Countries have differing priorities in the process of achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Examining how these priorities are reflected in national strategies facilitates the interpretation of future actions. The literature on SDGs achievement in Türkiye has largely been limited to municipalities, universities, and sectoral institutions. No study addresses the entire central administration, which is at the heart of national policy‐making. Aiming to address this gap, this study conducts a content analysis of the 2024–2028 strategic plans of 84 central administrations in Türkiye and evaluates the intended contribution, sustainability contexts, and performance measurement tools through a cherry‐picking approach. Across these forward‐looking plans, intended contribution is most prevalent for SDG 16 (98% of plans) and lowest for the ecological SDGs 6, 13, 14, and 15 (5%–29%), reflecting planned priorities rather than achieved outcomes. Central governments address sustainability as an institutional structure rather than a broad vision and measure success primarily through output‐level rather than outcome or impact indicators. The results indicate that the selective approach is also valid in the Turkish central government and that the biosphere aspect of sustainability is neglected. The study suggests making a roadmap for climate action mandatory in strategic plans, redesigning performance indicators based on impact, and establishing a supra‐institutional coordination mechanism.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Göçoğlu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: