Despite growing efforts toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the systemic impacts of cross-sectoral policy portfolios on China’s overall sustainability—spanning the economic, social, and environmental dimensions—remain insufficiently explored. Meanwhile, relying on a single aggregated method for overall SDG assessment may limit the reliability and robustness of evaluation results. To address this, we develop an integrated policy assessment framework that couples the iSDG-China model with an ensemble of multi-attribute decision-making (MADM) methods. Within this framework, the long-term dynamic impacts of policy portfolios on the 17 SDGs are simulated, and their overall sustainability performance is ranked to identify robust top- and bottom-performing portfolios that show consistent results across evaluation methods. Results show that policy performance varies substantially across SDGs: portfolios that strongly promote one goal may hinder others. The top-ranked robust portfolios consistently exhibit synergies among education access, universal health coverage, renewable energy expansion, land conservation, and water-use efficiency, whereas single-policy portfolios perform poorly. Comparative analyses further reveal the distributional characteristics of robust portfolios, differences between short- and long-term outcomes, and methodological consistency patterns across MADM methods. We conclude that multi-objective, cross-sectoral policy portfolios offer the most resilient pathways toward achieving overall sustainability. The proposed iSDG-MADM integrated framework enhances the reliability of sustainability assessments and provides robust and general policy recommendations.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Ning Yu
Juan Liu
International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems
Sichuan University
South China University of Technology
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Yu et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69a286490a974eb0d3c012ec — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44196-026-01240-z