Analysis investigates sustainable development outcomes in China, highlighting systemic trends and regional disparities.
The successful attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) necessitates robust monitoring frameworks capable of tracking progress toward tangible outcomes while capturing dynamic sustainability trajectories. However, existing SDG evaluation methods suffer from three critical limitations: (1) misalignment between global targets and national priorities, which undermines contextual relevance; (2) fragmented assessments that neglect holistic integration of social, economic, and ecological dimensions, thereby obscuring systemic interdependencies; and (3) insufficient longitudinal analysis, which restricts insights into temporal patterns of sustainable development and hinders adaptive policymaking. To address these gaps, we employed China’s 31 provinces as a case study and constructed an SDG indicator framework comprising 178 metrics—harmonizing global SDG benchmarks with China’s national development priorities. Using official statistics and open-source data spanning 2006–2021, we evaluate longitudinal SDG scores for all 17 goals (SDGs 1–17). Additionally, we developed a composite SDG index that considers the coupling coordination degree of the social–economic–ecological system and evaluated the index value under different economic region settings. Finally, we developed a two-threshold model to analyze the dynamic evolution of SDG conditions, incorporating temporal sustainability (long-term development resilience) and action urgency (short-term policy intervention needs) as dual evaluation dimensions. This model was applied to conduct a longitudinal analysis (2006–2021) across all 31 Chinese provinces, enabling a granular assessment of regional SDG trajectories while capturing both systemic trends and acute challenges over time. The results indicate that China’s social SDG performance improved substantially over the 2006–2021 period, achieving a cumulative increase of 126.53%, whereas progress in ecological SDGs was comparatively modest, with a cumulative growth of only 23.93%. Over the same period, the average composite SDG score across China’s 31 provinces increased markedly from 0.502 to 0.714, reflecting a strengthened systemic alignment between regional development trajectories and national sustainability objectives. Further analysis shows that all provinces attained a status of “temporal sustainability with low action urgency” throughout the study period, highlighting China’s overall progress in sustainable development. Nevertheless, pronounced regional disparities persist: eastern provinces developed earlier and have consistently maintained leading positions; central and northeastern regions exhibit broadly comparable development levels; and western regions, despite severe early-stage lagging, have demonstrated accelerated growth in later years. Our study holds substantial significance by integrating multi-dimensional indicators—spanning ecological, economic, and social dimensions—to deliver a holistic, longitudinal perspective on sustainable development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: