Quantitative assessment of The Group of Seven's collaboration in sustainable development goals

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development set by the United Nations calls for collaborative, inclusive action across 17 SDGs. While many countries have developed plans and policies, others face political and economic challenges that hinder progress, highlighting the need for strengthened international cooperation to meet targets such as the 1.5 °C warming limit and resilient climate development. The Paris Agreement underscores cooperation in science, loss and damage, and capacity building, with developed countries supporting developing nations. Despite broad recognition of collaboration’s importance, quantitatively measuring cooperation across the wide-ranging SDGs remains difficult; most prior work focuses on isolated national efforts rather than dynamic, collective interactions. This study addresses that gap by proposing a synergy-based framework to quantify international cooperation, enabling measurement of the collective effect and decomposition into individual country contributions. Focusing on the G7 (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, and the US) as advanced economies with proclaimed SDG collaboration, the paper evaluates their joint progress across economic (SDGs 1–9) and environmental (SDGs 12–15) indicators from 2000–2020. The work aims to objectively assess where cooperation succeeds or falters, informing both current and retrospective policy decisions to improve SDG implementation.

Data: 42 SDG indicators spanning economic (SDGs 1–9) and environmental (SDGs 12–15) dimensions were sourced from Our World in Data for 2000–2020, selected to capture impacts of major global events (Great Recession 2007–2009, Paris Agreement 2015, COVID-19 in 2020). All indicators were normalized to [0,1] by x_t = (x_t − min(X)) / (max(X) − min(X)). Expected goal directions were assigned per indicator (+ to increase, − to decrease). Domestic Change (DC): For country j, the year-to-year change for an indicator is d_t^j = sqrt((x_{t+1}^j − x_t^j)^2), with DC^j = (d_1^j, …, d_{T−1}^j). Values lie in [0,1], with 0 indicating no change. Foreign Change (FC): For a group of J countries, the compounded change is d_t = sqrt(Σ_{j=1}^J (x_{t+1}^j − x_t^j)^2), with FC = (d_1, …, d_{T−1}). Values lie in [0, sqrt(J)], with 0 indicating synchronized no change. Synergy: Annual synergy s_t considers DC and FC and adjusts for levels and dispersion (as specified in Eq. 6): s_t = (1/J)(Σ Δ_{i,t} − d_t) − (1/J)Σ(x_{i,t} − x_i) − (1/J)Σ(x_{i,t} − x_i)^2, constrained to [0,1) by division by J. Vector form over time: S = [Σ DC_t − FC_t] = (S_1,…,S_{T−1}). Directionality is assigned via g_t = (1/J)Σ(x_{i,t+1} − x_{i,t}); sign(s_t) is positive if sign(g_t) matches the indicator’s expected direction, negative otherwise (Eqs. 8–10). Zero synergy indicates either no collective progress or exact offsetting changes across members. Individual country contributions: For indicator-year t, country j’s contribution to gross synergy is c_j^t = ((d_j^t − d_j^{t−1}) / (s_j^t × sgn(s_j^t))) × 100% (Eq. 11). Signs denote positive or negative contributions; contributions can exceed ±100% individually but sum to +100% for positive gross synergy or −100% for negative gross synergy. Workflow: Six steps—(1) collect SDG time series; (2) normalize to [0,1]; (3) compute DC; (4) compute FC; (5) compute signed synergies; (6) decompose gross synergy into country-level contributions. Computations and visualization were implemented in R; data and code links are provided.

