Article type
Abstract
To achieve the SDGs, the international community will need rigorous evidence about which programmes and policies are most effective in improving indicators related to the goals. The Development Evidence Portal (DEP), maintained by the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie), is a database that gathers such evidence for low- and middle-income countries in the form of impact evaluations and systematic reviews. In this paper, we analyze data from the DEP to answer the following questions: what is the state of the evidence base for the SDGs, and where are the gaps in the evidence?
We find that there are substantial evidence bases, built up over several decades, for SDGs focusing on poverty (SDG 1), health (SDG 3), and education (SDG 4). SDGs focused on environmental sustainability (SDGs 12–15) have received limited attention in the impact evaluation literature, apart from a recent surge in evaluations of environmental policies in China. Across nearly all SDGs, there is a limited supply of high-quality evidence synthesis. We also find a striking lack of attention to gender and equity considerations in evaluation research for all SDGs.
We recommend that the SDGs be given a more central role in setting research priorities and coordinating research activities in global development. Just as the SDGs set firm targets against which progress is monitored, global producers and users of evidence should set and monitor progress toward targets for creating a robust evidence base for interventions to achieve the SDGs. To create such an evidence base, researchers and research commissioners will need to prioritize and dedicate resources to efficiently generating evidence for neglected SDGs (eg, SDGs 6, 7, 11, and 14), conducting high-quality synthesis, and gathering evidence on whether global development interventions reduce or exacerbate existing inequalities. Such efforts will ensure that the evidence base has sufficient coverage of the core themes of sustainable and equitable development to support sound decision-making, even after the SDG agenda closes in 2030.
We find that there are substantial evidence bases, built up over several decades, for SDGs focusing on poverty (SDG 1), health (SDG 3), and education (SDG 4). SDGs focused on environmental sustainability (SDGs 12–15) have received limited attention in the impact evaluation literature, apart from a recent surge in evaluations of environmental policies in China. Across nearly all SDGs, there is a limited supply of high-quality evidence synthesis. We also find a striking lack of attention to gender and equity considerations in evaluation research for all SDGs.
We recommend that the SDGs be given a more central role in setting research priorities and coordinating research activities in global development. Just as the SDGs set firm targets against which progress is monitored, global producers and users of evidence should set and monitor progress toward targets for creating a robust evidence base for interventions to achieve the SDGs. To create such an evidence base, researchers and research commissioners will need to prioritize and dedicate resources to efficiently generating evidence for neglected SDGs (eg, SDGs 6, 7, 11, and 14), conducting high-quality synthesis, and gathering evidence on whether global development interventions reduce or exacerbate existing inequalities. Such efforts will ensure that the evidence base has sufficient coverage of the core themes of sustainable and equitable development to support sound decision-making, even after the SDG agenda closes in 2030.