Exploring the Impact of the Sustainable Development Goals on Sustainability Trends

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Without a shadow of doubt, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) have marked a historic milestone by expressing global awareness about poverty, hunger, education, inequalities or environmental degradation, among others. By packaging these priorities into an understandable set of seventeen goals, they have put sustainability in focus. In this way, as the interest in the topic is growing (from both the academic and the social and political side), the article is relevant.

In my opinion, the article starts with an interesting critical reflection about the relationship between the existence of the SDGs and the progress or deterioration in sustainability challenges. The hypothesis, methods and results are well explained, and the references are appropriate.

I consider relevant to highlight the limitations exposed for the research, so it would be proper to continue with subsequent lines of work. As the author mentions in the conclusion, the SDGs expire in a few years, but the journey throughout sustainability is long and wide enough to continue with the research. It will be necessary to see where the field will head.

Finally, I always recommend to clearly define who this article is addressed to, from a stakeholder perspective.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your positive comments. I have followed them closely and my detailed response is below.

Reviewer 1:

Without a shadow of doubt, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) have marked a historic milestone by expressing global awareness about poverty, hunger, education, inequalities or environmental degradation, among others. By packaging these priorities into an understandable set of seventeen goals, they have put sustainability in focus. In this way, as the interest in the topic is growing (from both the academic and the social and political side), the article is relevant.

In my opinion, the article starts with an interesting critical reflection about the relationship between the existence of the SDGs and the progress or deterioration in sustainability challenges. The hypothesis, methods and results are well explained, and the references are appropriate.

I consider relevant to highlight the limitations exposed for the research, so it would be proper to continue with subsequent lines of work. As the author mentions in the conclusion, the SDGs expire in a few years, but the journey throughout sustainability is long and wide enough to continue with the research. It will be necessary to see where the field will head.

Response:

Thanks for your comments.

Reviewer 1:

Finally, I always recommend to clearly define who this article is addressed to, from a stakeholder perspective.

Response:

Thank you for this valuable comment. I have included a clear definition of them at the end of the introduction as well as in the discussion and conclusion sections when referring to the research implications.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript was of good quality.

Consider changing Figure 1 to better quality without small details in the left corner, also SDG#17 is not that color indicating that the photo you are using is not correct. Also, by the time it is part of a presentation you should reference it and ask for permission, otherwise, you can prepare it on your own. 

Limitations should be before the conclusion section. Conclusions are always in the end.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your positive comments. I have followed them closely and my detailed response is below.

 

Reviewer 2:

The manuscript was of good quality.

Response:

Thanks for your comment.

Reviewer 2:

Consider changing Figure 1 to better quality without small details in the left corner, also SDG#17 is not that color indicating that the photo you are using is not correct. Also, by the time it is part of a presentation you should reference it and ask for permission, otherwise, you can prepare it on your own. 

Response:

Thank you for this request and suggestion. The figure has been replaced with a better version of it without those small details in the left corner. The wedding cake figure on the back is partially hidden behind, that's why the colour of SDG#17 is blurry. That figure is also referenced in the background (Rockstrom & Sukhdev, 2016) and now this is also highlighted in the figure title.

Reviewer 2:

Limitations should be before the conclusion section. Conclusions are always in the end.

Response:

Limitations have been included in the conclusions section.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is very interesting and the subject is extremely important. I believe it lacks implications, based on the results obtained.

 

I present some observations for improvement:

Introduction:

It is necessary to clarify the research objective.

Explain what the scientific community has not yet addressed on the topic, which requires a study like this.

 

Literature review

Are there no similar studies carried out by the scientific community? It will be important to integrate them into the literature review.

The comment presented seems out of context to me. I would eliminate it or put it in the conclusions: “While 90 this is an intrinsic limitation of what the SDGs actually are and this article does not tackle 91 that challenge directly, it is important to understand the type of effect they have had, alt- 92 hough indirectly, so that all of us who use the SDGs as a sustainability framework are well 93 aware of their strengths and limitations.”

It does not make sense to create a sub-section just in the literature review: 2.1 SDG Impact and Progress.

 

Methods

The text you write between lines 131-146 is out of context and does not help to clarify the methodology.

It would be important to base the methodological approach used in the light of other scientific studies or auxiliary research literature.

 

Results

Table 2 should be improved, the conclusion column is not understandable.

 

Conclusions:

The practical implications of this study are missing, which could be presented in the form of recommendations for country governments and the main organizations involved.

What are the theoretical implications of this study, that is, what advances does this study introduce into the state-of-the-art, which deserves to be published by a prestigious journal?

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your positive comments. I have followed them closely and my detailed response is below.

 

Reviewer 3:

The article is very interesting and the subject is extremely important. I believe it lacks implications, based on the results obtained.

Response:

Thank you for this important observation. I have included practical implications in the discussion section and implications for researchers in the conclusion section.

Reviewer 3:

Introduction:

It is necessary to clarify the research objective.

Response:

Thanks for highlighting this. I have included an additional sentence to clearly state the research objective in the introduction as well as explaining the purpose of the article in the same section. You can see those additions highlighted in yellow in the revised article.

Reviewer 3:

Explain what the scientific community has not yet addressed on the topic, which requires a study like this.

Response:

This is a helpful observation. I have addressed this important point at the end of the introduction.

Reviewer 3:

Literature review

Are there no similar studies carried out by the scientific community? It will be important to integrate them into the literature review.

Response:

Thank you for this relevant question, which has been highlighted by other reviewers as well. I have expanded the literature review and mentioned a few articles that, although not in the same line, contribute to understanding the studies carried out on the topic. You can see from the changes made in the literature review section that I have mentioned them in several sections. This suggestion also allowed me to reorganise the section into three sub-sections making it much clearer.

Reviewer 3:

The comment presented seems out of context to me. I would eliminate it or put it in the conclusions: “While this is an intrinsic limitation of what the SDGs actually are and this article does not tackle that challenge directly, it is important to understand the type of effect they have had, although indirectly, so that all of us who use the SDGs as a sustainability framework are well aware of their strengths and limitations.”

Response:

I agree with your observation. However, I think it is an important comment that I have moved to the conclusions section where it fits properly.

Reviewer 3:

It does not make sense to create a sub-section just in the literature review: 2.1 SDG Impact and Progress.

Response:

You are right. Following this and other comments from you and other reviewers on the literature review, I have expanded it and created other sub-sections.

Reviewer 3:

Methods

The text you write between lines 131-146 is out of context and does not help to clarify the methodology.

Response:

You are right. This comment does not fit the methodology, so it has been moved and adjusted to the context of the literature review. You can see this in the last sub-section of it.

Reviewer 3:

It would be important to base the methodological approach used in the light of other scientific studies or auxiliary research literature.

Response:

Thanks for this observation. I have highlighted a couple of articles followed in terms of the used methods, which are well integrated as well in the literature review.

Reviewer 3:

Results

Table 2 should be improved, the conclusion column is not understandable.

Response:

Thanks for this observation. I have removed the mentioned column for clarity as these are explained in the results section.

Reviewer 3:

Conclusions:

The practical implications of this study are missing, which could be presented in the form of recommendations for country governments and the main organizations involved. What are the theoretical implications of this study, that is, what advances does this study introduce into the state-of-the-art, which deserves to be published by a prestigious journal?

Response:

Great observation. As suggested, practical and research/theoretical implications have been incorporated into the discussion and conclusions sections, respectively.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author addressed my comments and significantly improved the article. I am of the opinion that, at this moment, the article already meets the conditions to be publishable.