Exploring the interdependencies among social progress index (SPI) components and their impact on country-level sustainability performance based on Bayesian Belief Network

doi:10.1016/j.regsus.2025.100230

Abstract

Abstract:

The social progress index (SPI) measures social and environmental performance beyond traditional economic indicators, providing transparent and actionable insights into the true condition of societies. This study investigates the interdependencies among SPI components and their impact on country-level sustainability performance. Using a Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) approach, the analysis explores the interdependencies among 12 SPI components (including advanced education, basic education, environmental quality, freedom and choice, health, housing, inclusive society, information and communications, nutrition and medical care, rights and voice, safety, and water and sanitation) and their collective influence on sustainability performance. Data from the Sustainable Development Report and SPI datasets, covering 162 countries (including Australia, China, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, and so on), were used to assess the relative importance of each SPI component. The key findings indicate that advanced education, inclusive society, and freedom and choice make substantial contributions to high sustainability performance, whereas deficiencies in nutrition and medical care, water and sanitation, and freedom and choice are associated with poor sustainability performance. The results reveal that sustainability performance is shaped by a network of interlinked SPI components, with education and inclusion emerging as key levers for progress. The study emphasizes that targeted improvements in specific SPI components can significantly enhance a country’s overall sustainability performance. Rather than visualizing countries’ progress through composite indicator-based heat maps, this study explores the interdependencies among SPI components and their role in sustainability performance at the global level. The study underscores the importance of a multidimensional policy approach that addresses social and environmental factors to enhance sustainability. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of how SPI components interact and shape sustainable development.

Key words: Sustainability performance Social progress index (SPI), Advanced education, Environmental quality, Bayesian Belief, Network (BBN)

Abroon QAZI. Exploring the interdependencies among social progress index (SPI) components and their impact on country-level sustainability performance based on Bayesian Belief Network[J]. Regional Sustainability, 2025, 6(3): 100230.

Figures/Tables 9

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

Table S1

List of the 162 countries analyzed in this study."

No.	Country	No.	Country	No.	Country	No.	Country
1	Afghanistan	42	Denmark	83	Latvia	124	Russia
2	Albania	43	Djibouti	84	Lebanon	125	Rwanda
3	Algeria	44	Dominican Republic	85	Lesotho	126	Sao Tome and Principe
4	Angola	45	Ecuador	86	Liberia	127	Saudi Arabia
5	Argentina	46	Egypt	87	Lithuania	128	Senegal
6	Armenia	47	El Salvador	88	Luxembourg	129	Serbia
7	Australia	48	Estonia	89	Madagascar	130	Sierra Leone
8	Austria	49	Eswatini	90	Malawi	131	Singapore
9	Azerbaijan	50	Ethiopia	91	Malaysia	132	Slovakia
10	Bahrain	51	Fiji	92	Maldives	133	Slovenia
11	Bangladesh	52	Finland	93	Mali	134	Somalia
12	Barbados	53	France	94	Malta	135	South Africa
13	Belarus	54	Gabon	95	Mauritania	136	South Sudan
14	Belgium	55	Gambia	96	Mauritius	137	Spain
15	Benin	56	Georgia	97	Mexico	138	Sri Lanka
16	Bhutan	57	Germany	98	Moldova	139	Sudan
17	Bolivia	58	Ghana	99	Mongolia	140	Suriname
18	Bosnia and Herzegovina	59	Greece	100	Montenegro	141	Sweden
19	Botswana	60	Guatemala	101	Morocco	142	Switzerland
20	Brazil	61	Guinea	102	Mozambique	143	Syria
21	Bulgaria	62	Guyana	103	Myanmar	144	Tajikistan
22	Burkina Faso	63	Haiti	104	Namibia	145	Tanzania
23	Burundi	64	Honduras	105	Nepal	146	Thailand
24	Cabo Verde	65	Hungary	106	Netherlands	147	Trinidad and Tobago
25	Cambodia	66	Iceland	107	New Zealand	148	Tunisia
26	Cameroon	67	India	108	Nicaragua	149	Turkey
27	Canada	68	Indonesia	109	Niger	150	Turkmenistan
28	Central African Republic	69	Iran	110	Nigeria	151	Uganda
29	Chad	70	Iraq	111	Norway	152	Ukraine
30	Chile	71	Ireland	112	Oman	153	United Arab Emirates
31	China	72	Israel	113	Pakistan	154	United Kingdom
32	Colombia	73	Italy	114	Panama	155	United States
33	Comoros	74	Jamaica	115	Papua New Guinea	156	Uruguay
34	Democratic Republic of the Congo	75	Japan	116	Paraguay	157	Uzbekistan
35	Republic of the Congo	76	Jordan	117	Peru	158	Venezuela
36	Costa Rica	77	Kazakhstan	118	Philippines	159	Vietnam
37	Côte d’Ivoire	78	Kenya	119	Poland	160	Yemen
38	Croatia	79	Korea	120	Portugal	161	Zambia
39	Cuba	80	Kuwait	121	Qatar	162	Zimbabwe
40	Cyprus	81	Kyrgyzstan	122	Republic of North Macedonia
41	Czech	82	Laos	123	Romania

