IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i6p818-d1410661.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bridging Gaps towards the 2030 Agenda: A Data-Driven Comparative Analysis of Government and Public Engagement in China towards Achieving Sustainable Development Goals

Author

Listed:
  • Hongpeng Fu

    (Khoury College of Computer Science, Northeastern University, Seattle, WA 98122, USA)

  • Lingbo Fu

    (School of Cultural Industries Management, Communication University of China, Beijing 100024, China)

  • Lóránt Dénes Dávid

    (Department of Tourism and Hospitality, Faculty of Economics and Business, John von Neumann University, 6000 Kecskemét, Hungary
    Institute of Rural Development and Sustainable Economy, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100 Godollo, Hungary
    Savaria Department of Business Economics, Faculty of Social Sciences, Savaria University Centre, Eötvös Loránd University, 9700 Szombathely, Hungary)

  • Qikang Zhong

    (School of Architecture and Art, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China)

  • Kai Zhu

    (Faculty of Resources and Environmental Science, Hubei University, Wuhan 430062, China)

Abstract

The United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide a pivotal framework to guide government policies and mobilize public engagement for sustainability, although further exploration is still needed to analyze the attention given to the SDGs by these stakeholders using multi-source data. To comparatively analyze government and public engagement in the SDGs, based on a case study in China, this study employed a multi-source data and content analysis to assess the perceived importance and performance of the two stakeholders. Then, this study performed an importance–performance analysis (IPA) to assess the SDGs’ priority for further improvement. The results highlight the government’s emphasis on SDG 7, SDG 2, and SDG 9, contrasting with public attention predominantly on SDG 8, SDG 9, and SDG 4. Regarding the performance of the SDGs in China, the greatest achievements have been exhibited for SDG 4 and SDG 1, while SDG 10, SDG 15, and SDG 17 have shown the least progress. Concerning the individual indicators, 12 out of 98 have attained 100% completion, while 19 out of 98 remain below the 50% threshold. According to the IPA results, China should concentrate on SDG 10 and SDG 15 and improve SDGs 6, 7, 14, 16, and 17 as a relatively low priority. The stakeholder analysis indicated that these SDGs are neglected zones by both the public and government. This research innovatively assessed the priorities of SDGs and could strengthen the cooperation between the government and the public to drive the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals more effectively. This study could contribute to guiding policy directions, inform strategies for public engagement, and enhance the comprehension of sustainable development in China. The framework could serve as a valuable reference for stakeholder engagement in the SDGs in other countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Hongpeng Fu & Lingbo Fu & Lóránt Dénes Dávid & Qikang Zhong & Kai Zhu, 2024. "Bridging Gaps towards the 2030 Agenda: A Data-Driven Comparative Analysis of Government and Public Engagement in China towards Achieving Sustainable Development Goals," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-25, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:818-:d:1410661
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/6/818/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/6/818/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:818-:d:1410661. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.