The sustainability evaluation using SDG indicators under a geometric integrated threshold score framework

Evaluating national sustainability requires frameworks that integrate diverse indicators, yet traditional compensatory methods often allow strong performance in one area to offset critical weaknesses in others, potentially distorting policy interpretation. To address this limitation, this study proposes the Geometric Integrated Threshold Score (GITS), a non-compensatory framework that integrates multiplicative aggregation of multiple geometric distances with threshold-based veto logic. This design effectively eliminates underperforming alternatives while preserving interpretability. Using longitudinal data from 2019 to 2023 across six core SDG indicators for 25 countries, we compare GITS and its soft-veto extension (GITS-S) with three benchmark models including the Sustainability Composite Score (SCS), the Elimination and Choice Expressing Reality (ELECTRE) III and Fuzzy ELECTRE III. Results show that under the strict hard-veto logic, only 7 out of 25 countries fully satisfied all baseline thresholds, resulting in nullified scores for the remaining 18 countries. The soft-veto extension (GITS-S) effectively resolves this issue by differentiating rankings among near-compliant countries, thereby clarifying its systematic distinctions from both compensatory and outranking approaches. Overall, GITS provides a unified, interpretable, and threshold-sensitive framework that supports more robust sustainability planning and policy prioritization.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-07-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-62355-z
Primary Topic
Sustainable Building Design and Assessment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The sustainability evaluation using SDG indicators under a geometric integrated threshold score framework

Ruey‐Chyn Tsaur, Minh Tú Nguyễn, Yin-Yin Huang, Tsai-Sung Lin et al.
Scientific Reports
Sustainable Building Design and Assessment
article

The sustainability evaluation using SDG indicators under a geometric integrated threshold score framework

Ruey‐Chyn Tsaur, Minh Tú Nguyễn, Yin-Yin Huang, Tsai-Sung Lin, Jingchao Pan
article en

Abstract

Evaluating national sustainability requires frameworks that integrate diverse indicators, yet traditional compensatory methods often allow strong performance in one area to offset critical weaknesses in others, potentially distorting policy interpretation. To address this limitation, this study proposes the Geometric Integrated Threshold Score (GITS), a non-compensatory framework that integrates multiplicative aggregation of multiple geometric distances with threshold-based veto logic. This design effectively eliminates underperforming alternatives while preserving interpretability. Using longitudinal data from 2019 to 2023 across six core SDG indicators for 25 countries, we compare GITS and its soft-veto extension (GITS-S) with three benchmark models including the Sustainability Composite Score (SCS), the Elimination and Choice Expressing Reality (ELECTRE) III and Fuzzy ELECTRE III. Results show that under the strict hard-veto logic, only 7 out of 25 countries fully satisfied all baseline thresholds, resulting in nullified scores for the remaining 18 countries. The soft-veto extension (GITS-S) effectively resolves this issue by differentiating rankings among near-compliant countries, thereby clarifying its systematic distinctions from both compensatory and outranking approaches. Overall, GITS provides a unified, interpretable, and threshold-sensitive framework that supports more robust sustainability planning and policy prioritization.

Scientific Reports
Tamkang University (TW), Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City (VN), Jiujiang University (CN), Nanchang University (CN), Jiangxi University of Technology (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Sustainable Building Design and Assessment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.