A Principal Component Analysis for the Social Sustainable Development Goals Indicators Framework

Authors

Keywords:

sustainability; statistical description; Principal component analysis (PCA)

Abstract

Sustainable development is a theoretical construct with more and more supporters in the last three decades, be it in the media, the political system, researchers or the public policy environment. The Sustainable Development Goals generally propose an approach to a specific sector through numerous indicators, with interferences often existing between objectives and indicators. An analysis focused on a certain pattern of indicators (e.g. economic, social, environmental), for a critical destination can better channel efforts to achieve it starting from the goal, rather than from the manner of intervention or the path to be followed, and eliminating as much as possible the elements of interference with an ambiguous, multi-univocal character. Therefore, in addition to clarifying the conceptual framework, the study methodologically attempts to approach the Sustainable Development Goals of a social nature based on the Principal Components Analysis (PCA). Thus, based on a multivariate analysis, mainly SDGs indicators 4, 5, 10 and 17 are analyzed, starting from Eurostat data, for the period 2012-2025. The use of a large number of variables for the European Union countries (EU27) for each target and for the social field as a whole, against the background of the complexity of the indicators and the different units of measurement for each of them, revealed the choice of the Principal Components Analysis methodology as appropriate. The results show the strengths and weaknesses of the social SDGs starting from the PCA analysis. The paper, through the original systematization proposed, can be considered a landmark in the analysis of the social SDGs in order to better identify the gaps that need to be corrected in the analysis of the SDGs.

 

Author Biography

  • Alina Georgeta Ailinca, "Victor Slavescu" Financial and Monetary Research Centre, INCE, Romanian Academy

    Fiscal Studies

References

Booysen, F. (2002). An Overview and Evaluation of Composite Indices of Development. Social Indicators Research 59(2):115-151. DOI: 10.1023/A:1016275505152

Decancq, K., & Lugo, M. A. (2010). Weights in Multidimensional Indices of Well-Being: An Overview. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1571124 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1571124

Filmer, D., Pritchett, L.H. (2001). Estimating Wealth Effects Without Expenditure Data—Or Tears: An Application To Educational Enrollments In States Of India*. Demography 38, 115–132 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2001.0003

Greco, S., Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M., & Torrisi, G. (2019). On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness, January 2019, Social Indicators Research 141(3):1-34, DOI: 10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9

Hijman, R. et al. (ed.) (2025). Sustainable Development in the European Union. Monitoring Report on Progress Towards the SDGs in an EU Context. [eurostat Statistical books 2025 edition]. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, Doi: 10.2785/1111373.

Jolliffe, I. T., & Cadima, J. (2016). Principal component analysis: A review and recent developments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 374(2065): 20150202. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2015.0202.

Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S. ,Hoffmann, A. & Giovannini E. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. OECD publishing

OECD (2018). Measuring Distance to the SDG Targets 2017: An Assessment of Where OECD Countries Stand, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264308183-en.

OECD (2024). How's Life? 2024: Well-being and Resilience in Times of Crisis, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/90ba854a-en.

Sachs, J., Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G., Fuller, G. (2018): SDG Index and Dashboards Report 2018. New York: Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN).

Sachs, J. D., Lafortune, G., Fuller , G., and Drumm, E. (2023). Sustainable development report 2023 Implementing the SDG Stimulus Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards. Dublin University Press Dublin, Ireland. DOI https://doi.org/10.25546/102924.

Saisana, M., & Tarantola, S. (2002). State-of-the-art report on current methodologies and practices for composite indicator development. European Commission, JRC.

Saltelli, A. (2007). Composite Indicators between Analysis and Advocacy. Soc Indic Res 81, 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-006-0024-9

UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2022). Human Development Report 2021-22: Uncertain Times, Unsettled Lives: Shaping our Future in a Transforming World. New York.

Vyas, S., & Kumaranayake, L. (2006). Constructing socio-economic status indices: how to use principal components analysis. Health Policy Plan. Nov; 21(6): 459-68. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czl029.

Downloads

Published

2026-10-12

Issue

Section

Green Economy and Sustainable Development