performance by Indicator
2.1 2018 • G
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 9.6 2021 • D The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
23.3 2019 • S
2021 S Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 79.6 2020 • A
163.3 2019 • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 57.7 2021 • S Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 51.7 2022 • G
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 95.6 2021 • A Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 46.9 2018 • G
2022 A
2022 S
2023 G
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
2011 •
2022 A
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 36.8 2020 • S Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 73.3 •
2014 •
1.8 2019 •
2022 D
2012 •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -3.0 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.3 2021 • S
33.4 2021 • D Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.3 2021 • D
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • G Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 5.2 2020 • S
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 19.9 2020 • S
12.3 2018 • •

CAMEROON Sub-Saharan Africa
139
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Cameroon
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
55.2
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D D S D
D D S • D S
S S G D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Cameroon 99.0
Oceania 99.8
0
100
D 4%
54.5 46.0

CAMEROON Performance by Indicator
2.6 2018 • A
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
80.4 2019 • G
206.7 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
2020 D
2022 G
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 21.9 2020 • G Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 61.9 •
2018 •
1.0 2019 •
2022 G
2014 •
0.0 2021 •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 3.8 2020 •D
4.8 2018 • •

CANADA OECD Countries
26
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Canada
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
78.5
20
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S S D
D S S S D D
S S D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Canada 68.7
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
92.9 7.0

CANADA Performance by Indicator
Poverty rate after taxes and transfers (%) 8.6 2020 •A Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 75.1 2021 • A
SDG2 – Zero Hunger 3.8 2018 • D
78.8 2022 •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • S Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 9.4 2019 • A
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 3.1 2021 • D Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 17.5 2020 • S
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 0.8 2018 • D Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) NA NA • •
Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) 64.0 2021 • • Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 31.4 2016 • D
SDG3 – Good Health and Well-Being Gini coefficient 33.3 2017 • •
2021 A Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 12.1 2020 •G
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
5.9 2019 • A
8.1 2019 •
Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 99.3 2020 • D
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 60.0 2022 • G
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 5.3 2019 • A Population with rent overburden (%) 9.0 2017 • •
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 11.5 2019 • G Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 27.2 2018 • S
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 11.8 2020 • A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 4.3 2021 • D
Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 9.4 2020 • A Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) NA NA • •
•
99.3 2020 • CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 14.4 2021 • D
99.7 2020 • A
CO2 emissions embodied in imports (tCO2/capita) 3.3 2018 • A
* 100.0 2020 • A
Carbon Pricing Score at EUR60/tCO2 (%, worst 0–100 best) 34.2 2018 • •
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 6.4 2018 • A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 88.8 2022 • A
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 13.4 2018 • D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 36.3 2018 • A
2022 D
2022 D
Gender wage gap (% of male median wage) 16.7 2021 • D Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.96 •
2023 D
2021 D
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 99.2 2020 • D (per million population)
4.1 2018 • •
• • •
5. COUNTRY PROFILES
2019 G
Population using safely managed water services (%) 99.0 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 74 •
2022 D
2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
0.9 2019 • D Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 83.5 2023 • D
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 22.1 2019 • G Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • G
0.4 2022 • S
0.3 2018 • NA NA •
Employment-to-population ratio (%) 75.6 2022 • A Financial Secrecy Score (best 0–100 worst) 51.2 2022 • A
13.7 2021 • G
CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC Sub-Saharan Africa
165
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Central African
SCORE SDG
13 Republic SDG
5
30
40.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D • D G
D D D • G S
D • D G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

CAR 98.9
Oceania 99.8
0
100
10%
42.6 57.0

CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 84.6 2023 •D Population using the internet (%) 10.6 2021 • D
1.9 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.1 2017 • D Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) * 0.0 2021 • D
2020 D
2021 D Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) NA NA• •
61.7 2019 • G
305.1 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 A
2023 A
2021 G
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) NA •
NA • 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
2017 •
2019 •
1.7 2019 •
2022 D
2019 •
0.0 2021 •
3.6 2018 • •

CHAD Sub-Saharan Africa
164
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Chad
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
45.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D D D D D
D D D • D S
A • D G S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Chad 99.3
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 12%
49.2 51.0

CHAD Performance by Indicator
2.4 2018 • D
* 0.0 2022 • •
Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) 1,063.0 2020 • D
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 32.3 2021 • D Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 82.0 2020 • D
Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) 107.1 2021 • S Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
69.6 2019 • G
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 140.0 2021 • D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 52.0 2020 • G
New HIV infections (per 1,000 uninfected population) 0.2 2021 • A Satisfaction with public transport (%) 53.0 2022 • A
227.4 2019 • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 55 2021 • S Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) NA NA • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
2022 G
2019 •
4.3 2019 •
2022 G
2019 •
0.0 2021 •
3.2 2018 • •

CHILE OECD Countries
30
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Chile
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
78.2
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S S A A
S D S G S D
D D D G S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Chile 90.9
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
87.4 13.0

CHILE Performance by Indicator
40.5 2022 •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 28.0 2016 • G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.3 2019 • G
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • G Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 1.3 2020 • D
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 6.5 2021 • D Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 0.7 2020 • G
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 0.8 2018 • S Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 7.5 2017 • •
Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) NA NA • • Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 18.8 2017 • D
2020 A Palma ratio 2.6 2017 • •
2021 A Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 17.6 2017 • •
2021 D
• A
2021 D Proportion of urban population living in slums (%)
0.0 2008
19.4 2019 • S
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) 17.9 2019 • • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 57.0 2022 • S
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 14.9 2019 • G Population with rent overburden (%) 13.9 2017 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 22.6 2018 • • SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 92 2021 • D Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) 26.8 2018 • •
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 2.8 2021 • A Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 13.5 2018 • G
97.1 2020 • A CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 4.4 2021 • D
99.4 2020 • A
98.8 2020 • A
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 99.1 2021 • D
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 437.7 2018 • G Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 25.0 2022 • D
Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 0.3 2019 • A
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 A
1.1 2018 • •
• • •
5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 1,063.0 2018 • • Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 32.2 2020 • G
Population using safely managed water services (%) 98.8 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 36 2022 • G
Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 78.6 2020 • A Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 99.4 2011 • •
5.9 2012 • •
1.0 2019 • A Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 60.1 2023 • G
(MtCO2/TWh)
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -0.3 2021• • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 224.5 2020 • S
0.8 2018• • SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
NA NA • •
0.1 2018 •
(per 100,000 population) D Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) NA NA • •
Employment-to-population ratio (%) 61.9 2022 • D Financial Secrecy Score (best 0–100 worst) 59.8 2022 • D
Youth not in employment, education or training (NEET)
23.4 2020 • G
Shifted profits of multinationals (US$ billion) 9.1 2019 • A
CHINA East and South Asia
63
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG
17 1
16 2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 China
SCORE
SDG SDG
30 13 5
72.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S • D A
S S A D S D
D D G D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

China 94.5
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 8%
59.6 40

CHINA Performance by Indicator
3.8 2018 • A
81.6 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 6.2 2016 • D Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.6 2021 • A
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2017 • A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 2.4 2020 • A
2020 A
48.6 2019 • S
NA • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 85.0 2021 • •
95.3 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) NA NA • • Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 7.1 2022 • D
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.6 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 305.7 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.5 2020 • A
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) NA NA • • 5. COUNTRY PROFILES
1.3 2019 •
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 45 2022 • S
0.1 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 3.1 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • A
8.5 2018 • •

COLOMBIA OECD COUNTRIES
76
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Colombia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
70.1
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D S S S S
S D S G D S
A G D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Colombia 96.3
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
85.9 14.0

COLOMBIA Performance by Indicator
Poverty rate after taxes and transfers (%) NA NA • • Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 71.4 2021 • A
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 8.2 2020 • G The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
31.3 2022 •
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 1.6 2016 • • Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.3 2021 • S
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • A Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) NA NA • •
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 1.1 2018 • G Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 58.0 2021 • D
2020 G Palma ratio 4.1 2020 •G
2021 A Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) NA NA • •
2021 G
• D
9.7 2020
15.1 2019 • A
Age-standardized death rate attributable to household air pollution and Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 95.1 2020 • G
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) 31.3 2019 • • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 58.0 2022 • D
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 15.4 2019 • S Population with rent overburden (%) NA NA • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 52.6 2020 • S SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 5.9 2022 • G Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 29.7 2018 • D
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 15.1 2021 • G Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 6.2 2018 • A
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 8.1 2019 • • Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.1 2021 • A
Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 13.0 2013 • • Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) NA NA • •
99.1 2021 • A CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 1.8 2021 • A
98.9 2021 • A
CO2 emissions embodied in imports (tCO2/capita) 0.4 2018 • A
79.5 2020 • S
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 99.0 2020 • A
Tertiary educational attainment (% of population aged 25 to 34) 30.5 2021 • S SDG14 – Life Below Water
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 50.4 2018 • G Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 51.1 2018 • G
Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 26.4 2019 • G
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 66.8 2022 • G Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 58.6 •
2022 S
2022 S
2023 G
2021 G
1.0 2018 • •
• • •
5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) 25.9 2020 Homicides (per 100,000 population) 27.5 2021 G
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 611.57 2018 • • Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 24.1 2020 • A
Population using safely managed water services (%) 73.0 2020 • D Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 44 2022 • G
Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 18.3 2020 • D Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 96.8 2015 • •
7.0 2020 • •
1.2 2019 • D Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 45.2 2023 • G
(MtCO2/TWh)
Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • S
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
NA NA • •
(per 100,000 population) 0.0 2018 • A Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 24.1 2020 • G
Employment-to-population ratio (%) 61.6 2022 • D Financial Secrecy Score (best 0–100 worst) 54.3 2022 • •
27.1 2021 • G
COMOROS Sub-Saharan Africa
154
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Comoros
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
51.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D • D D
S • D • D •
D G S G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Oceania 99.8
Comoros 100.0
0
100
24%
na
COMOROS Performance by Indicator
2.3 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.1 2007 • • Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) NA NA • •
2020 S
2021 S Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 68.6 2018 • •
20.4 2019 • D
164.6 2019 • •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 26.6 2019 • D Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 82 2021 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 81.2 2021 • • Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 6.6 2018 • D
NA NA • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) NA NA • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) NA •
NA •
2022 •
2012 •
2.1 2019 •
2022 G
2012 •
0.0 2021 •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 3.3 2020•D
NA
NA NA • •

CONGO, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF Sub-Saharan Africa
159
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Congo
SCORE SDG
13 Dem. Rep. SDG
5
30
48.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D S S G
D D S • D A
A D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Congo, Dem. Rep. 99.5
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 6%
51.1 49.0

CONGO, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF Performance by Indicator
SDG2 – Zero Hunger Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 24.1 2021 • S
2.1 2018 • S
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
2021 D Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 78.4 2020 • G
42.8 2019 • D
209.8 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
0.2 2018 • •
NA •
2022 S
2018 •
0.2 2019 •
2022 G
2018 •
0.0 2021 •
Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) * 8.4 2019 • G
3.0 2018 • •

CONGO, REPUBLIC OF Sub-Saharan Africa
151
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Congo, Rep.
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
52.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D D • D D
S S D • G S
S S S G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Congo, Rep. 97.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
G 6%
37.5 63.0

CONGO, REPUBLIC OF Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 59.3 2023 •G Population using the internet (%) 8.7 2017 • •
SDG2 – Zero Hunger Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 15.8 2021 • •
2.1 2018 • S
* 0.0 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 9.6 2016 • D Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.1 2021 • G
2020 S
50.1 2019 • G
2021 G Satisfaction with public transport (%) 44.0 2022 • G
170.4 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 84.4 2018 • • Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 65.4 2022 • S
2022 S
2022 S
2023 A
2021 D
0.3 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 1,000.5 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) NA •
NA •
2022 G
2015 •
1.3 2019 •
2022 G
2015 •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -9.5 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 8.0 2018• • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 6.4 2020 •A
14.3 2018 • •
Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 37.5 2022 • G

COSTA RICA OECD Countries
52
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Costa Rica
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
73.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D S D S D
S G S D S D
S D G D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Costa Rica 76.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
89.9 10.0

COSTA RICA Performance by Indicator
Poverty rate after taxes and transfers (%) 20.3 2021 •D Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 87.3 2021 • D
39.5 2022 •
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 9.5 2022 • G top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best) •
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 1.8 2018 • • Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.3 2021 • S
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 25.7 2016 • G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.4 2018 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • D Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) NA NA • •
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 0.8 2018 • D Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 18.3 2020 • •
Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) NA NA • • Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 32.2 2018 • A
2020 D Palma ratio 3.0 2021 •G
2021 A Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 22.4 2021 •D
2021 D
• A
2021 G Proportion of urban population living in slums (%)
3.5 2020
14.8 2019 • A
17.8 2019 •
Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 100.0 2020 • A
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 14.8 2019 • S Population with rent overburden (%) NA NA • •
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) NA NA • • Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 2.3 2021 • D
98.5 2020 • A CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 1.5 2021 • A
99.9 2020 • A
101.7 2021 • A
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 99.5 2021 • •
Carbon Pricing Score at EUR60/tCO2 (%, worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Tertiary educational attainment (% of population aged 25 to 34) 30.3 2021 • D SDG14 – Life Below Water
2022 D
2022 D
Gender wage gap (% of male median wage) 4.7 2018 • • Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.81 •
2023 G
2021 G
1.6 2018 • •
• • •
5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) 7.2 2020 Homicides (per 100,000 population) 11.4 2021 G
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 5,020.4 2018 • • Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 22.4 2018 • •
Population using safely managed water services (%) 80.5 2020 • D Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 45 2022 • G
Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 30.2 2020 • G Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 99.6 2013 • •
3.8 2018 • •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -1.8 2021• • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 308.1 2020 • G
1.3 2018• • SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals
68.5 2021 • S Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 12.4 2020 • D
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • G For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
NA NA • •
(per 100,000 population) 0.1 2018 • D Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 23.7 2020 • D
Employment-to-population ratio (%) 60.1 2022 • D Financial Secrecy Score (best 0–100 worst) 55.8 2022 • A
25.9 2021 • G
CÔTE D’IVOIRE Sub-Saharan Africa
120
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG 100 SDG
2
16
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
60
25
SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Côte d'Ivoire
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
62.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D D A S D
D S S A D A
S S D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Cote d'Ivoire 98.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 1%
62.2 38.0

CÔTE D’IVOIRE Performance by Indicator
2.9 2018 • A
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
28.3 2019 • G
186.5 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 96.8 2021 • A Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 97.9 2022 • A
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 58.8 2021 • A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 40.0 2022 • G
SDG5 – Gender Equality Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 11.9 2019 • S
2022 D
2022 D
2023 A
2021 G
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
2022 G
2016 •
1.2 2019 •
2022 D
2016 •
0.0 2018 •
12.0 2018 • •

CROATIA Eastern Europe and Central Asia
12
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Croatia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
81.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S D S A
S S A A S G
G S S S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Croatia 75.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
83.1 17.0

CROATIA Performance by Indicator
3.0 2018 • A
22.0 2022 • •
2020 A
16.8 2019 • S
31.3 2019 • •
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 31.1 2021 • A Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 100.0 2022 • A
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 98.7 2007 • • Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 2021 • A
1.4 2018 • •
Population with access to electricity (%) 100.0 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 75 2022 • A
1.3 2019 •
0.1 2017 • •
Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D
91.8 2021 • A Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • A
0.2 2018 • D public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.2 2022 •D
58.4 2018 • •

CUBA Latin America and the Caribbean
46
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Cuba
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
74.1
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D D D D S
S S S • D S
A D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Cuba 96.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
19%
na
CUBA Performance by Indicator
2.0 2018 • S
16.5 2022 • •
2020 D
18.5 2019 • S
41.9 2019 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 51.1 2020 • D Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 25.5 2018 • S
2022 D
2022 A
2023 G
2021 D
0.2 2018 • •
2019 S
2006 •
2019 •
1.3 2019 •
2022 G
(MtCO2/TWh) A Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA •
NA •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) NA NA • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
0.0 2018 • D public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA ••
NA
15.6 2018 • •

CYPRUS Eastern Europe and Central Asia
59
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Cyprus
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
72.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S S D D
S S S A D S
G S D G S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Cyprus 51.1
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 3%
85.1 15.0

CYPRUS Performance by Indicator
2.9 2018 • S
39.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • D Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.8 2020 • A
2020 D
16.6 2019 • A
15.8 2019 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.3 2019 • A Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 84.5 2018 • S
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 81.8 2020 • G Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 62.5 2022 • D
Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 21.4 2019 • S
2022 S
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
1.3 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 9,197.4 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 1.3 2021 • D
Population with access to electricity (%) 100.0 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 68 2022 • G
1.2 2019 •
(MtCO2/TWh) S Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA NA • •
0.0 2021 • •
Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • •
Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • •
0.3 2018 • D public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.1 2021 •G
161.3 2018 • •

CZECHIA OECD Countries
8
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Czechia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
81.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S S S
S S S S A D
D • S D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Czechia 72.5
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
90.9 9.0

CZECHIA Performance by Indicator
32.9 2022 •
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
15.3 2019 • A
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.8 2017 • • Electronic waste (kg/capita) 15.7 2019 • •
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 4.1 2020 • D Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 21.6 2018 • D
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 44.1 2020 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 7.8 2021 • A
95.7 2020• A CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 9.2 2021 • D
98.7 2020 • D
92.7 2020 • D
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 495.3 2018 • A Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 16.9 2018 • A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 18.8 2018 • A Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 D
1.6 2018 • •
• • •
5. COUNTRY PROFILES
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) 61.5 2020 Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.4 2021 A
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 2,226.94 2018 • • Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 8.1 2020 • A
Population using safely managed water services (%) 97.9 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 77 2022 • A
Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 85.2 2020 • A Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 2022 • •
* 0.0 2021 • •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 15.8 2019 • D Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • G
Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • S
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 0.5 2021 • • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 180.1 2020 • S
0.4 2022 • A
0.2 2018 • NA NA •
11.9 2021 • D
DENMARK OECD Countries
3
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Denmark
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
85.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S D A S
A S S D S D
S D S S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Denmark 68.0
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
91.6 8.0

DENMARK Performance by Indicator
59.7 2022 •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 6.4 2021 • D Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 54.8 2020 • D
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
9.6 2019 • A
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 3.7 2019 • D Population with rent overburden (%) 16.1 2019 • G
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 17.6 2020 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 5.9 2021 • A
99.7 2020 • A CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 5.1 2021 • S
99.3 2020 • D
103.9 2020 • A
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 D
1.7 2018 • •
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) 100.0 2020 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.8 •
2021 A
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 3,552.902018 • • Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 37.3 •
2020 G
• Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 87 •
2022 A
5. Country Profiles
Population using safely managed water services (%) 96.7 2020 D

2022 •
2022 A
* 0.0 •
2021 •
0.9 2019 • A Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 89.5 2023 • A
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 37.5 2019 • A Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.9 2021 • A
public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.7 2022 • G
10.9 2021 • S Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 91.6 2022 • A
DJIBOUTI Sub-Saharan Africa
150
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Djibouti
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
52.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D D D S D
D G A • S A
S G G D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Djibouti 86.5
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 16%
46.6 53.0

DJIBOUTI Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) 12.9 2023 • S Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 71.5 2022 • •
2.8 2018 • A
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
47.4 2019 • G
177.9 2019 • •
* 52.8 2023 • S Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 26.2 2021 • A Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 0.0 2022 • D
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 76.1 2020 • D Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) NA NA • •
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
2018 •
2011 •
• Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 91.7 •
2006 •
5. Country Profiles
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 9.7 2020 D
5.8 2019 •
2022 G
(MtCO2/TWh) G Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA •
NA •
0.0 2021 •
48.3 2018 • •

DOMINICA Latin America and the Caribbean
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Dominica
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D • D A •
D • S • • •
A S G D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Dominica INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
44%
44.2 55.8

DOMINICA Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 27.9 2016 • G Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.3 2021 • G
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 28.3 2021 • G Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) NA NA • •
Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) 35.9 2021 • D Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
18.4 2019 • S
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 16.0 2021 • D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA • •
NA NA • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 100.0 2020 • A Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 92 2021 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 24.3 2021 • G Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 65.1 2022 • S
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 95.4 2017 • • Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.1 2021 • G
NA NA • •
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 55.5 2020 • G
• Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) NA NA • •
5. Country Profiles
1.9 2019 •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -5.4 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.8 2021 • A
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) NA NA • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • S
NA NA • •

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC Latin America and the Caribbean
62
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Dominican
SCORE SDG
13 Republic SDG
5
30
72.1
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D D D S S
S G S A D S
S D D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Dominican Republic 94.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
72.4 27.6

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC Performance by Indicator
2.4 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
12.7 2019 • A
2021 D Satisfaction with public transport (%) 67.0 2022 • D
41.3 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 A
2023 G
2021 D
0.2 2018 • •
2021 S
2020 D
2022 D
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 91.5 2020 A
1.2 2019 •
2022 G
2019 •
0.0 2017 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 0.2 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D
22.9 2018 • •

ECUADOR Latin America and the Caribbean
74
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Ecuador
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
70.4
20
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D S D S A
S D A G A D
A D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Ecuador 96.9
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
79.2 20.9

ECUADOR Performance by Indicator
2.7 2018 • A
20.8 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • S Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.4 2014 • •
2020 A
13.7 2019 • A
28.1 2019 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 97.2 2019 • A Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 7.1 2018 • D
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 99.0 2021 • D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 29.0 2018 • G
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.3 2018 • •
2021 G
2020 G
2022 G
2020 •
5. Country Profiles
1.2 2019 •
2022 D
NA •
0.0 2018 •
64.2 2021 • A Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • S
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • S Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 8.7 2021 •G
9.7 2018 • •

Middle East
EGYPT, ARAB REPUBLIC OF and North Africa
81
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Egypt,
SCORE SDG
13 Arab Rep. SDG
5
30
69.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D S A S A
S S S • S A
S D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Egypt, Arab Rep. 98.7
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
79.6 20

EGYPT, ARAB REPUBLIC OF Performance by Indicator
2.8 2018 • G
40.5 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2017 • A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 1.0 2020 • S
2020 A
91.3 2019 • G
NA • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 68.0 2022 • S
105.6 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 A
0.1 2018 • •
2017 •
2016 •
2022 A
2014 •
5. Country Profiles
1.2 2019 •
2022 G
2014 •
0.0 2019 •
27.4 2021 • D Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • D
3.5 2018 • •

EL SALVADOR Latin America and the Caribbean
73
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 El Salvador
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
70.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S D D D
S D D S D A
S D D D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

El Salvador 89.0
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
73.8 26.2

EL SALVADOR Performance by Indicator
2.2 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.2 2019 • D
2020 A
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 16.5 2020 • G
22.9 2019 • S
40.3 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 A
2023 G
2021 D
1.8 2018 • •
2021 A
2018 •
2022 A
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
1.3 2019 •
2022 G
2019 •
0.0 2021 •
24.9 2018 • •

EQUATORIAL GUINEA Sub-Saharan Africa
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Equatorial
SCORE SDG
13 Guinea SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D D • D •
D G D • G A
A D S • G

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Equatorial Guinea INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
28%
39.0 61.0

EQUATORIAL GUINEA Performance by Indicator
1.9 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
59.0 2019 • G
2021 G Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 48.1 2017 • •
2021 D Satisfaction with public transport (%) NA NA • •
165.7 2019 • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 53 2021 • S Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 44.7 2015 • • Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 100.0 2022 • A
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 87.3 2022 • A Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 100.0 2022 • A
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 23.0 2021 • G Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 64.7 2017 • • Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.2 2021 • S
NA NA • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 3,523.5 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) NA NA • •
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) NA NA • •
Population with access to electricity (%) 66.7 2020 • D Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) NA NA • •
• Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 53.5 2011 • •
5. Country Profiles
4.4 2019 •
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 17 2022 • •
0.0 2021 •
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 50.4 2023 • S
27.0 2018 • •

ERITREA Sub-Saharan Africa
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Eritrea
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S G S •
D D D • G A
S G G • D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Eritrea INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
23%
na
ERITREA Performance by Indicator
1.9 2018 • S
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.1 2007 • • Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) * 0.0 2021 • D
2020 S
2021 S Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) NA NA• •
52.1 2019 • G
2021 S Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 69.0 2016 • •
237.4 2019 • •
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 22.0 2019 • • Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 0.0 2022 • D
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 51.9 2016 • • Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) NA NA • •
0.0 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 486.0 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 14.6 2012 • •
Population with access to electricity (%) 52.2 2020 • D Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) NA NA • •
5. Country Profiles
1.5 2019 •
0.0 2021 •
0.0 2018 • D public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA ••
NA
0.9 2018 • •

ESTONIA OECD Countries
10
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Estonia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
81.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S A S S
S D S S D D
S S S S A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Estonia 63.8
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
89.6 10.0

ESTONIA Performance by Indicator
Poverty rate after taxes and transfers (%) 14.9 2019 • S Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 180.1 2021 • A
37.9 2022 •
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
6.4 2019 • A
12.8 2019 •
Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 98.8 2015 • •
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 46.6 2020 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 11.7 2021 • S
93.2 2017• • CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 7.9 2021 • A
97.6 2017 • •
100.8 2020 • A
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 525.3 2018 • A Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 97.6 2022 • A
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 8.8 2018 • A Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 1.6 2018 • A
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 D
0.3 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 A
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 A
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 2.1 2021 • • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 178.4 2020 • S
public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.5 2022 • A
12.3 2021 • D Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 89.6 2022 • A
ESWATINI Sub-Saharan Africa
132
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Eswatini
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
57.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S A S D
S • S • D •
D • D G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Eswatini 92.3
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 16%
51.7 48.0

ESWATINI Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
16.7 2019 • S
2021 A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 93.1 2020 • S
173.7 2019 • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) 57.7 2019 • S SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
1.7 2018 • •
2021 G
2012 •
2022 •
2014 •
5. Country Profiles
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 55.4 2020 S
1.3 2019 •
2022 G
2010 •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

ETHIOPIA Sub-Saharan Africa
144
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG
17 1
16 2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Ethiopia
SCORE
SDG SDG
30 13 5
54.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S D S D
S D D • D D
D • D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Ethiopia 99.1
Oceania 99.8
4%
0 100
S
61.1 39.0

ETHIOPIA Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 41.7 2023 • S Population using the internet (%) 16.7 2021 • D
2.1 2016 • •
42.5 2022 • •
2020 A
39.8 2019 • G
142.5 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 S
0.0 2018 • •
2012 •
NA •
2022 G
2016 •
5. Country Profiles
0.9 2019 •
2022 D
2015 •
0.0 2021 •
6.5 2018 • •

FIJI Oceania
57
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Fiji
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
72.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G S D S D S
D • S • D •
D S G G S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Fiji 96.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 20%
63.2 37

FIJI Performance by Indicator
2.4 2018 • G
24.8 2022 • •
2020 A
2021 G Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 9.4 2020 • D
2021 G Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
10.1 2019 • A
118.7 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
2020 D
2016 •
NA •
2021 •
5. Country Profiles
2.4 2019 •
2022 •
2021 •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

FINLAND OECD Countries
1
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Finland
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
86.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S D S S
A S S G S D
G S S S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Finland 73.7
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
93.66.0

FINLAND Performance by Indicator
54.5 2022 •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 2.8 2021 • D Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 53.3 2020 • A
SDG3 – Good Health and Well-Being Gini coefficient 27.7 2019 •D
2020 D Palma ratio 0.9 2020 •D
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
5.5 2019 • A
7.4 2019 •
Universal health coverage (UHC) index of service coverage (worst 0–100 best) 83 2019 • D SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 7.3 2018 • •
96.9 2020• D CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 6.8 2021 • S
98.3 2020 • D
102.1 2020 • A
Carbon Pricing Score at EUR60/tCO2 (%, worst 0–100 best) 33.5 2018 • G
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 10.5 2018 • D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 81.9 2022 • A
Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 0.0 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
Gender wage gap (% of male median wage) 16.0 2020 • S Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.99 •
2023 A
2021 A
2.0 2018 • •
2020 G
2020 D
2022 A
5. Country Profiles
Population using safely managed water services (%) 99.6 2020 A

Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 84.1 2020 • D Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 •
2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
99.5 2021 • D Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 13.7 2020 • D
0.6 2022 • A
0.3 2018 • NA NA •
11.9 2021 • A
FRANCE OECD Countries
6
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 France
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
82.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S S A D
S S S D S D
S S S S A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
France 61.9
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
90.8 9.0

FRANCE Performance by Indicator
67.0 2022 •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.5 2017 • D Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 11.4 2020 • A
SDG3 – Good Health and Well-Being Gini coefficient 32.4 2018 • S
2020 D Palma ratio 1.1 2019 • S
2021 D Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 4.4 2019 •D
2021 D SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
11.2 2019 • A
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 7.5 2019 • D SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 11.1 2020 • G Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 19.9 2018 • D
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 17.1 2020 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 6.1 2021 • S
99.9 2020 • A
100.1 2020 • A
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 20.5 2018 • A Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 21.0 2018 • D
2022 A
2022 A
2023 G
2021 D
7.1 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 D
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 78.6 2020 • G Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 •
2022 •
2022 A
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
0.6 2022 • A
0.2 2018 • NA NA •
15.1 2021 • S
GABON Sub-Saharan Africa
113
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG 100 SDG
2
16
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
60
25
SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Gabon
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
63.1
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D • D D
A S S • D A
A D S D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Gabon 92.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 6%
42.8 57.0

GABON Performance by Indicator
2.1 2018 • D
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
47.5 2019 • G
2021 S Satisfaction with public transport (%) 40.0 2022 • S
78.3 2019 • •
NA •
NA • SDG14 – Life Below Water
2022 D
2022 A
2023 A
2021 A
2.5 2018 • •
NA •
2018 •
2022 D
2012 •
5. Country Profiles
2.3 2019 •
2022 G
2012 •
0.0 2021 •
17.2 2018 • •

THE GAMBIA Sub-Saharan Africa
129
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 The Gambia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
58.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D D D S D
D S D • D A
A G S S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

The Gambia 97.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 4%
64.4 36.0

THE GAMBIA Performance by Indicator
1.8 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
35.4 2019 • D
2021 S Satisfaction with public transport (%) 31.0 2022 • •
220.5 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 A
2023 A
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
2014 •
2022 •
2020 •
5. Country Profiles
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) 1.7 2020 G
2.2 2019 •
2022 D
2018 •
0.0 2021 •
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 71.1 2023 • A
3.4 2018 • •

GEORGIA Eastern Europe and Central Asia
42
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Georgia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
75.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S S S D S D
S D S S S D
G G D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Georgia 92.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 3%
90.7 9.0

GEORGIA Performance by Indicator
2.4 2018 • G
16.5 2022 • •
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) NA NA • • Gini coefficient 34.5 2020 • S
2020 A
21.7 2019 • S
92.8 2019 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 27.3 2020 • A Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 25.0 2018 • S
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.8 2020 • D Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 18.2 2018 • G
NA •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 95.2 2021 • D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 57.7 2022 • D
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 A
0.7 2018 • •
2019 G
2019 D
2022 A
2017 •
5. Country Profiles
0.7 2019 •
2022 A
2015 •
0.2 2017 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 0.6 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • S
27.6 2018 • •

GERMANY OECD Countries
4
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Germany
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
83.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D S D S A
S D S G S S
S S S S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Germany 65.2
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
91.0 9.0

GERMANY Performance by Indicator
75.9 2022 •
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
11.3 2019 • A
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 96.2 2019 • G Electronic waste (kg/capita) 19.4 2019 • •
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 6.6 2022 • D Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 34.4 2018 • S
98.3 2020 • A CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 8.1 2021 • S
97.9 2020 • D
* 98.8 2020 • D
2022 S
2022 S
2023 A
2021 D
5.7 2018 • •
2021 D
2020 D
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2020 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 17.2 2019 • S Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.8 2021 • A
Employment-to-population ratio (%) 75.8 2021 • A Financial Secrecy Score (best 0–100 worst) 56.7 2022 • S
10.2 2021 • G Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 91.0 2022 • A
GHANA Sub-Saharan Africa
122
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Ghana
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
61.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D S S S S S
S S S • G D
D D G D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Ghana 96.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 0%
64.2 36.0

GHANA Performance by Indicator
2.4 2018 • G
32.2 2022 • •
2020 D
40.1 2019 • G
193.6 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 G
0.0 2018 • •
2021 D
2022 A
2022 G
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
1.0 2019 •
2022 G
2018 •
0.0 2021 •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • G Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 5.9 2020 •G
9.8 2018 • •

GREECE OECD Countries
28
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Greece
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
78.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S D D A
S S S A S G
S S S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Greece 74.3
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
88.7 11.0

GREECE Performance by Indicator
43.3 2022 •
2020 D Palma ratio 1.1 2019 •A
2021 A Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 7.2 2019 • S
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
15.4 2019 • A
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 8.7 2020 • D SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 5.9 2022 • A Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 40.0 2018 • G
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 9.0 2020 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 5.2 2021 • G
Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 24.9 2019 • S Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 1.1 2019 • •
99.3 2020 • D CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 5.4 2021 • S
99.6 2020 • A
93.6 2020 • D
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 453.3 2018 • G Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 86.6 2022 • A
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 10.9 2018 • A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 67.4 2022 • S
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 31.7 2018 • D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 64.1 2018 • D
2022 A
2022 A
2023 G
2021 A
2.9 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 A
2022 S
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 S
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • G
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -1.5 2021 • • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 109.2 2020 • G
0.1 2022 • G
0.2 2018 • NA NA •
21.4 2021 • S
GRENADA Latin America and the Caribbean
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Grenada
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S S S •
D • A • • •
D D D D G

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Grenada INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
37%
41.1 58.9

GRENADA Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) NA NA • •
21.4 2019 • S
47.4 2019 • •
84.8 2020 • S SDG14 – Life Below Water
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 95.6 2017 • • Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 2021 • A
NA NA • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) NA NA • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 4.0 2021 • S
5. Country Profiles
1.4 2019 •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -6.1 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • G
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) NA NA • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • A
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • A Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 5.8 2020 •G
NA NA • •

GUATEMALA Latin America and the Caribbean
127
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Guatemala
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
59.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S S D S
S G D • D S
S D G D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Guatemala 87.7
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
72.0 28.0

GUATEMALA Performance by Indicator
2.2 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 S
22.1 2019 • S
91.0 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 90.6 2021 • S Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 49.1 2022 • D
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 G
0.5 2018 • •
2021 S
2019 A
2022 D
2015 •
5. Country Profiles
1.1 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.0 2021 •
12.5 2018 • •

GUINEA Sub-Saharan Africa
142
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Guinea
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
54.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D D S D D
D D D • D S
D G D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Guinea 98.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 4%
57.9 42.0

GUINEA Performance by Indicator
1.6 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
27.1 2019 • G
2021 A Satisfaction with public transport (%) 46.0 2022 • S
238.0 2019 • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 60.3 2021 • S Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 11.8 2018 • D
2022 D
2022 A
2023 D
2021 G
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
2017 •
2022 S
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
1.7 2019 •
2022 D
2016 •
0.0 2021 •
30.4 2021 • S Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • •
9.3 2018 • •

GUINEA-BISSAU Sub-Saharan Africa
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Guinea-Bissau
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D D D D
D • D • D •
D D G D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Guinea-Bissau INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
D 23%
40.0 60.0

GUINEA-BISSAU Performance by Indicator
1.8 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 G
32.2 2019 • G
2021 S Satisfaction with public transport (%) NA NA • •
228.8 2019 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 53.8 2019 • S Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 67.9 2021 • D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 3.3 2018 • A
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 59.0 2020 • D Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.8 2021 • G
NA NA • •
2017 •
2017 •
Population with access to electricity (%) 33.3 2020 • S Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) NA •
NA •
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
4.5 2019 •
2022 D
2019 •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

GUYANA Latin America and the Caribbean
96
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Guyana
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
67.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S A S D
D S S • S •
D S S D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Guyana 66.7
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 14%
56.5 43.6

GUYANA Performance by Indicator
2.1 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 S
21.5 2019 • S
95.7 2019 • •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 22.3 2019 • D Production-based SO2 emissions (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 95.6 2020 • D Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 2021 • D
47.2 2018 • •
2021 D
2020 G
2007 •
2014 •
5. Country Profiles
2.0 2019 •
2022 S
2014 •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 19.0 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • A
NA NA • •

HAITI Latin America and the Caribbean
152
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Haiti
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
52.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D • S D
D G D • D S
S G D G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Haiti 99.0
Oceania 99.8
0
100
D 8%
39.6 60.4

HAITI Performance by Indicator
1.9 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
15.3 2019 • S
206.4 2019 • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) NA NA • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 34.9 2022 • G
2022 D
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 2.5 2019 • • Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 83.9 •
2022 A
2023 G
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
2021 G
2018 •
2018 •
2017 •
5. Country Profiles
3.3 2019 •
2022 D
2012 •
0.0 2021 •
4.6 2018 • •

HONDURAS Latin America and the Caribbean
116
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Honduras
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
62.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S D S S
S D S D S D
S D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Honduras 94.0
Oceania 99.8
0
100
D 0%
61.0 39.1

