ABSTRACT This study critically examines the global landscape of policy interventions for sustainable development by pursuing three interrelated objectives: (1) to map the intellectual terrain and thematic evolution of sustainability‐oriented policy research; (2) to analyze the governance and institutional factors that shape the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); and (3) to propose a coherent research agenda and conceptual framework for integrated, adaptive, and context‐sensitive policy design. Using a Bibliometric–Systematic Literature Review (B‐SLR), the study synthesizes evidence from 1862 peer‐reviewed articles published between 2016 and 2024, identified through a structured, two‐track search strategy and PRISMA‐guided screening, and interpreted through Governance Theory, Institutional Theory, Systems Thinking, and Circular Economy perspectives. The findings map how SDG‐aligned policy interventions are framed within holistic governance models, robust institutional arrangements, and collaborative stakeholder platforms, including public–private partnerships. However, some gaps remain in adaptive governance, institutional innovation, and cross‐sectoral policy coherence, particularly in underrepresented contexts. To address these challenges, the study develops an Integrated Theoretical Framework that links governance mechanisms, institutional capacity, and systems‐based design to guide transformative policy action. The research presents a future research agenda targeting the following four domains: environmental–economic policy integration, public health and social equity, resource governance, and institutional coordination for SDG implementation. By advancing theoretical synthesis and highlighting practical implications for policymakers, development practitioners, and managers, the study provides a conceptual roadmap for designing inclusive, responsive, and sustainable policy interventions in a complex global environment. Limitations relate to database and language scope, which should be considered when interpreting coverage and generalizability.
Shabbir et al. (Sun,) studied this question.