Table S1

References 53

[1]	Agbedahin, A.V., 2019. Sustainable development, Education for Sustainable Development, and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: Emergence, efficacy, eminence, and future. Sustain. Dev. 27(4), 669-680. doi: 10.1002/sd.1931
[2]	Ainscow, M., 2020. Promoting inclusion and equity in education: Lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Education Policy. 6, 7-16.
[3]	Al Nuairi, A., Simsekler, M.C.E., Qazi, A., et al., 2023. A data-driven Bayesian belief network model for exploring patient experience drivers in healthcare sector. Ann. Oper. Res. 342(3), 1797-1817.
[4]	Albreiki, S., Simsekler, M.C.E., Qazi, A., et al., 2024. Assessment of the organizational factors in incident management practices in healthcare: A tree augmented Naive Bayes model. PLoS ONE. 19(3), e0299485, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299485.
[5]	Alonso-Martínez, D., 2018. Social progress and international patent collaboration. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 134, 169-177.
[6]	Alvino, F., Di Vaio, A., Hassan, R., et al., 2021. Intellectual capital and sustainable development: A systematic literature review. J. Intellect. Cap. 22(1), 76-94.
[7]	Beltrán-Esteve, M., Peiró-Palomino, J., Picazo-Tadeo, A.J., et al., 2023. Is the European Social Progress Index robust? Implications for the design of European Union regional cohesion policy. Reg. Stud. 57(11), 2285-2306.
[8]	Betancourt, T.S., Williams, T.P., Kellner, S.E., et al., 2012. Interrelatedness of child health, protection and well-being: An application of the SAFE model in Rwanda. Soc. Sci. Med. 74(10), 1504-1511. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.01.030 pmid: 22459187
[9]	Cerf, M.E., 2023. The social-education-economy-health nexus, development and sustainability: perspectives from low- and middle-income and African countries. Discov. Sustain. 4(1), 37, doi: 10.1007/s43621-023-00153-7.
[10]	Chankseliani, M., McCowan, T., 2021. Higher education and the sustainable development goals. High. Educ. 81, 1-8.
[11]	Chankseliani, M., Qoraboyev, I., Gimranova, D., 2021. Higher education contributing to local, national, and global development: New empirical and conceptual insights. High. Educ. 81(1), 109-127.
[12]	Cremin, P., Nakabugo, M.G., 2012. Education, development and poverty reduction: A literature critique. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 32(4), 499-506.
[13]	De Neve, J.E., Sachs, J.D., 2020. The SDGs and human well-being: a global analysis of synergies, trade-offs, and regional differences. Sci. Rep. 10(1), 15113, doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-71916-9.
[14]	Diep, L., Martins, F.P., Campos, L.C., et al., 2021. Linkages between sanitation and the sustainable development goals: A case study of Brazil. Sustain. Dev. 29(2), 339-352.
[15]	Estes, R.J., Sirgy, M.J., 2019. Global advances in quality of life and well-being: Past, present, and future. Soc. Indic. Res. 141(3), 1137-1164.
[16]	Fritz, M., Koch, M., 2014. Potentials for prosperity without growth: Ecological sustainability, social inclusion and the quality of life in 38 countries. Ecol. Econ. 108, 191-199.
[17]	Hosseini, S., Ivanov, D., 2020. Bayesian networks for supply chain risk, resilience and ripple effect analysis: A literature review. Expert Syst. Appl. 161, 113649, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113649.
[18]	Hutton, G., Chase, C., 2016. The knowledge base for achieving the sustainable development goal targets on water supply, sanitation and hygiene. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 13(6), 536, doi: 10.3390/ijerph13060536.
[19]	Kamran, M., Rafique, M.Z., Nadeem, A.M., et al., 2023. Does inclusive growth contribute towards sustainable development? Evidence from selected developing countries. Soc. Indic. Res. 165(2), 409-429.
[20]	Krishnan, S., 2019. Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) and disaster recovery for community resilience: A mixed methods study from Odisha, India. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 35, 101061, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.12.023.
[21]	Krysovatyy, A., Zvarych, I., Brodovska, O., et al., 2022. Global social sustainability and inclusion: The “voice” of social and environmental imbalances. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 15(12), 599, doi: 10.3390/jrfm15120599.
[22]	Kumaraswamy, N., Ekin, T., Park, C., et al., 2024. Using a Bayesian Belief Network to detect healthcare fraud. Expert Syst. Appl. 238, 122241, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2023.122241.
[23]	Majumder, S., Roy, S., Bose, A., et al., 2023. Multiscale GIS based-model to assess urban social vulnerability and associated risk: Evidence from 146 urban centers of Eastern India. Sust. Cities Soc. 96, 104692, doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2023.104692.
[24]	Manu, E.K., Chen, G.S., Hoang, N., et al., 2024. Natural resource extraction and environmental sustainability in Africa: The role of voice and accountability. Sustain. Dev. 32(6), 6104-6119.
[25]	Marcot, B.G., Hanea, A.M., 2021. What is an optimal value of k in k-fold cross-validation in discrete Bayesian network analysis? Comput. Stat. 36(3), 2009-2031.
[26]	Menon, S., Suresh, M., 2020. Synergizing education, research, campus operations, and community engagements towards sustainability in higher education: A literature review. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 21(5), 1015-1051.
[27]	O’Donnell, O., 2024. Health and health system effects on poverty: A narrative review of global evidence. Health Policy. 142, 105018, doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.105018.
[28]	Osundina, O.A., 2020. Sustainable development: Does improvement in education and health of women improve female labour force participation rate? Sustain. Dev. 28(1), 13-24. doi: 10.1002/sd.1961
[29]	Qazi, A., Al-Mhdawi, M.K.S., 2023. Exploring dependencies among global environmental, socioeconomic, and technological risks. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 98, 106912, doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106912.
[30]	Qazi, A., Angell, L.C., Daghfous, A., et al., 2023a. Network-based risk assessment of country-level sustainable development goals. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 99, 107014, doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2022.107014.
[31]	Qazi, A., Simsekler, M.C.E., Al-Mhdawi, M.K.S., 2023b. Exploring network-based dependencies between country-level sustainability and business risks. J. Clean Prod. 418, 138161, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138161.
[32]	Qazi, A., 2024. Exploring the impact of global competitiveness pillars on sustainable development. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 105, 107404, doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107404.
[33]	Qazi, A., Al-Mhdawi, M.K.S., 2024. Exploring the relative importance of sustainable competitiveness pillars. J. Clean Prod. 443, 140986, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.140986.
[34]	Rasheed, R., Rizwan, A., Javed, H., et al., 2021. Socio-economic and environmental impacts of COVID-19 pandemic in Pakistan—an integrated analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 28(16), 19926-19943.
[35]	Rosati, F., Faria, L.G.D., 2019. Addressing the SDGs in sustainability reports: The relationship with institutional factors. J. Clean Prod. 215, 1312-1326.
[36]	Roy, S., Bose, A., Basak, D., et al., 2024a. Towards sustainable society: The sustainable livelihood security (SLS) approach for prioritizing development and understanding sustainability: An insight from West Bengal, India. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 26(8), 20095-20126.
[37]	Roy, S., Majumder, S., Bose, A., et al., 2024b. Mapping the vulnerable: A framework for analyzing urban social vulnerability and its societal impact. Societal Impacts. 3(4), 100049, doi: 10.1016/j.socimp.2024.100049.
[38]	Roy, S., Majumder, S., Bose, A., et al., 2024c. GWPCA-based spatial analysis of urban vitality: A comparative assessment of three high-altitude Himalayan towns in India. J. Spat. Sci. 69(2), 593-620.
[39]	Roy, S., Majumder, S., Bose, A., et al., 2024d. Hilly terrain and housing wellness: Geo-visualizing spatial dynamics of urban household quality in the Himalayan town of Darjeeling, India. Singap. J. Trop. Geogr. 45(2), 361-383.