HONDURAS Performance by Indicator
2.5 2018 • A
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 G
18.8 2019 • A
112.5 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 A
2023 G
2021 G
0.6 2018 • •
2021 S
2018 •
2022 S
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
1.0 2019 •
2022 G
2019 •
0.0 2021 •
16.0 2018 • •

HUNGARY OECD Countries
22
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Hungary
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
79.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S D S S
S S A D S D
D • S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Hungary 80.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
87.9 12.0

HUNGARY Performance by Indicator
37.9 2022 •
2020 D Palma ratio 1.0 2019 •D
2021 A
• A
0.0 2016
diabetes, or chronic respiratory disease in adults aged 30–70 years (%) 22.1 2019 • D 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) (μg/m³)
15.1 2019 • A
42.3 2019 •
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 63.0 2022 • S
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 7.7 2019 • A Population with rent overburden (%) 8.2 2019 • G
Life expectancy at birth (years) 76.4 2019 • S Proportion of population with access to points of interest within a 15min walk (%) 95.9 2022 • •
Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 24.9 2019 • D Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 0.7 2021 • •
93.9 2020• A CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 5.0 2021 • G
94.5 2020 • G
95.6 2020 • A
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 98.7 2021 • D
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 21.2 2018 • D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 24.1 2018 • S Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
2022 D
2022 A
2023 D
2021 A
0.4 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 A
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 G
* 0.0 •
2021 •
1.5 2019 • S Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 63.0 2023 • G
(MtCO2/TWh)
Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • S
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 13.6 2019 • G Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • G
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • S For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
0.3 2022 • D
0.1 2018 • NA NA •
13.1 2021 • A
ICELAND OECD Countries
29
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Iceland
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
78.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S D S S
A D S • S D
D S D S A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Iceland 45.8
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 9%
86.9 13.0

ICELAND Performance by Indicator
44.8 2022 •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.6 2017 • D Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 10.4 2017 • •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 3.1 2021 • D Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 7.0 2020 • G
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 1.4 2018 • G Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 4.9 2017 • •
Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) NA NA • • Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 35.2 2012 • •
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) NA NA • • SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities
2020 A Palma ratio 0.9 2017 • •
2021 D Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 3.1 2017 • •
2021 D
• A
* 0.0 2020
6.1 2019 • A
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 97.4 2020 • G Electronic waste (kg/capita) 21.4 2019 • •
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 7.4 2022 • D Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 48.0 2018 • S
96.9 2020 • D CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 9.1 2021 • D
99.6 2020 • A
102.8 2020 • A
NA NA • • Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 47.6 2021 • A Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 35.9 2022 • D
Gender wage gap (% of male median wage) 12.9 2018 • • Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.87 2023 • G
SDG6 – Clean Water and Sanitation Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) NA NA • •
0.4 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 A
2022 D
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 81.1 2019 • A Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
100.0 2021 • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 15.7 2020 • A
NA NA • • For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
• D
9.4 2021 Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 86.9 2022 • A
INDIA East and South Asia
112
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 India
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
63.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S S S
S S S G D A
D S G D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

India 99.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
78.2 22

INDIA Performance by Indicator
2.9 2018 • S
45.7 2022 • •
2020 A
90.6 2019 • G
139.3 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.1 2018 • •
2021 S
2020 G
2022 G
2016 •
5. Country Profiles
1.5 2019 •
2022 D
(MtCO2/TWh) S Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA •
NA •
0.0 2021 •
3.1 2018 • •

INDONESIA East and South Asia
75
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Indonesia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
70.2
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S A S A
D S S S D S
D D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Indonesia 97.9
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
79.0 21.0

INDONESIA Performance by Indicator
2.9 2018 • D
26.4 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 6.9 2016 • D Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.2 2021 • S
2020 S
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 19.4 2020 • S
16.2 2019 • D
2021 G Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 44.6 2020 • D
96.1 2019 • •
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 65.4 2022 • S Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 25.9 •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 S
0.2 2018 • •
2004 •
2020 A
2022 A
2021 •
5. Country Profiles
2.1 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.0 2021 •
51.8 2021 • S Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • S
5.9 2018 • •

Middle East
IRAN, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF and North Africa
86
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Iran,
SCORE SDG
13
Islamic Rep. SDG
5
30
69.1
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S A D S
D D A G D S
S S D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Iran, Islamic Rep. 97.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 2%
58.7 41

IRAN, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF Performance by Indicator
2.8 2018 • •
45.1 2022 • •
2020 D
39.2 2019 • D
58.1 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 A
0.2 2018 • •
2014 •
2014 •
2022 A
2010 •
5. Country Profiles
2.3 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.0 2021 •
11.5 2018 • •

IRAQ Middle East and North Africa
105
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Iraq
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
64.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S • D A
S D S • D A
S D G D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Iraq 96.9
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 14%
56.3 44

IRAQ Performance by Indicator
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 15.9 2020 • S Logistics Performance Index: Quality of trade and transport-related
2.0 2018 • G
20.8 2022 • •
2020 A
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 49.3 2020 • G
61.9 2019 • D
2021 A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 88.2 2020 • G
NA • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 63.0 2022 • A
89.7 2019 • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 75 2021 • S Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.2 2016 • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 48.4 2007 • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 77.8 2022 • A
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 16.4 2022 • G Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 5.6 2022 • D
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 28.9 2021 • D Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 8.1 2022 • D
0.0 2018 • •
2013 •
NA •
2022 A
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
2.6 2019 •
2022 D
2018 •
0.0 2021 •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) * NA NA • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
18.6 2021 • D Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) 15.7 2023 • G
11.7 2018 • •

IRELAND OECD Countries
17
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Ireland
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
80.1
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S S S
S S S A S G
D S S S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Ireland 60.6
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
91.39.0

IRELAND Performance by Indicator
54.0 2022 •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • S Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 10.7 2020 • D
2020 A Palma ratio 1.1 2018 • •
2021 A
• A
0.0 2020
7.8 2019 • A
Age-standardized death rate attributable to household air pollution and Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 97.0 2020 • G
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) 12.8 2019 • • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 63.0 2022 • S
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) NA NA • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 63.7 2018 • G
100.0 2020 • A
100.3 2020 • A
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 D
1.7 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 D
2022 D
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 A
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 12.3 2019 • S Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • •
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.9 2021 • •
99.7 2021 • A Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 8.7 2020 • G
0.8 2021 • • For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
• A
Shifted profits of multinationals (US$ billion) -129.6 2019 • G
ISRAEL OECD Countries
48
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG
17 1
16 2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Israel
SCORE
SDG SDG
30 13 5
74.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S D D S
S D A S S D
S D D S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Israel 62.4
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
9%
0 100
A
83.3 17.0

ISRAEL Performance by Indicator
47.2 2022 •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • G Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) NA NA • •
Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) NA NA • • Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) NA NA • •
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) NA NA • • SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities
SDG3 – Good Health and Well-Being Gini coefficient 38.6 2018 • S
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
18.5 2019 • S
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 3.9 2019 • A Population with rent overburden (%) NA NA • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) NA NA • • Electronic waste (kg/capita) 14.5 2019 • •
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 7.7 2022 • A Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 30.5 2018 • S
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 8.1 2020 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 2.1 2021 • D
99.9 2020• A CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 6.2 2021 • S
99.5 2020 • D
104.4 2020 • A
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 13.6 2018 • G Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 46.7 2022 • S
Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 46.4 2019 • S
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
2.1 2018 • •
2021 G
2016 •
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 A
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 4.5 2019 • D Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -0.2 2021 • • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 231.2 2018 • S
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
0.1 2022 • D
0.3 2018 •
17.6 2021 • G
ITALY OECD Countries
24
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Italy
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
78.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S D S A
S S S D S D
S D D S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Italy 73.9
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
91.9 8.0

ITALY Performance by Indicator
54.6 2022 •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 5.6 2021 • A Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 15.3 2020 • S
2020 A Palma ratio 1.3 2018 • •
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
15.8 2019 • S
15.0 2019 •
Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA • •
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 9.3 2019 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 2.1 2021 • S
95.8 2020 • G
98.7 2020 • D
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 477.0 2018 • G Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 78.0 2022 • S
2022 S
2022 A
2023 D
2021 D
3.5 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 D
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 A
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 17.3 2019 • D Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • S
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -0.5 2021 • • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 90.3 2020 • D
0.3 2022 • S
0.2 2018 • NA NA •
26.0 2021 • D
JAMAICA Latin America and the Caribbean
82
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG 100 SDG
2
16
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
60
25
SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Jamaica
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
69.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D G A D
D D S • D D
S D D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Jamaica 90.5
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 3%
61.6 38.4

JAMAICA Performance by Indicator
2.3 2018 • G
42.5 2022 • •
2020 D
12.7 2019 • A
35.9 2019 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.7 2018 • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 15.8 2018 • S
NA •
82.9 2008• A Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.2 2018 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 S
0.6 2018 • •
2021 G
2020 D
2022 G
2017 •
5. Country Profiles
1.9 2019 •
2022 D
2016 •
0.0 2021 •
31.9 2018 • •

JAPAN OECD Countries
21
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Japan
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
79.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S S S
S S S • S S
D D D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Japan 72.2
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 3%
89.9 10.0

JAPAN Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 0.5 2023 •A Population using the internet (%) 82.9 2021 • D
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 3.2 2020 • D The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
65.9 2022 •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 4.3 2016 • D Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 3.3 2020 • A
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 0.8 2018 • G Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) NA NA • •
Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) NA NA • • Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) NA NA • •
2020 A Palma ratio 1.3 2018 • •
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
11.0 2019 • A
11.8 2019 •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 3.6 2019 • A Population with rent overburden (%) 9.0 2018 • G
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 2.3 2015 • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 19.4 2018 • S
91.8 2015 • • CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 8.5 2021 • D
97.4 2020 • D
* 100.0 2020 • A
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 10.8 2018 • D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 60.9 2018 • G
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
5.1 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 D
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
0.4 2022 • S
0.1 2018 • NA NA •
9.8 2014 • •
JORDAN Middle East and North Africa
77
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Jordan
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
69.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S D D D D
S S S • D S
A A D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Jordan 92.2
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 4%
78.2 22

JORDAN Performance by Indicator
2.7 2018 • A
33.9 2022 • •
2020 A
33.5 2019 • D
38.7 2019 • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 68.8 2021 • D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 79.9 2022 • A
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 11.5 2021 • G Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 18.7 2022 • D
0.2 2018 • •
2021 A
2019 S
2022 A
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
1.0 2019 •
2022 G
2016 •
0.4 2021 •
27.8 2018 • •

KAZAKHSTAN Eastern Europe and Central Asia
66
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Kazakhstan
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
71.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S D D S
D S S D D D
S • D S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Kazakhstan 92.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
78.2 22.0

KAZAKHSTAN Performance by Indicator
2.5 2018 • A
16.5 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.4 2017 • G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.1 2021 • G
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) NA NA • • Gini coefficient 27.8 2018 •D
2020 D
13.6 2019 • S
83.5 2019 • •
77.7 2020• G SDG14 – Life Below Water
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 A
0.3 2018 • •
2020 A
2020 D
2022 S
2015 •
5. Country Profiles
2.7 2019 •
2022 S
NA •
0.0 2021 •
53.8 2018 • •

KENYA Sub-Saharan Africa
123
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Kenya
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
60.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D S S D
S D S • G A
S D G D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Kenya 97.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 2%
62.3 38.0

KENYA Performance by Indicator
2.6 2018 • A
39.5 2022 • •
2020 G
28.4 2019 • G
131.9 2019 • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 88.7 2021 • S Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 22.2 2018 • D
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.7 2018 • •
2021 D
2020 G
2022 G
2014 •
5. Country Profiles
1.3 2019 •
2022 D
NA •
0.0 2021 •
16.3 2018 • •

KIRIBATI Oceania
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Kiribati
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S G D D
D • S • S •
D D • • S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Kiribati INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 39%
43.8 37

KIRIBATI Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) NA NA • • Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) NA NA • •
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
10.0 2019 • A
246.6 2019 • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) NA NA • • Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 14.2 2018 • D
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 78.0 2020 • S Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) NA NA • •
NA NA • •
2012 •
2016 •
NA •
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
3.2 2019 •
NA •
2019 •
0.0 2021 •
NA
NA NA • •

KOREA, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF East and South Asia
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Korea, Dem.
SCORE SDG
13 Rep. SDG
5
30
NA
20
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D D • S D
D S D • D S
D D D • •

