Authors : Chikezie Bethel Uchechukwu; Ogbonnia Kingsley Chibuzo

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 7 - July

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/ycy3a8zs

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/msy5tewh

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jul1523

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) form an indivisible agenda, yet policy design and implementation remain dominated by sector-specific programmes that can generate unrecognized spillovers, delayed effects and burden shifting. This study develops a dynamic systems-of-systems (SoS) decision-support framework that represents all 17 SDGs as operationally distinct but interdependent constituent systems. The framework integrates a signed and directed interaction matrix, causal-loop analysis, stock-flow system dynamics, seven cross-sector policy levers, constrained multi-objective optimization and Monte Carlo uncertainty analysis. A transparent proof-of-concept application uses normalized goal-level states and literature-informed interaction directions to compare business-as-usual, siloed growth, green-transition, humandevelopment and optimized SoS portfolios over 2025-2035. The optimized portfolio increases the mean normalized SDG score from 0.601 under business-as-usual to 0.710 by 2030 and from 0.693 to 0.835 by 2035. It also raises the weakest-goal score from 0.452 to 0.631 by 2030 and from 0.512 to 0.753 by 2035. In contrast, the siloed-growth scenario improves the aggregate score but depresses the weakest-goal and environmental outcomes, demonstrating that aggregate progress can conceal systemic deterioration. Network out-strength identifies SDGs 16, 4, 17, 13 and 5 as high-leverage goals. Across 1,000 uncertain parameter realizations, the optimized portfolio retains a narrow 2035 mean-score interval of 0.829-0.840. The numerical results are illustrative rather than forecasts, but they demonstrate how systems engineering can convert qualitative SDG interlinkage knowledge into an auditable, adaptive and optimization-ready policy architecture.

Keywords : Sustainable Development Goals; Systems-of-Systems; Systems Engineering; System Dynamics; Causal-Loop Diagram; Policy Coherence; Multi-Objective Optimization; Uncertainty Analysis; Leverage Points.

References :

