IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v18y2026i2p948-d1842521.html

Sustainable Development Agenda: Historical Evolution, Goal Progression, and Future Prospects

Author

Listed:
  • Chaofeng Shao

    (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai University, 38 Tongyan Road, Jinnan District, Tianjin 300350, China)

  • Sihan Chen

    (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai University, 38 Tongyan Road, Jinnan District, Tianjin 300350, China)

  • Xuesong Zhan

    (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai University, 38 Tongyan Road, Jinnan District, Tianjin 300350, China)

Abstract

The concept of sustainable development has emerged as a global consensus, forged in response to environmental constraints and critical reflection on conventional growth-oriented paradigms. It now serves as the overarching framework for addressing climate, ecological, and socio-economic crises. In the period after the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2016, there was an observable trend of increased integration of these objectives into the strategic frameworks of national and subnational entities. However, global assessments have indicated a divergence between the progress achieved and the trajectory delineated by the SDGs. The Earth system is demonstrating signs of decreased resilience, with widening inequalities and the emergence of multiple crises, thereby hindering the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development . As the 2030 deadline approaches, a fundamental question arises for global development governance: what should be the future of the SDGs beyond 2030? While insufficient progress has prompted debates over the adequacy of the SDG framework, fundamentally revising or replacing the SDGs would risk undermining a hard-won international consensus forged through decades of negotiation and institutional investment. Based on a comprehensive review of the historical evolution of the sustainable development concept, this study argues that the SDGs represent a rare and fragile achievement in global governance. While insufficient progress has sparked debates about their effectiveness, fundamentally revising or replacing the SDGs would jeopardize the hard-won international consensus forged through decades of negotiations and institutional investments. This study further analyzes the latest progress on the SDGs and identifies emerging risks, aiming to explore how to accelerate and optimize sustainable development pathways within the existing SDG framework rather than propose a new global goal system. Based on both global experience and practice in China, four interconnected strategic priorities—namely, economic reform, social equity, environmental justice, and technology sharing—are proposed as a comprehensive framework to accelerate SDG implementation and guide the transformation of development pathways towards a more just, low-carbon, and resilient future.

Suggested Citation

  • Chaofeng Shao & Sihan Chen & Xuesong Zhan, 2026. "Sustainable Development Agenda: Historical Evolution, Goal Progression, and Future Prospects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-27, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:2:p:948-:d:1842521
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/2/948/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/2/948/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:2:p:948-:d:1842521. 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.