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Korea, Dem. Rep. INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
32%
na
KOREA, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) NA NA • • Population using the internet (%) 0.0 2012 • •
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
29.8 2019 • A
212.8 2019 • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) NA NA • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 53.1 2022 • D
89.6 2017 • A Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
0.0 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 41.3 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) NA NA • •
Population with access to electricity (%) 52.3 2020 • S Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) NA NA • •
5. Country Profiles
2.1 2019 •
(MtCO2/TWh) D Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) 4.3 2017 • •
0.0 2014 • •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) NA • •
NA
0.0 2018 • A public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA ••
NA
0.0 2018 • •

KOREA, REPUBLIC OF OECD Countries
31
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Korea, Rep.
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
78.1
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S S S S
S D S S S S
S D G S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Korea, Rep. 76.2
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 3%
87.8 12.0

KOREA, REPUBLIC OF Performance by Indicator
64.1 2022 •
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 0.2 2020 • A Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 1.9 2021 • A
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 4.7 2016 • D Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 4.8 2020 • A
Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) NA NA • • Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 25.2 2017 • G
Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) 8.1 2020 • D Palma ratio 1.3 2020 • S
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 1.4 2021 • A Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 40.4 2020 •D
Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) 2.9 2021 • A SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 44.0 2021 • A
• A
New HIV infections (per 1,000 uninfected population) NA NA • • Proportion of urban population living in slums (%)
* 0.0 2020
23.8 2019 • S
Age-standardized death rate attributable to household air pollution and Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA • •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 8.6 2019 • A Population with rent overburden (%) 3.1 2012 • •
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 2.2 2020 • A Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 23.5 2018 • D
89.8 2020• G CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 11.9 2021 • D
98.6 2020 • A
90.2 2020 • D
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 519.7 2018 • A Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 38.7 2022 • D
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 14.2 2018 • A Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 42.2 2018 • G
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 74.4 2022 • A Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 37.6 2022• D
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 19.0 2021 • D Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 36.8 2022• D
Gender wage gap (% of male median wage) 31.1 2021 • S Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.69 2023• G
SDG6 – Clean Water and Sanitation Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 2021• D
2.5 2018 • •
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) 76.8 2020 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.5 2021 • A
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 2,208.0 2018 • • Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 35.6 2020 • D
• Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 79 2022 • A
5. Country Profiles

Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 99.9 2020 • A Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) NA NA • •
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 63 2022 • A
* 0.0 2021 • •
(MtCO2/TWh)
1.1 2019 • S Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 70.8 2023 • D
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 3.4 2019 • D Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • A
Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.8 2021 • D
0.2 2022 • D
0.1 2018 •
NA NA • •
KUWAIT Middle East and North Africa
108
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Kuwait
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
64.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S D D A
S S S • S S
D S D • S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Kuwait 65.2
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 18%
69.2 31

KUWAIT Performance by Indicator
3.0 2018 • D
29.6 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2017 • G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.2 2020 • D
2020 D
60.7 2019 • D
45.2 2019 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 6.2 2019 • D Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 43.1 2018 • S
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 80.8 2021 • G Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 32.1 2022 • S
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 86.6 2021 • G Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 76.7 2022 • A
5.2 2018 • •
Freshwater withdrawal (% of available freshwater resources) 3,850.5 2019 • •
2020 •
2019 D
2022 •
• Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) NA •
NA •
5. Country Profiles
1.5 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
NA NA •
0.2 2018 • A public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.2 2022 •G
106.8 2018 • •

KYRGYZ REPUBLIC Eastern Europe and Central Asia
45
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Kyrgyz
SCORE SDG
13 Republic
SDG
5
30
74.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S S D A
S D S A S S
S • D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Kyrgyz Republic 96.5
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
81.5 19.0

KYRGYZ REPUBLIC Performance by Indicator
2.4 2018 • A
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • S Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.1 2020 • G
2020 A
19.8 2019 • S
124.9 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 A
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
2018 •
2022 A
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
0.7 2019 •
2022 G
2018 •
0.1 2017 •
8.6 2018 • •

East and
LAO PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC South Asia
115
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Lao PDR
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
63.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S D S A
D D S • S D
D • D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Lao PDR 92.2
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 7%
60.4 40

Performance
LAO PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC by Indicator
2.4 2018 • A
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
23.1 2019 • S
195.3 2019 • •
2022 S
2022 D
2023 G
2021 G
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
NA •
2022 •
2017 •
5. Country Profiles
0.8 2019 •
2022 D
2017 •
0.0 2021 •
22.1 2018 • •

LATVIA OECD Countries
14
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Latvia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
80.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S S S A
A D S G S G
D S S S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Latvia 66.7
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
88.8 11.0

LATVIA Performance by Indicator
SDG2 – Zero Hunger 3.0 2018 • G
33.1 2022 •
2020 A Palma ratio 1.5 2020 •G
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
12.7 2019 • A
Life expectancy at birth (years) 75.4 2019 • D Proportion of population with access to points of interest within a 15min walk (%) 92.6 2022 • •
Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 22.6 2019 • S Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 0.8 2020 • •
98.7 2020 • A
98.3 2020 • A
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 487.3 2018 • S Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 96.2 2022 • A
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 D
0.2 2018 • •
Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 92.4 2020 • S
2021 D
2020 A
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 A
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 41.5 2019 • A Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.8 2021 • • For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
0.2 2022 • S
0.2 2018 • NA NA •
14.9 2021 • G
LEBANON Middle East and North Africa
95
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Lebanon
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
67.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D • D S
S G A • G G
S S G D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Lebanon 82.7
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 9%
58.5 42

LEBANON Performance by Indicator
2.6 2018 • S
33.8 2022 • •
2020 D
30.6 2019 • D
58.6 2019 • •
NA •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) NA NA • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 57.5 2022 • A
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 G
0.6 2018 • •
2020 A
2020 D
2022 G
• • Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 98.9 •
2016 •
5. Country Profiles
Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%) NA NA
0.9 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.0 2021 •
20.7 2021 • G Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • D
49.8 2018 • •

LESOTHO Sub-Saharan Africa
143
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Lesotho
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
54.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D D S D
D G D • S •
A • S G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Lesotho 98.9
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 14%
57.5 43.0

LESOTHO Performance by Indicator
2.0 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 S
26.6 2019 • S
2021 S Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 91.3 2020 • S
288.3 2019 • •
0.5 2018 • •
2008 •
2016 •
2022 G
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
4.9 2019 •
2022 G
2018 •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

LIBERIA Sub-Saharan Africa
157
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Liberia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
49.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D D G D D
D D D • D A
A S D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Liberia 94.0
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 4%
64.9 35.0

LIBERIA Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 65.8 2023 •G Population using the internet (%) 33.6 2021 • S
1.9 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
18.8 2019 • D
152.7 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 A
2021 G
0.0 2018 • •
2012 •
2017 •
2022 G
2020 •
5. Country Profiles
4.0 2019 •
2022 G
2020 •
0.0 2021 •
5.4 2018 • •

LIBYA Middle East and North Africa
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Libya
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• G S • D S
G G D • G D
G D S • D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Libya INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
D 25%
24.4 76

LIBYA Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) * NA NA • • Population using the internet (%) 17.8 2014 • •
2.2 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2007 • • Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) NA NA • •
2020 D
55.5 2019 • G
53.9 2019 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 99.9 2013 • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 37.0 2018 • G
Lower secondary completion rate (%) NA NA • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 50.9 2022 • G
0.1 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) NA NA • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) NA NA • •
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 90.0 2016 • •
Population with access to electricity (%) 69.7 2020 • G Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 63 2022 • •
• • Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) NA NA • •
5. Country Profiles
1.5 2019 •
0.0 2011 •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 6.1 2011 • •
35.3 2018 • •

LIECHTENSTEIN Western Europe
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Liechtenstein
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• • • S • •
A • S • • •
• • S • •

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Liechtenstein INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
68%
na
LIECHTENSTEIN Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) NA NA • • Population using the internet (%) 95.6 2021 • D
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) NA NA • • Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 3.6 2021 • A
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) NA NA • • Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) * 0.0 2020 • A
Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) NA NA • • Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
NA NA • •
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) NA NA • • Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA • •
NA NA • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) NA NA • • Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) NA NA • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) NA NA • • Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) NA NA • •
0.4 2018 • •
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) NA NA • • SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 25.0 2020 • A
• • Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 2022 • •
5. Country Profiles
NA NA •
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) A per 100,000 population)
0.0 2021 • •
Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 84.5 2023 • A
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) NA • •
NA
NA
NA NA • •

LITHUANIA OECD Countries
37
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Lithuania
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
76.8
20
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S S S A
S S S D S D
G D A S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Lithuania 57.4
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
88.1 12.0

LITHUANIA Performance by Indicator
29.8 2022 •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 26.3 2016 • G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 1.2 2020 • S
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 0.7 2018 • G Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 42.6 2020 • S
Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) 8.7 2020 • D Palma ratio 1.5 2019 • S
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 1.9 2021 • A Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 28.7 2019 •G
• A
New HIV infections (per 1,000 uninfected population) 0.1 2021 • A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%)
* 0.0 2020
11.2 2019 • A
95.4 2020• D CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 4.9 2021 • G
99.9 2020 • D
100.9 2020 • A
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 479.7 2018 • A Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 83.5 2022 • D
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 22.2 2018 • A Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 A
0.8 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 D
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 A
* 0.0 •
2021 •
4.7 2019 • D Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 86.8 2023 • A
(MtCO2/TWh)
Youth not in employment, education or training (NEET) Shifted profits of multinationals (US$ billion) NA NA • •
14.1 2021 • G Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 88.1 2022 • A
LUXEMBOURG OECD Countries
33
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Luxembourg
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
77.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S D A D
S S D D A D
S • S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Luxembourg 46.3
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
87.8 12.0

LUXEMBOURG Performance by Indicator
49.2 2022 •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • D Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 6.2 2020 • G
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 1.0 2018 • G Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 10.5 2020 • G
2021 D Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 5.2 2019 •A
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
9.5 2019 • A
Subjective well-being (average ladder score, worst 0–10 best) 7.2 2022 • A Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 57.2 2018 • S
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 9.2 2020 • A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 18.1 2021 • S
Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 19.2 2021 • G Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 1.0 2021 • •
•
98.7 2020 D CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 13.2 2021 • S
99.3 2020 • A
* 98.6 2020 • A
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 476.7 2018 • G Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 20.9 2018 • G Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
NA NA • • Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.7 2018 • •
2022 A
2022 D
2023 A
2021 D
7.9 2018 • •
2021 A
2019 G
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
11.9 2019 • G Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 82.0 2023 • D
(MtCO2/TWh)
98.8 2017 • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 10.0 2020 • A
public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 1.0 2022 • D
Youth not in employment, education or training (NEET) Shifted profits of multinationals (US$ billion) -64.4 2019 • G
7.8 2021 • A Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 87.8 2022 • A
MADAGASCAR Sub-Saharan Africa
156
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Madagascar
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
50.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D G S D
D G D • D A
D D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Madagascar 99.5
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 1%
53.7 46.0

MADAGASCAR Performance by Indicator
2.2 2018 • D
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 S
2021 G Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 67.4 2020 • D
2021 G Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
22.3 2019 • D
2021 D Satisfaction with public transport (%) 48.0 2022 • S
208.0 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
2018 •
2022 G
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
2.0 2019 •
2022 G
2018 •
0.0 2021 •
3.1 2018 • •

MALAWI Sub-Saharan Africa
135
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Malawi
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
56.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D S D S D
D D D A D S
S • D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Malawi 99.2
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 2%
64.8 35.0

MALAWI Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 91.5 2023 •G Population using the internet (%) 24.4 2021 • S
2.2 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 S
23.0 2019 • D
148.5 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
0.3 2018 • •
2012 •
2020 D
2022 D
2014 •
5. Country Profiles
0.8 2019 •
2022 D
2020 •
0.0 2021 •
42.7 2021 • S Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • S
2.6 2018 • •

MALAYSIA East and South Asia
78
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG
17 1
16 2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Malaysia
SCORE
SDG SDG
30 13 5
69.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D D D S D
D D S • S S
D S D S D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Malaysia 81.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 3%
76.6 23

MALAYSIA Performance by Indicator
3.1 2018 • D
40.5 2022 • •
2020 A
14.8 2019 • A
76.5 2019 • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) 74.7 2019 • G SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 2.4 2018 • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 87.0 2021 • S Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 72.8 2022 • A
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 S
2.1 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 G
2022 A
NA •
5. Country Profiles
1.6 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.1 2014 •
SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 62.8 2023 • S
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -1.9 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • A
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 6.9 2018• • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • S
88.4 2021 • A Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • S
33.6 2018 • •