- Domestic indicator dynamics: Economic indicators across G7 show synchronized patterns with large oscillations around the Great Recession (2007–2009) and COVID-19 (2020). Environmental indicators exhibit greater cross-country variability; e.g., Japan shows a sharp spike in disaster mortality around the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami, whereas Canada shows relatively stable forest area due to long-standing management. - Gross synergies: Most indicators fluctuate around zero but are more often positive than negative (2000–2020), indicating partial cooperation. Economic synergies were highly sensitive to shocks: positive synergy of 0.269 in 2010 (collective rebound post-2008 crisis) and negative synergy of −0.294 in 2020 (COVID-19 impacts). For environmental SDG 14.1.1(1) (chlorophyll-a deviation), gross synergy ranged from −0.094 to +0.120, indicating challenges in marine pollution control. SDGs 7.1.1 and 7.1.2 show zero synergy throughout, consistent with saturated access to electricity and clean fuels across G7. - Indicator-specific cooperation: Stronger cooperation is observed for SDGs 1, 3, 6, 7, 8 (with notable GDP per capita fluctuations due to crises), and 9 (reducing CO2 per value added, R&D investment, digital access). Transport shows divergence: rail passenger increases in several countries but continued heavy reliance on air transport in Canada and the US. Manufacturing value added declines reflect offshoring to China and Southeast Asia. - Country contributions (examples, 2020): For SDG 8.1.1 (GDP growth), all G7 contributed negatively to the negative gross synergy (−0.294), with the UK most negative (−24.5%) and Japan least (−5.3%). For SDG 8.5.2(1) (unemployment), gross synergy was −0.072; the US and Canada contributed large negatives (−67.7% and −56.6%), while Japan, France, Germany, the UK, and Italy contributed positively but insufficiently to offset. - Median contribution profiles (2000–2020): Canada is the only country with an overall positive role (+2.1%) for GDP growth (SDG 8.1.1); all countries contributed positively to lowering unemployment, led by Germany (+8.3%) and with Canada at +2.2%. Countries generally contributed negatively to manufacturing value added (SDG 9.2.1), consistent with deindustrialization/offshoring. For disaster mortality (SDG 13.1.1(1)), Canada, Germany, and Japan show negative roles. - Overall rankings by dimension (median-of-medians): Economic indicators—positive overall roles for all members, led by Japan and Canada (both ~+7.90%), followed by the US (+6.69%); Italy lowest (+4.60%), with Germany, UK, and France in the middle. Environmental indicators—uncooperative overall outcome with wide discrepancies: France (+6.27%) and Italy (+6.24%) lead; Japan (+0.12%) and the UK (+0.55%) are marginally positive; the US (approximately −2.66%), Germany (−6.27%), and Canada (−8.84%) are negative. Canada and Germany’s sizable negative contributions can offset France and Italy’s positives, yielding overall negative environmental synergy.

The study quantitatively addresses the research question of how and to what extent G7 members cooperate toward SDGs by introducing a synergy metric that captures collective progress and decomposes it into country-level roles. Findings show robust, coordinated economic collaboration—particularly evident in the collective rebound after the Great Recession—contrasted with fragmented and sometimes counterproductive environmental cooperation. These patterns imply that while institutional and economic linkages among G7 support aligned economic policies, environmental ambitions remain uneven across members, risking net-zero and biodiversity targets. The framework’s decomposition identifies where and when specific countries’ actions hinder or reinforce group progress, informing targeted policy alignment. Policy implications include maintaining effective pre-pandemic economic policies while adapting them for post-COVID recovery (e.g., green infrastructure, digitalization, SME support, and health system resilience) and significantly strengthening environmental collaboration through joint research, policy alignment, financing, conservation initiatives, and public–private partnerships to address climate and biodiversity challenges.

This work introduces a synergy-based methodological framework to measure and attribute international cooperation on SDG indicators, applying it to G7 performance from 2000–2020. The G7 demonstrates overall positive, coordinated contributions to economic SDGs but shows inconsistent and, in aggregate, uncooperative performance on environmental SDGs, driven by substantial negative contributions from some members. The results underscore the urgency for enhanced and harmonized environmental action within the G7 to meet climate and biodiversity goals. Future research should extend the framework to include social SDG dimensions (not analyzed here due to data constraints), integrate post-2020 data to capture full COVID-19 and recovery effects, and test the approach across other country groups to generalize insights and refine policy guidance.

- Scope limited to 42 economic and environmental indicators; social SDG dimensions were excluded due to lack of quantitative data. - Data coverage ends in 2020; thus, COVID-19 impacts and subsequent recovery policies are not fully captured. - Zero gross synergy can reflect either no progress or offsetting changes, which may be indistinguishable without additional context. - Normalization to [0,1] and indicator selection may influence sensitivity to extreme events and comparability across indicators. - Reliance on secondary data (Our World in Data) introduces potential reporting delays and harmonization issues.