1. United Nations General Assembly, Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, A/RES/70/1, New York, 2015.
2. United Nations Statistics Division, The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2025, United Nations, New York, 2025.
3. Independent Group of Scientists appointed by the Secretary-General, Global Sustainable Development Report 2023: Times of Crisis, Times of Change, United Nations, New York, 2023.
4. J. D. Sachs, "From Millennium Development Goals to Sustainable Development Goals," The Lancet, vol. 379, no. 9832, pp. 2206-2211, 2012, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60685-0.
5. D. Le Blanc, "Towards integration at last? The Sustainable Development Goals as a network of targets," Sustainable Development, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 176-187, 2015, doi:10.1002/sd.1582.
6. M. Stafford-Smith, D. Griggs, O. Gaffney, F. Ullah, B. Reyers, N. Kanie, B. Stigson, P. Shrivastava, M. Leach and D. O'Connell, "Integration: the key to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability Science, vol. 12, pp. 911-919, 2017, doi:10.1007/s11625-016-0383-3.
7. E. B. Barbier and J. C. Burgess, "The Sustainable Development Goals and the systems approach to sustainability," Economics, vol. 11, no. 1, art. 20170028, 2017, doi:10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2017-28.
8. M. Nilsson, D. Griggs and M. Visbeck, "Policy: Map the interactions between Sustainable Development Goals," Nature, vol. 534, pp. 320-322, 2016, doi:10.1038/534320a.
9. M. Nilsson, E. Chisholm, D. Griggs, P. Howden-Chapman, D. McCollum, P. Messerli, B. Neumann, A.-S. Stevance, M. Visbeck and M. Stafford-Smith, "Mapping interactions between the Sustainable Development Goals: lessons learned and ways forward," Sustainability Science, vol. 13, pp. 1489-1503, 2018, doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0604-z.
10. P. Pradhan, L. Costa, D. Rybski, W. Lucht and J. P. Kropp, "A systematic study of Sustainable Development Goal interactions," Earth's Future, vol. 5, no. 11, pp. 1169-1179, 2017, doi:10.1002/2017EF000632.
11. C. Kroll, A. Warchold and P. Pradhan, "Sustainable Development Goals: Are we successful in turning trade-offs into synergies?" Palgrave Communications, vol. 5, art. 140, 2019, doi:10.1057/s41599-019-0335-5.
12. D. Lusseau and F. Mancini, "Income-based variation in Sustainable Development Goal interaction networks," Nature Sustainability, vol. 2, pp. 242-247, 2019, doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0231-4.
13. A. Warchold, P. Pradhan and J. P. Kropp, "Variations in Sustainable Development Goal interactions: Population, regional, and income disaggregation," Sustainable Development, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 285-299, 2021, doi:10.1002/sd.2145.
14. H. Hegre, K. Petrova and N. von Uexkull, "Synergies and trade-offs in reaching the Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 20, art. 8729, 2020, doi:10.3390/su12208729.
15. C. C. Anderson, M. Denich, A. Warchold, J. P. Kropp and P. Pradhan, "A systems model of SDG target influence on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Sustainability Science, vol. 17, pp. 1459-1472, 2022, doi:10.1007/s11625-021-01040-8.
16. J. H. P. Dawes, X. Zhou and M. Moinuddin, "System-level consequences of synergies and trade-offs between SDGs: quantitative analysis of interlinkage networks at country level," Sustainability Science, vol. 17, 2022, doi:10.1007/s11625-022-01109-y.
17. H. L. van Soest, D. P. van Vuuren, J. Hilaire, J. C. Minx, M. J. H. M. Harmsen, V. Krey, A. Popp, K. Riahi and G. Luderer, "Analysing interactions among Sustainable Development Goals with Integrated Assessment Models," Global Transitions, vol. 1, pp. 210-225, 2019, doi:10.1016/j.glt.2019.10.004.
18. A. Miola, F. Borchardt, S. Neher and D. Buscaglia, Interlinkages and Policy Coherence for the Sustainable Development Goals Implementation: An Operational Method to Identify Trade-Offs and Co-Benefits in a Systemic Way, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019.
19. N. Weitz, H. Carlsen and M. Nilsson, SDG Synergies: An Approach for Coherent 2030 Agenda Implementation, Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, 2019.
20. A. Assubayeva and J. Marco, "Methodological approaches on synergies and trade-offs within the 2030 Agenda," iScience, vol. 27, no. 11, art. 111100, 2024, doi:10.1016/j.isci.2024.111100.
21. M. Kuc-Czarnecka, I. Markowicz and A. Sompolska-Rzechula, "SDGs implementation, their synergies, and trade-offs in EU countries - sensitivity analysis-based approach," Ecological Indicators, vol. 146, art. 109888, 2023, doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.109888.
22. F. Laumann, J. von Kugelgen, T. H. Kanashiro Uehara and M. Barahona, "Complex interlinkages, key objectives, and nexuses among the Sustainable Development Goals and climate change: a network analysis," The Lancet Planetary Health, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. e422-e430, 2022, doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(22)00070-5.
23. U. A. Khot, A. Warchold and P. Pradhan, "Existing gaps in understanding Sustainable Development Goals interactions: Insights from a systematic review," Environmental Impact Assessment Review, vol. 118, art. 108274, 2026, doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2025.108274.
24. T. Kluck, C. Li and P. Pradhan, "A systematic review highlights the need for holistic modeling of the Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainable Development, 2025, doi:10.1002/sd.70096.
25. L. Yang and K. Cormican, "The crossovers and connectivity between systems engineering and the Sustainable Development Goals: A scoping study," Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 6, art. 3176, 2021, doi:10.3390/su13063176.
26. C. Haskins, "Systems engineering for Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 18, art. 10293, 2021, doi:10.3390/su131810293.
27. H. Giudici, K. Falk, G. Muller, D. E. Helle and E. Drilen, "A systems thinking perspective on the obstacles faced by industrial organizations to transition towards sustainability," Highlights of Sustainability, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 240-254, 2024, doi:10.54175/hsustain3020014.