MALDIVES East and South Asia
68
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Maldives
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
71.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S A D A
S • S A S •
D S G D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Maldives 97.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 22%
61.8 38

MALDIVES Performance by Indicator
2.7 2018 • A
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
6.8 2019 • A
NA • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 59.0 2017 • •
32.0 2019 • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) 79.6 2019 • A SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
0.3 2018 • •
2019 A
NA •
2017 •
2017 •
5. Country Profiles
2.5 2019 •
2022 D
NA •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

MALI Sub-Saharan Africa
131
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG 100 SDG
2
16
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
60
25
SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Mali
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
58.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D G S S
D D D • S D
S • S D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Mali 99.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 2%
59.1 41.0

MALI Performance by Indicator
2.3 2018 • S
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 10.6 2022 • S The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2017 • A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.2 2019 • G
2020 D
2021 D Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 41.9 2020 • S
39.4 2019 • D
167.1 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 A
2023 D
2021 A
0.0 2018 • •
NA •
NA •
2022 A
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
1.0 2019 •
2022 G
2017 •
0.0 2021 •
43.5 2021 • S Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 5.9 2021 • S
5.9 2018 • •

MALTA Eastern Europe and Central Asia
41
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Malta
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
75.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S S S S
S S S G S S
S D S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Malta 61.5
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 5%
80.3 20.0

MALTA Performance by Indicator
2.9 2018 • G
29.6 2022 • •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 4.9 2017 • • SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities
2020 A
13.3 2019 • A
2021 G Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 100.0 2020 • A
NA • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 59.0 2022 • S
20.9 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 99.8 2020 • A Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 98.9 2022 • A
1.1 2018 • •
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) * 15.5 2019 • • SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Population with access to electricity (%) 100.0 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 71 2022 • D
5. Country Profiles
1.2 2019 •
(MtCO2/TWh) S Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA NA • •
1.1 2015 • •
Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • •
0.2 2018 • D public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.3 2022 •G
61.5 2018 • •

MARSHALL ISLANDS Oceania
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Marshall
SCORE SDG
13 Islands
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D • G D •
D • D • • •
• D • • S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Marshall Islands INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 55%
35.5 37

MARSHALL ISLANDS Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 13.8 2021 • A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) NA NA• •
NA NA• •
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 483.0 2021 • G Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 35.7 2020 • D
NA NA • •
NA NA • •
5. Country Profiles
NA NA •
0.0 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 2.7 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
NA NA • •

MAURITANIA Sub-Saharan Africa
133
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Mauritania
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
57.2
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D S D D
D D S • D S
S S D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Mauritania 97.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 5%
58.9 41.0

MAURITANIA Performance by Indicator
2.3 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
50.4 2019 • D
128.4 2019 • •
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 20.3 2021 • G Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 0.0 2022 • D
0.1 2018 • •
2020 •
NA •
2022 S
2015 •
5. Country Profiles
2.0 2019 •
2022 G
2015 •
0.0 2021 •
9.6 2018 • •

MAURITIUS Sub-Saharan Africa
93
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Mauritius
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
68.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D D D S A
D S A • D •
D D D D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Mauritius 46.2
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 14%
77.3 23.0

MAURITIUS Performance by Indicator
2.8 2018 • A
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 G
14.2 2019 • D
2021 S Satisfaction with public transport (%) 66.0 2022 • D
34.7 2019 • •
Life expectancy at birth (years) 74.1 2019 • G SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 102.6 2021 • A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 69.2 2022 • S
22.1 2018 • •
2021 D
2020 G
2022 A
NA •
5. Country Profiles
1.5 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

MEXICO OECD Countries
80
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Mexico
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
69.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S D S S
S D D S S D
S D G G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Mexico 91.9
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
88.6 11.0

MEXICO Performance by Indicator
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 6.1 2020 • D The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of
31.4 2022 •
Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 1.7 2021 • D Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.2 2021 • D
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • D Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 1.2 2020 • D
2021 G
• D
17.6 2020
19.0 2019 • S
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 12.8 2019 • S Population with rent overburden (%) 4.1 2018 • A
Life expectancy at birth (years) 76.0 2019 • D Proportion of population with access to points of interest within a 15min walk (%) 34.7 2022 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 70.5 2018 • • SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
Universal health coverage (UHC) index of service coverage (worst 0–100 best) 74 2019 • S SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 2.4 2018 • •
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) NA NA • • Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.0 2021 • A
99.2 2020 • D
90.5 2020 • D
CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) 1,356.02021 • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 99.1 2020 • A
Carbon Pricing Score at EUR60/tCO2 (%, worst 0–100 best) 30.4 2018 • G
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 G
0.7 2018 • •
Anthropogenic wastewater that receives treatment (%) 25.2 2020 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 28.2 2021 • G
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 1,348.14 2018 • • Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 41.6 2021 • S
• Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 47 2022 • •
5. Country Profiles

Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 57.3 2020 • S Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 97.0 2020 • •
6.0 2019 • •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • G
36.9 2017 • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 7.6 2020 • G
NA NA • •
(per 100,000 population) 0.1 2018 • D Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 19.2 2020 • D
20.9 2021 • D
MICRONESIA, FEDERATED STATES OF Oceania
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG
17 1
16 2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Micronesia,
SCORE
SDG SDG
13 Fed. Sts. 5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• • D G D •
D • D • • •
D D D • D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Micronesia INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 46%
35.3 37

Performance
MICRONESIA, FEDERATED STATES OF by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 G
2021 A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) NA NA • •
10.7 2019 • A
2021 S Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA • •
254.0 2019 • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) NA NA • • Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 97.2 2018 • G
* 63.3 2023 • D Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
NA NA • •
5. Country Profiles
NA NA •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

MOLDOVA Eastern Europe and Central Asia
25
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Moldova
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
78.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S S S S
D S D A A G
G • S S A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Moldova 92.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 3%
82.8 17.0

MOLDOVA Performance by Indicator
2.0 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
15.8 2019 • S
2021 S Satisfaction with public transport (%) 68.0 2022 • A
68.9 2019 • •
2022 A
2022 D
2023 A
2021 A
0.0 2018 • •
2020 A
2019 A
2022 A
2012 •
5. Country Profiles
1.0 2019 •
2022 D
NA •
0.3 2011 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 1.9 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • S
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 5.5 2018• • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • S
65.4 2018 • •

MONACO Western Europe
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Monaco
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• • • • • A
A • S • A •
• • • • G

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Monaco INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
66%
na
MONACO Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 1.5 2021• A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) * 0.0 2020 • A
Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) 2.9 2021• A Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
11.8 2019 • A
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 0.0 2021• A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 100.0 2020 • A
NA NA • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) NA NA • • Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) NA NA • •
CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) NA NA • •
Lower secondary completion rate (%) NA NA • • Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 57.6 2022 • A
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) NA NA • • Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 100.0 2020 •A Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) NA NA • •
Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 100.0 2020 •A Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity threats embodied in imports
0.4 2018 • •
5. Country Profiles
NA •
(MtCO2/TWh)
NA • Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA NA • •
NA • • Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) NA
per 100,000 population)
0.0 2021 • •
Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 2.6 2020•G
NA
NA NA • •

MONGOLIA East and South Asia
106
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Mongolia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
64.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S A D S
D D S G D D
G • D D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Mongolia 92.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
84.0 16.0

MONGOLIA Performance by Indicator
2.1 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
Exports of hazardous pesticides (tonnes per million population) NA NA • • Gini coefficient 32.7 2018 •G
2020 A
38.6 2019 • D
214.7 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 A
0.0 2018 • •
2021 D
2020 D
2022 G
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
7.6 2019 •
2022 G
2018 •
0.0 2021 •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • S Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 7.8 2020 • S
41.4 2018 • •

MONTENEGRO Eastern Europe and Central Asia
67
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Montenegro
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
71.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S D A
D D S A D •
A S D S A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Montenegro 77.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 16%
78.1 22.0

MONTENEGRO Performance by Indicator
2.6 2018 • G
16.5 2022 • •
2020 D
19.6 2019 • S
115.2 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 A
5.3 2018 • •
2021 S
2020 G
2022 A
2013 •
5. Country Profiles
0.8 2019 •
2022 D
2018 •
0.0 2017 •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) NA NA• •
NA NA • •

MOROCCO Middle East and North Africa
70
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Morocco
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
70.9
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S S D A
S G A • D S
D D S D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Morocco 97.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
72.3 28

MOROCCO Performance by Indicator
2.4 2018 • •
23.6 2022 • •
2020 A
33.4 2019 • G
66.6 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 99.6 2021 • A Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 58.0 2022 • S
2022 A
2022 A
2023 D
2021 D
0.1 2018 • •
2021 G
2020 A
2022 G
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
1.6 2019 •
2022 D
NA •
0.0 2021 •
10.7 2018 • •

MOZAMBIQUE Sub-Saharan Africa
149
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Mozambique
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
52.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D S S S
D S G • D S
A S G G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Mozambique 98.9
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 3%
56.7 43.0

MOZAMBIQUE Performance by Indicator
2.2 2016 • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
20.5 2019 • D
228.4 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
2011 •
2017 •
2022 D
2015 •
5. Country Profiles
0.4 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.0 2021 •
5.2 2018 • •

MYANMAR East and South Asia
125
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Myanmar
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
60.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D A D S
D S S • D D
S G G G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Myanmar 99.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
72.0 28.0

MYANMAR Performance by Indicator
2.0 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
34.2 2019 • S
184.1 2019 • •
74.9 2015 • A Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 58.9 2020 • • Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 22.3 •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
2021 G
2016 •
2022 G
2016 •
5. Country Profiles
1.4 2019 •
2022 D
2015 •
0.0 2021 •
2.8 2018 • •

NAMIBIA Sub-Saharan Africa
109
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Namibia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
64.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
G D S S A D
D D S • G S
A D A G D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Namibia 89.7
Oceania 99.8
0
100
D 2%
55.8 44.0

NAMIBIA Performance by Indicator
Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 18.0 2020 • S Logistics Performance Index: Quality of trade and transport-related
2.8 2016 • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
25.8 2019 • D
2021 S Satisfaction with public transport (%) 42.0 2022 • G
142.5 2019 • •
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 A
1.3 2018 • •
2021 •
2016 •
2022 G
2016 •
5. Country Profiles
2.7 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.0 2021 •
28.9 2018 • •

NAURU Oceania
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Nauru
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D • G D A
S • G • S •
D G • • A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Nauru INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
52%
32.6 37

NAURU Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 61.0 2016 • G Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.0 2021 • G
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 17.7 2021 • S Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) * 0.0 2020 • A
11.8 2019 • A
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 193.0 2021 • G Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 52.8 2019 • D
NA NA • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) NA NA • • Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 39.1 2017 • G
NA NA • •
5. Country Profiles
1.9 2019 •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

NEPAL East and South Asia
99
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Nepal
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
66.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S D S A
D D S • D D
D • D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Nepal 98.2
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 3%
62.0 38.0

NEPAL Performance by Indicator
2.2 2018 • G
29.6 2022 • •
2020 A
95.7 2019 • G
177.9 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
0.0 2018 • •
2019 D
NA •
2022 S
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
2.1 2019 •
2022 D
2014 •
0.0 2021 •
54.0 2021 • S Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • G Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 5.7 2020 • S
13.6 2018 • •

NETHERLANDS OECD Countries
20
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Netherlands
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
79.4
20
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S D S S
S S S G S D
S D D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Netherlands 50.6
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
92.8 7.0

NETHERLANDS Performance by Indicator
68.9 2022 •
Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) 4.3 2020 • A Palma ratio 1.2 2020 •D
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 2.7 2021 • D Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 5.9 2020 •G
• A
New HIV infections (per 1,000 uninfected population) 0.0 2021 • A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%)
* 0.0 2020
11.4 2019 • A
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 4.0 2019 • D Population with rent overburden (%) 6.1 2019 • A
•
99.2 2020 D CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 8.1 2021 • S
99.7 2020 • A
* 99.8 2020 • D
2022 S
2022 A
2023 D
2021 D
6.0 2018 • •
2021 D
2020 D
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 8.5 2019 • D Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.9 2021 • A
• A
Shifted profits of multinationals (US$ billion) -110.9 2019 • G
NEW ZEALAND OECD Countries
27
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 New Zealand
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
78.4
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S D A S
D S S D S D
S D D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
New Zealand 65.7

