In 2015, countries adopted the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to end poverty, build sustainable cities, and take climate action. Yet not everyone can afford a sustainable future. A decade on, the world marks a milestone with the 2025 Sustainable Development Report (SDR), now a barometer of collective action. The SDR 2025 makes one thing clear: not a single SDG is on track for full achievement if we continue at the current pace, with only 16.7% of targets showing steady progress.
At the heart of this year’s report lies a stark question: Why are we moving so slowly toward the goals? The answer is simple yet alarming — many countries lack the financial means to reach them. Sustainability is no longer just policy; it is a question of “who can afford a sustainable future” and under what terms.
Why does money still rule (almost) everything?
Though the idea of sustainable development has moved into the mainstream, implementation of the SDGs lags far behind. According to SDR 2025, less than 17% of indicators are currently on track. This is happening amid intensifying climate disasters, migration pressures, economic uncertainty, and technological disruption.
The core issue? Many low- and middle-income countries cannot afford to invest in a sustainable future. Crippling debt, fragile tax systems, and limited long-term financing have created a “financial deadlock.” About half of humanity lives in countries lacking fiscal space for meaningful sustainable investments.
Global annual savings are estimated at around $30 trillion. On paper, that should be enough to fund the transition. In reality, capital flows to wealthy nations with strong credit ratings. For poorer countries, borrowing often comes with punishing terms: short maturities, high interest rates, and low credit ratings.
The SDR 2025 stresses that sustainable development should not be viewed as aid but as an economically sound investment, especially in human capital. Investing in healthcare, nutrition, and education in low-income countries can yield returns of up to 20% annually. Yet the current financial system leaves these investments underfunded, favoring saturated economies over high-growth potential countries.
Who сan afford a sustainable future: measuring and fixing the system
In 2025, the SDG Index uses 126 indicators, including 17 headline indicators forming the new Headline SDG Index (SDGi). This reduces the impact of missing data and improves clarity on long-term progress.
The 2025 edition covers 167 countries, drawing on data from UN, World Bank, WHO, and others. Additionally, SDR 2025 introduces the UN Multilateralism Index (UN-Mi), assessing countries’ engagement in international agreements.
Tracking progress over time
Comparing the 2025 edition with earlier reports reveals a sobering story of stagnation and missed opportunities. In 2020, around 19% of SDG indicators showed steady progress. By 2023, this dropped to 18.2%. Now, only 16.7% of targets are on track, the lowest share in recent years. This decline reflects climate disasters, debt crises, and inequality. It also underscores a deeper issue — the world is committed to measuring sustainable development more than financing it.
Since its introduction, the SDG Index’s top ranks have been dominated by Northern and Western European countries due to robust data systems, long-term planning, and high public investment. This also signals rigidity in the global order, where structural barriers prevent emerging economies from closing the gap. No low-income country has yet broken into the upper SDG ranks.
China moved from 57th in 2020 to 49th in 2025 with gains in clean energy and poverty reduction but continues to face governance challenges. India remains around 99th, with gains in education offset by air quality and gender equality issues. These cases highlight the paradox: economic growth does not automatically translate into sustainable outcomes, especially where institutional capacity is uneven.
Who’s ahead, who’s falling behind
The top 20 SDG Index positions remain with Northern and Western European nations, reflecting strong institutions and policy efforts. China ranks 49th, making progress in clean energy but facing governance and environmental challenges. India is at 99th, advancing in digital inclusion but hindered by sanitation and gender equality issues.
Countries like Yemen and Chad remain at the bottom, not due to policy failure but to conflict, debt, and lack of financing. Real success in sustainable development depends on the ability to accelerate — not just maintain — progress. These nations struggle not because of policy failure, but due to a lack of peace, stability, and financing — underscoring the urgent need for targeted global support. The 2025 rankings reveal that while some countries enjoy a head start, real success in sustainable development depends on the ability to accelerate progress.
From Barbados to Benin: lessons from outliers
The Sustainable Development Report 2025 doesn’t just measure progress – it tells stories from the edges of the global system. Take the United States, Barbados, and Benin: three very different countries, each illustrating a sharply contrasting approach to sustainable development.
Despite its vast economic and technological power, the U.S. ranked dead last in this year’s UN Multilateralism Index (UN-Mi Index). Barbados topped the UN-Mi Index, demonstrating that political resolve can outweigh size in global leadership. Benin has become a fast riser through local actions in digital education and nutrition programs, proving sustainable development can be homegrown if backed internationally.
Benin has emerged as one of the fastest risers in the Headline SDG Index (SDGi) — not through grand declarations, but through focused, local action. By digitizing education systems, scaling up anti-malnutrition programs, and leveraging partnerships with development banks, the country is rewriting the narrative of what’s possible for low-income nations. Its progress shows that sustainable development isn’t reserved for the privileged — it can be homegrown, provided there’s international backing.
A сall for justice
The SDG Index, while intuitive and globally comparable, is not immune to critique. Built on reputable sources, it still has methodological limits: it assumes equal relevance of indicators across diverse countries and uses a “one-size-fits-all” model that misses local nuances. The requirement for 80% data availability also excludes many low-income and conflict-affected nations that most need visibility.
The composite nature of the Index can dilute critical failures, allowing countries with severe climate issues to rank high due to strengths elsewhere. The Headline SDG, while simplifying comparisons, risks masking trade-offs, such as when industrial growth undermines biodiversity, reducing the complexity of sustainable development to single indicators per goal.
Fixing the system: global financial reform
In the Sustainable Development Report 2025 lays out a bold reform agenda for reshaping the global financial architecture. If the world is serious about reaching the SDGs, these five systemic changes are essential.
- Rethink credit ratings to reflect growth potential.
- Scrap the “sovereign ceiling” restricting private sector ratings in developing countries.
- Extend debt horizons to match education and health investment timelines.
- Create new revenue streams through international taxes on emissions and travel.
- Fund multilateralism with stable financing.
Make it fair by moving beyond loans to address historical injustices.
The SDR 2025 underscores a central paradox: while solutions and financial capacity exist globally, the distribution of power, capital, and credit ratings remains unequal. Achieving equity in sustainable development requires a moral shift and systemic change, proving that “who can afford a sustainable future” is not rhetorical but the defining question of our time.
Read more analysis of SDG reporting documents here.