28. J. A. Duenas Santana, A. Di Benedetto, O. Gonzalez Gomez and E. Salzano, "Towards sustainable hydrogen production: An integrated approach for sustainability, complexity, and systems thinking in the energy sector," Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 449, art. 141751, 2024, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141751.
29. A. Acero and M. C. Ramirez Cajiao, "Analyzing sustainable practices in engineering projects: A systemic approach," Sustainability, vol. 15, art. 6022, 2023, doi:10.3390/su15076022.
30. D. H. Meadows, Thinking in Systems: A Primer, Chelsea Green Publishing, White River Junction, VT, 2008.
31. D. H. Meadows, Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System, Sustainability Institute, Hartland, VT, 1999.
32. J. D. Sterman, Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World, Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston, 2000.
33. J. W. Forrester, Industrial Dynamics, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1961.
34. P. Checkland, Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 1981.
35. M. C. Jackson, Critical Systems Thinking and the Management of Complexity, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, 2019.
36. L. von Bertalanffy, General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications, George Braziller, New York, 1968.
37. M. W. Maier, "Architecting principles for systems-of-systems," Systems Engineering, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 267-284, 1998.
38. J. Boardman and B. Sauser, "System of systems - the meaning of of," in Proc. 1st IEEE/SMC International Conference on System of Systems Engineering, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 1-6, 2006.
39. INCOSE, Systems Engineering Handbook: A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activities, 5th ed., John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, 2023.
40. ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288:2023, Systems and Software Engineering - System Life Cycle Processes, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2023.
41. BKCASE Editorial Board, The Guide to the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SEBoK), version 2.7, 2022.
42. F. Fuso Nerini, J. Tomei, L. S. To, I. Bisaga, P. Parikh, M. Black, A. Borrion, C. Spataru, V. Castan Broto, G. Anandarajah, B. Milligan and Y. Mulugetta, "Mapping synergies and trade-offs between energy and the Sustainable Development Goals," Nature Energy, vol. 3, pp. 10-15, 2018, doi:10.1038/s41560-017-0036-5.
43. D. L. McCollum, L. Gomez Echeverri, S. Busch, S. Pachauri, S. Parkinson, J. Rogelj, V. Krey, J. C. Minx, M. Nilsson, A.-S. Stevance and K. Riahi, "Connecting the Sustainable Development Goals by their energy inter-linkages," Environmental Research Letters, vol. 13, no. 3, art. 033006, 2018, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aaafe3.
44. G. G. Singh, A. M. Cisneros-Montemayor, W. Swartz, W. Cheung, J. A. Guy, T. Kenny, C. J. McOwen, R. Asch, J. L. Geffert, C. C. Wabnitz, R. Sumaila, Q. Hanich and Y. Ota, "A rapid assessment of co-benefits and trade-offs among Sustainable Development Goals," Marine Policy, vol. 93, pp. 223-231, 2018, doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2017.05.030.
45. Q. Zhang, C. Prouty, J. B. Zimmerman and J. R. Mihelcic, "More than Target 6.3: A systems approach to rethinking Sustainable Development Goals in a resource-scarce world," Engineering, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 481-489, 2016, doi:10.1016/J.ENG.2016.04.010.
46. D. Collste, M. Pedercini and S. E. Cornell, "Policy coherence to achieve the SDGs: using integrated simulation models to assess effective policies," Sustainability Science, vol. 12, pp. 921-931, 2017, doi:10.1007/s11625-017-0457-x.
47. O. A. Guerrero and G. Castaneda, "Policy priority inference: A computational framework to analyze the allocation of resources for the Sustainable Development Goals," Data & Policy, vol. 2, art. e17, 2020, doi:10.1017/dap.2020.18.
48. O. A. Guerrero and G. Castaneda, "Quantifying the coherence of development policy priorities," Development Policy Review, vol. 39, pp. 155-180, 2021, doi:10.1111/dpr.12498.
49. E. A. Moallemi, S. Malekpour, M. Hadjikakou, R. Raven, K. Szetey, D. Ningrum, A. Dhiaulhaq and B. A. Bryan, "Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals requires transdisciplinary innovation at the local scale," One Earth, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 300-313, 2020, doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2020.08.006.
50. C. Allen and S. Malekpour, "Modelling six sustainable development transformations in Australia and their accelerators, impediments, enablers, and interlinkages," Nature Communications, 2024, doi:10.1038/s41467-023-44655-4.
51. C. Allen, S. Malekpour and M. Mintrom, "Cross-scale, cross-level and multi-actor governance of transformations toward the Sustainable Development Goals: A review of common challenges and solutions," Sustainable Development, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 1250-1267, 2023, doi:10.1002/sd.2495.
52. J. Rockstrom et al., "A safe operating space for humanity," Nature, vol. 461, pp. 472-475, 2009, doi:10.1038/461472a.
53. K. Richardson et al., "Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries," Science Advances, vol. 9, no. 37, art. eadh2458, 2023, doi:10.1126/sciadv.adh2458.
54. B. Purvis, Y. Mao and D. Robinson, "Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins," Sustainability Science, vol. 14, pp. 681-695, 2019, doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5.
55. K. Raworth, Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist, Random House, London, 2017.
56. J. Elkington, Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, Capstone, Oxford, 1997.
57. OECD, Recommendation of the Council on Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development, OECD/LEGAL/0381, Paris, 2019.
58. UNESCO, Engineering for Sustainable Development: Delivering on the Sustainable Development Goals, UNESCO, Paris, 2021.
59. ISO 14040:2006, Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and Framework, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2006.