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 4%
88.7 11.0

NEW ZEALAND Performance by Indicator
Poverty rate after taxes and transfers (%) 12.4 2020 • S Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 95.4 2021 • D
54.2 2022 •
Yield gap closure (% of potential yield) NA NA • • Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 35.0 2017 • A
SDG3 – Good Health and Well-Being Gini coefficient NA NA • •
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
5.6 2019 • A
12.2 2019 •
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 9.6 2019 • G Population with rent overburden (%) NA NA • •
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 4.4 2018 • • Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 31.6 2018 • G
Daily smokers (% of population aged 15 and over) 9.4 2021 • A Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) NA NA • •
•
89.6 2020 G CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 6.6 2021 • S
99.9 2020 • A
* 98.8 2020 • A
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 18.0 2018 • D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 60.4 2018 • G
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 A
2.6 2018 • •
2019 G
2020 G
2022 G
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 29.6 2019 • G Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.8 2021 • A
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 0.4 2021 • • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 196.4 2020 • G
98.8 2021 • D Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 13.7 2020 • A
0.2 2022 • G
0.2 2018 •
12.5 2021 • S
NICARAGUA Latin America and the Caribbean
104
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Nicaragua
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
64.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S • S D
D D S • S S
A D G G S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Nicaragua 95.7
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 1%
52.7 47.3

NICARAGUA Performance by Indicator
2.5 2016 • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
16.2 2019 • S
84.5 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 G
0.5 2018 • •
2021 D
2018 •
2022 D
2012 •
5. Country Profiles
1.3 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.0 2021 •
11.5 2018 • •

NIGER Sub-Saharan Africa
161
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG
17 1
16 2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Niger
SCORE
SDG SDG
30 13 5
48.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D G S D
D S D G S A
A • S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Niger 99.1
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 3%
65.3 35.0

NIGER Performance by Indicator
2.0 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
2021 D Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 70.4 2018 • •
106.1 2019 • G
213.3 2019 • •
36.9 2020 • G Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.0 2018 • •
0.0 2018 • •
2012 •
2019 S
2022 G
2012 •
5. Country Profiles
4.0 2019 •
2022 G
2012 •
0.0 2021 •
3.6 2018 • •

NIGERIA Sub-Saharan Africa
146
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Nigeria
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
54.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D • D S
D D S S D D
D S G D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Nigeria 98.5
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 2%
58.6 41.0

NIGERIA Performance by Indicator
2.6 2018 • D
39.0 2022 • •
Maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) •
1,047.0 2020 D
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) •
34.9 2021 D Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 49.0 2020 • D
Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) •
110.8 2021 D Annual mean concentration of particulate matter of less than
83.6 2019 • G
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) •
219.0 2021 D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 12.0 2020 • G
New HIV infections (per 1,000 uninfected population) •
0.3 2021 A Satisfaction with public transport (%) 59.0 2022 • S
diabetes, or chronic respiratory disease in adults aged 30–70 years (%) •
16.9 2019 A SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
165.2 2019 • •
Surviving infants who received 2 WHO-recommended vaccines (%) 56 2021 • S Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.1 2021 • D
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 G
0.0 2018 • •
2019 A
2022 G
2022 G
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
4.1 2019 •
2022 G
2017 •
0.0 2021 •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) * NA NA • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.3 2021 • G
5.8 2018 • •

NORTH MACEDONIA Eastern Europe and Central Asia
60
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 North
SCORE SDG
13 Macedonia SDG
5
30
72.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S D S A
D S D A D D
D • S S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

North Macedonia 90.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 3%
83.5 17.0

NORTH MACEDONIA Performance by Indicator
2.5 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
29.2 2019 • S
95.6 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 95.2 2020 • S Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
2022 D
2022 A
2023 A
2021 A
0.7 2018 • •
2019 A
2018 •
2022 A
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
1.4 2019 •
2022 G
2019 •
0.0 2021 •
25.3 2018 • •

NORWAY OECD Countries
7
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Norway
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
82.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D S D A D
S S S S S G
S D D S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Norway 58.6
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
93.5 7.0

NORWAY Performance by Indicator
52.4 2022 •
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 1.2 2018 • G Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 8.2 2020 • G
2021 A Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 4.4 2020 •A
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
6.5 2019 • A
7.9 2019 •
ambient air pollution (per 100,000 population) • Satisfaction with public transport (%) 61.0 2022 • S
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 18.0 2020 • D Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 12.2 2021 • G
99.8 2020 • D
100.3 2020 • A
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
3.8 2018 • •
2021 D
2020 A
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
0.3 2019 • D Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 95.2 2023 • A
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 62.4 2019 • A Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.8 2021 • D
99.5 2021 • D Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 15.7 2020 • A
public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.9 2022 • D
• A
OMAN Middle East and North Africa
90
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG 100 SDG
2
16
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
60
25
SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Oman
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
68.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S S D S
S A S • S A
D D D • A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Oman 86.2
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 15%
66.1 34

OMAN Performance by Indicator
3.2 2018 • A
29.6 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2017 • S Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.4 2020 • D
2020 D
45.1 2019 • G
104.0 2019 • •
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 92.2 2020 • S Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) NA NA • •
0.7 2018 • •
5. Country Profiles
1.9 2019 •
0.2 2017 • •
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) 2.5 2023 • A
81.1 2018 • •

PAKISTAN East and South Asia
128
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Pakistan
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
59.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D D D D S
D D D A D S
S S D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Pakistan 99.3
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 5%
71.1 29

PAKISTAN Performance by Indicator
2.2 2018 • G
36.5 2022 • •
2020 S
57.7 2019 • D
192.1 2019 • •
Literacy rate (% of population aged 15 to 24) 72.7 2019 • G Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 30.1 2018 • A
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 A
0.0 2018 • •
2021 D
2016 •
2022 D
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
1.7 2019 •
2022 G
2018 •
0.0 2021 •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) * NA NA • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.3 2021 • G
3.0 2018 • •

PALAU Oceania
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Palau
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• • • S D A
S • A • A •
• D D • S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Palau INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
54%
48.3 37

PALAU Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 8.5 2021 • A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) NA NA• •
11.5 2019 • A
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 51.0 2021 • A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 94.3 2020 • A
NA NA • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 97.2 2020 • G Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) NA NA • •
* 63.8 2023 • D Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
NA NA • •
5. Country Profiles
NA NA •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

PANAMA Latin America and the Caribbean
97
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Panama
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
67.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S S S S S S
D D S D A S
G D D D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Panama 68.3
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
70.5 29.5

PANAMA Performance by Indicator
3.1 2018 • A
* 3.4 2019 • •
2020 D
10.5 2019 • A
27.3 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 S
2023 G
2021 D
1.4 2018 • •
2021 G
2019 A
2022 S
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
1.2 2019 •
2022 G
2016 •
0.0 2019 •
66.3 2018 • •

PAPUA NEW GUINEA Oceania
148
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Papua New
SCORE SDG
13 Guinea SDG
5
30
53.6
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D G D • D D
D D D • D D
D D D D D

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Papua New Guinea 97.3
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 14%
46.0 37.0

PAPUA NEW GUINEA Performance by Indicator
2.0 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
11.0 2019 • A
189.6 2019 • •
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 45.3 2020 • D Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.1 2021 • S
0.0 2018 • •
2010 •
2016 •
NA •
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
2.0 2019 •
2022 D
NA •
0.0 2021 •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • • Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 3.1 2020 • •
13.2 2018 • •

PARAGUAY Latin America and the Caribbean
88
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Paraguay
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
68.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S D S A
D G S S S D
D • D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Paraguay 95.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
75.8 24.2

PARAGUAY Performance by Indicator
2.5 2018 • S
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2017 • A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.1 2019 • D
2020 A
10.7 2019 • A
55.6 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
0.4 2018 • •
2021 S
2020 D
2022 S
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
0.1 2019 •
2022 D
2016 •
0.0 2021 •
15.8 2018 • •

PERU Latin America and the Caribbean
65
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Peru
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
71.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S S S S
S S S G S S
S S D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Peru 95.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
73.3 26.7

PERU Performance by Indicator
2.3 2018 • G
25.4 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2017 • G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.2 2020 • D
2020 D
23.3 2019 • S
37.9 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
0.7 2018 • •
2020 S
2020 A
2022 D
2020 •
5. Country Profiles
0.9 2019 •
2022 D
2015 •
0.0 2021 •
14.0 2018 • •

PHILIPPINES East and South Asia
98
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Philippines
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
67.1
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S S S D D A
D S S S D S
D S D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Philippines 97.0
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
83.4 17

PHILIPPINES Performance by Indicator
2.7 2018 • A
25.7 2022 • •
2020 A
16.9 2019 • A
2021 G Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 82.3 2020 • S
202.8 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 91.2 2021 • G Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 46.6 2022 • S
2022 S
2022 S
2023 G
2021 S
0.1 2018 • •
2019 A
2019 S
2021 A
2017 •
5. Country Profiles
1.3 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.0 2021 •
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • D Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 6.0 2020 • S
10.8 2018 • •

POLAND OECD Countries
9
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Poland
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
81.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S S A
S S A A D D
D S S D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Poland 84.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
91.6 8.0

POLAND Performance by Indicator
33.1 2022 •
2020 A Palma ratio 1.0 2018 • •
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
19.7 2019 • S
Age-standardized death rate attributable to household air pollution and Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 96.6 2020 • D
Traffic deaths (per 100,000 population) 9.4 2019 • D Population with rent overburden (%) 7.0 2019 • G
Universal health coverage (UHC) index of service coverage (worst 0–100 best) 74 2019 • S SO2 emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 4.7 2018 • •
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 26.7 2020 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 3.4 2021 • D
95.9 2020• D CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 8.6 2021 • G
99.8 2020 • A
* 97.2 2020 • A
PISA score (worst 0–600 best) 513.0 2018 • A Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 87.3 2022 • A
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 13.8 2018 • A Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 51.0 2018 • G
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 D
1.0 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 D
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 G
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
0.5 2022 • A
0.1 2018 • NA NA •
13.8 2021 • S
PORTUGAL OECD Countries
18
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Portugal
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
80.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S A A
S S S S S D
S D G S S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Portugal 71.9
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 0%
89.3 11.0

PORTUGAL Performance by Indicator
43.3 2022 •
Sustainable Nitrogen Management Index (best 0–1.41 worst) 1.1 2018 • D Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 35.3 2020 • A
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
7.5 2019 • A
10.0 2019 •
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 4.2 2020 • S Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 25.6 2018 • G
Gap in self-reported health status by income (percentage points) 26.4 2020 • G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 5.3 2021 • D
100.0 2020 • A
99.3 2020 • A
2022 D
2022 D
2023 G
2021 D
4.0 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 D
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

2022 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 28.2 2019 • S Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.4 2021 • G
0.2 2022 • D
0.2 2018 • NA NA •
14.0 2021 • S
QATAR Middle East and North Africa
100
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Qatar
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
66.2
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S S S S
S A S • S A
D S G G S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Qatar 55.2
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 16%
70.7 29

QATAR Performance by Indicator
3.4 2018 • D
47.1 2022 • •
2020 D
93.8 2019 • D
90.8 2019 • •
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 62.4 2022 • S Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 60.0 2022 • D
1.0 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) 10,937.6 2018 • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.3 2021 • D
5. Country Profiles
2.0 2019 •
0.4 2021 • •
Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+) 0.1 2023 • A
0.5 2018 • A public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.5 2022 •A
255.0 2018 • •

ROMANIA Eastern Europe and Central Asia
35
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Romania
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
77.5
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A S S D S A
D S S S S D
G S D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Romania 81.7
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
84.3 16.0

ROMANIA Performance by Indicator
2.9 2018 • A
31.3 2022 • •
2020 A
14.2 2019 • S
67.8 2019 • •
Births attended by skilled health personnel (%) 93.1 2019 • D Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 13.2 2018 • D
Lower secondary completion rate (%) 86.9 2020 • G Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 64.4 2022 • S
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
0.5 2018 • •
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 7.8 2020 • D
Population with access to electricity (%) 100.0 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 67 2022 • A
5. Country Profiles
1.2 2019 •
0.5 2013 • •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 3.3 2021• •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 4.3 2018• •
Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • S
69.1 2021 • S Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • D
0.1 2018 • D public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.1 2022 •D
30.6 2018 • •

RUSSIAN FEDERATION Eastern Europe and Central Asia
49
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Russian
SCORE SDG
13 Federation SDG
5
30
73.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S A D S
D D S S S D
G D D D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Russian Federation 87.2
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 4%
84.1 16.0

RUSSIAN FEDERATION Performance by Indicator
2.8 2018 • A
52.0 2022 • •
2020 D
15.6 2019 • S
67.1 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 A
0.9 2018 • •
SDG7 – Affordable and Clean Energy Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 14.1 2020 • D
Population with access to electricity (%) 100.0 2020 • A Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city/area where they live (%) 59 2022 • S
5. Country Profiles
1.7 2019 •
3.5 2021 • •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 1.0 2021• •
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 5.5 2018• •
11.8 2018 • •

RWANDA Sub-Saharan Africa
126
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Rwanda
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
60.2
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D D S D
S G S • D D
S • D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Rwanda 98.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
70.6 29.0

RWANDA Performance by Indicator
2.8 2018 • A
* 0.0 2022 • •
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.1 2017 • D Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.8 2019 • S
2020 S
42.3 2019 • G
165.8 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
0.3 2018 • •
2020 D
NA •
2019 •
2020 •
5. Country Profiles
1.0 2019 •
2022 G
2014 •
0.0 2021 •
5.9 2018 • •

SAMOA Oceania
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Samoa
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D D D D S
D • S • D •
D G G A S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Samoa INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 29%
62.4 37

SAMOA Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
10.8 2019 • A
2021 A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 86.8 2020 • G
145.5 2019 • •
27.0 2019 • G Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
0.4 2018 • •
2018 •
2017 •
NA •
2020 •
5. Country Profiles
2.2 2019 •
NA •
2020 •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

SAN MARINO Western Europe
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 San Marino
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• • • • A •
A • A • A •
• • • • A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
San Marino INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
64%
na
SAN MARINO Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
Neonatal mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 0.8 2021 • A Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) * 0.0 2020 • A
13.3 2019 • A
Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 population) 0.0 2021 • A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA • •
NA NA • •
CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) NA NA • •
Ratio of female-to-male mean years of education received (%) 101.9 2021 • • SDG15 – Life on Land
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) NA NA • • Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA • •
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 100.0 2020 •A Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) NA NA • •
Population using at least basic sanitation services (%) 100.0 2020 •A Terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity threats embodied in imports
59.1 2018 • •
5. Country Profiles
NA •
(MtCO2/TWh)
NA • Children involved in child labor (% of population aged 5 to 14) NA NA • •
NA • • Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) NA
per 100,000 population)
0.0 2021 • •
Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
NA
NA NA • •

SÃO TOMÉ AND PRÍNCIPE Sub-Saharan Africa
119
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 São Tomé
SCORE SDG
13 and Príncipe SDG
5
30
62.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D D D • D D
S • S • D •
A D S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Sao Tome Principe 99.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 22%
54.8 45.0

SÃO TOMÉ AND PRÍNCIPE Performance by Indicator
2.3 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 D
29.0 2019 • G
225.4 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 94.0 2017 • • Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 92.3 2022 • A
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) 54.2 2022 • D Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 86.3 2022 • A
0.1 2018 • •
2011 •
2018 •
NA •
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
1.2 2019 •
2022 D
2019 •
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

SAUDI ARABIA Middle East and North Africa
94
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Saudi Arabia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
67.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S D D A
S S S • S S
S D G G A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Saudi Arabia 82.3
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 11%
80.8 19

SAUDI ARABIA Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP, %) * 0.0 2023 •A Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 61.1 2022 • •
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) * 0.0 2023 •A Population using the internet (%) 100.0 2021 • A
3.1 2018 • D
50.6 2022 • •
2020 D
88.3 2019 • D
91.1 2019 • •
1.8 2018 • •
2019 •
2019 •
2022 •
2018 •
5. Country Profiles
1.5 2019 •
2022 G
NA •
0.1 2016 •
74.3 2021 • A Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) NA NA • •
0.2 2018 • A public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.7 2022 •A
83.2 2018 • •

SENEGAL Sub-Saharan Africa
121
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Senegal
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
61.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D S D D S
D S S • D S
D S D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Senegal 98.4
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
72.2 28.0

SENEGAL Performance by Indicator
2.2 2018 • G
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 S
41.6 2019 • D
146.4 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 D
2021 D
0.1 2018 • •
NA •
2017 •
2022 S
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
1.7 2019 •
2022 G
2016 •
0.0 2021 •
9.0 2018 • •

SERBIA Eastern Europe and Central Asia
36
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG
17 1
16 2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Serbia
SCORE
SDG SDG
30 13 5
77.3
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
D S S D S A
S S S A S S
D • S D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Serbia 86.6
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
80.8 19.0

SERBIA Performance by Indicator
2.6 2018 • G
29.5 2022 • •
2020 A
23.8 2019 • S
2021 A Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 97.7 2020 • S
71.5 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 A
2021 A
3.8 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 D
2022 A
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
1.7 2019 •
2022 G
2019 •
0.3 2021 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 2.6 2021• • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • A
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • A Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 8.9 2020 •D
29.3 2018 • •

SEYCHELLES Sub-Saharan Africa
NA
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Seychelles
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
NA
20 SDG
SDG
12 6
10
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S S D A
S • A • S •
D D S • A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Seychelles INSUFFICIENT DATA 0.0

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 35%
66.0 34.0

SEYCHELLES Performance by Indicator
NA NA • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 A
19.8 2019 • D
2021 G Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA • •
43.1 2019 • •
Net primary enrollment rate (%) 98.3 2021 • D Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 71.9 2022 • A
NA NA• • Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA • •
Ratio of female-to-male labor force participation rate (%) NA NA • • Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 52.8 2022 • A
Seats held by women in national parliament (%) 22.9 2021 • G Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 98.9 2022 • A
0.5 2018 • •
Scarce water consumption embodied in imports (m3 H2O eq/capita) NA NA • • Homicides (per 100,000 population) 4.7 2021 • A
5. Country Profiles
0.8 2019 •
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 70 2022 • A
0.0 2021 •
NA NA • •

SIERRA LEONE Sub-Saharan Africa
137
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Sierra Leone
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
55.7
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
S D D D D D
D S D • G A
S D D D A

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
OECD members 73.8

Sierra Leone 99.3
Oceania 99.8
0
100
S 0%
59.2 41.0

SIERRA LEONE Performance by Indicator
Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP, %) 42.1 2023 • S Population using the internet (%) 18.0 2020 • D
1.8 2018 • •
* 0.0 2022 • •
2020 S
22.9 2019 • G
239.0 2019 • •
2022 D
2022 D
2023 A
2021 G
0.0 2018 • •
2020 D
2018 •
2022 G
2019 •
5. Country Profiles
5.7 2019 •
2022 D
2017 •
0.0 2021 •
3.3 2018 • •

SINGAPORE East and South Asia
64
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Singapore
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
71.8
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
• D S S S A
S S S • S A
A D G D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Singapore 35.8
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 10%
86.6 13

SINGAPORE Performance by Indicator
4.1 2018 • A
79.1 2022 • •
Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 6.1 2016 • D Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 4.1 2021 • A
Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) NA NA • • Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 1.9 2019 • D
2020 A
19.0 2019 • S
23.4 2019 • •
Population using at least basic drinking water services (%) 100.0 2020 • A Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 1.1 2021 • G
12.6 2018 • •
2021 A
2020 A
2022 A
2020 •
5. Country Profiles
0.7 2019 •
2022 D
NA •
0.7 2016 •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) 3.2 2021 • • Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.6 2021 • G
Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population) 3.4 2018 • • Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.9 2021 • A
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • D Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 6.0 2021 • S
296.2 2018 • •

SLOVAK REPUBLIC OECD Countries
23
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG
16
100 SDG
2
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
25
60 SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Slovak
SCORE SDG
13 Republic SDG
5
30
79.1
20
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S S S
S S S S S S
D • A D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Slovak Republic 72.5

OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 1%
89.1 11.0

SLOVAK REPUBLIC Performance by Indicator
24.8 2022 •
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
16.9 2019 • S
Age-standardized death rate attributable to household air pollution and Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 97.2 2018 • •
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19) 26.9 2019 • G SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production
Gap in life expectancy at birth among regions (years) 2.2 2020 • A Nitrogen emissions embodied in imports (kg/capita) 27.5 2018 • A
87.1 2020 • A CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO2/capita) 6.5 2021 • G
97.1 2020 • A
77.0 2020 • G
Variation in science performance explained by socio-economic status (%) 18.5 2018 • G Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) NA NA • •
Underachievers in science (% of 15-year-olds) 29.3 2018 • D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA • •
2022 A
2022 A
2023 A
2021 A
1.4 2018 • •
2021 D
2020 D
2022 A
5. Country Profiles

Population using safely managed sanitation services (%) 81.9 2020 • G Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 •
2020 •
2022 D
* 0.0 •
2021 •
(MtCO2/TWh)
Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%) 17.6 2019 • S Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.5 2021 • •
Adjusted GDP growth (%) -1.2 2021 • • Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 192.7 2020 • G
Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best) 0.7 2021 • • For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional
0.2 2022 • D
0.3 2018 • NA NA •
14.3 2021 • A
SLOVENIA OECD Countries
13
100
STATUS OF SDG SDG

COUNTRY SDG 100 SDG
2
16
RANKING 80 75
/166 70
SDG
15 50
SDG
3
60
25
SDG
SDG
14 4
50
COUNTRY 40 Slovenia
SCORE SDG
13
SDG
5
30
81.0
20 SDG
SDG
Worsening 12 6
10
Limited progress
SDG
SDG
11 7
SDG SDG
10 SDG
8
A D S S S A
S S S S S D
D S D D S

0 0 (worst) to 100 (best) 100
Slovenia 61.3
OECD members 73.8
Oceania 99.8
0
100
A 2%
92.5 7.0

SLOVENIA Performance by Indicator
26.4 2022 •
Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 6.9 2021 • A Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 7.1 2020 • S
2021 A
• A
* 0.0 2020
15.4 2019 • A
18.8 2019 •
100.0 2020 • A
94.1 2020 • D
Tertiary educational attainment (% of population aged 25 to 34) 48.0 2021 •

2023 Sustainable Development Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2023 Sustainable Development Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2023 Sustainable Development Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUSTAINABLE

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data

Implementing the SDG Stimulus. Sustainable Development Report 2023

ISBN: 978-0-903200-12-7 (paperback)

Published by Dublin University Press Dublin, Ireland, 2023

Design: Pica Publishing, New York, London, Paris

Printed by Ingenidoc in Rouen, France.

An open access online version of this work is published at https://doi.org/10.25546/102924 under

By Jeffrey D. Sachs, Guillaume Lafortune, Grayson Fuller

Published by Dublin University Press

Please cite this report as:

Design, layout and copyediting by Pica Publishing Ltd – www.pica-publishing.com

Part 1. How to Achieve the SDGs: The SDSN Framework 1

Part 2. The SDG Index and Dashboards 23

Part 3. Government Efforts and Commitments

Part 4. Lessons Learned and Next Steps 77

Annex. Methods Summary and Data Tables 92

Part 5. Country Profiles 122

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus iii

iv Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus v

vi Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus vii

viii Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

MRIO Multi-regional input-output

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus ix

How to Achieve the SDGs:

Members of the SDSN Leadership Council

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus 1

Overview 2. Enhancement of relief for countries facing debt

2 Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

3. Zero-carbon energy systems: the transition by 2050

3. Sachs, J.D., Schmidt-Traub, G., Mazzucato, M. et al. Six Transformations

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus 3

Introduction The UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network

We emphasize that achieving the SDGs rests on five pillars

4 Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

World Average Pre-pandemic trend Trend needed to achieve the SDGs

Ocean goods and services (SDG 14 and the High Seas

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus 5

Projected gap by 2030

Projected gap by 2030

6 Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

50 Current policies scenario:

Area of figure 4.2

Source: UNEP, Emissions Gap Report 2022

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus 7

In her 2022 report on the SDGs, E. Tendayi Achiume –

11. Achiume, T. E. (2022). 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,

8 Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus 9

10 Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus 11

12 Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus

Sustainable Development Report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus 13

Population Investment GDP

LIC 8.0% 0.4% 0.5%

LMIC 43.2% 11.9% 10.7%

UMIC 32.7% 37.4% 28.5%

HIC 16.1% 50.3% 60.3%

Part 1. How to Achieve the SDGs: The SDSN Framework 1

Part 2. The SDG Index and Dashboards 23

Part 4. Lessons Learned and Next Steps 77

Annex. Methods Summary and Data Tables 92

Part 5. Country Profiles 122