[40]	Roy, S., Majumder, S., Bose, A., et al., 2024e. The rich-poor divide: Unravelling the spatial complexities and determinants of wealth inequality in India. Appl. Geogr. 166, 103267, doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2024.103267.
[41]	Sabokro, M., Masud, M.M., Kayedian, A., 2021. The effect of green human resources management on corporate social responsibility, green psychological climate and employees’ green behavior. J. Clean Prod. 313, 127963, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127963.
[42]	Schofer, E., Ramirez, F.O., Meyer, J.W., 2021. The societal consequences of higher education. Sociol. Educ. 94(1), 1-19.
[43]	Simsekler, M.C.E., Qazi, A., 2022. Adoption of a data-driven bayesian belief network investigating organizational factors that influence patient safety. Risk Anal. 42(6), 1277-1293.
[44]	Social Progress Imperative, 2023. Global Social Progress Index. [2024-10-20]. https://www.socialprogress.org/social-progress-index.
[45]	Torkayesh, A.E., Ecer, F., Pamucar, D., et al., 2021. Comparative assessment of social sustainability performance: Integrated data-driven weighting system and CoCoSo model. Sust. Cities Soc. 71, 102975, doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2021.102975.
[46]	United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2023. Sustainable Development Report. [2024-10-20]. https://sdgtransformationcenter.org/reports/sustainable-development-report-2023.
[47]	Uzar, U., 2024. The impact of freedom of expression and belief on CO₂ emissions: An examination of the group of seven. J. Environ. Manage. 367, 121952, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121952.
[48]	Wamsler, C., 2020. Education for sustainability: Fostering a more conscious society and transformation towards sustainability. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 21(1), 112-130.
[49]	Winston, N., 2022. Sustainable community development: Integrating social and environmental sustainability for sustainable housing and communities. Sustain. Dev. 30(1), 191-202. doi: 10.1002/sd.2238
[50]	Wu, L.H., Ma, T.S., Bian, Y.C., et al., 2020. Improvement of regional environmental quality: Government environmental governance and public participation. Sci. Total Environ. 717, 137265, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137265.
[51]	Zafar, M.W., Shahbaz, M., Sinha, A., et al., 2020. How renewable energy consumption contribute to environmental quality? The role of education in OECD countries. J. Clean Prod. 268, 122149, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122149.
[52]	Žalėnienė I., Pereira, P., 2021. Higher education for sustainability: A global perspective. Geogr. Sustain. 2(2), 99-106.
[53]	Zhang, D., Zheng, M.B., Feng, G.F., et al., 2022. Does an environmental policy bring to green innovation in renewable energy? Renew. Energy. 195, 1113-1124.

Variable	Indicator
Advanced education	Expected years of tertiary education Women with advanced education Quality-weighted universities Citable documents Academic freedom
Basic education	Population with no schooling Primary school enrollment Secondary school attainment Gender parity in secondary attainment Equal access to quality education
Environmental quality	Outdoor air pollution Species protection Particulate matter pollution Lead exposure Recycling
Freedom and choice	Vulnerable employment Early marriage Perception of corruption Freedom over life choices Young people not in education, employment, or training
Health	Life expectancy beyond 60 years Mortality between 15 and 50 years Access to essential health services Equal access to quality healthcare Satisfaction with the availability of quality healthcare
Housing	Access to electricity Household air pollution Dissatisfaction with housing affordability Usage of clean fuels and technology for cooking
Inclusive society	Discrimination and violence against minorities Equal access index Count on relatives and friends for help in trouble
Information and communications	Mobile telephone subscriptions Internet users Access to online governance World press freedom index
Nutrition and medical care	Undernourishment Maternal mortality Child mortality Child stunting Infectious diseases Diet low in fruits and vegetables
Rights and voice	Political rights Freedom of peaceful assembly Equality before the law and the individual liberty index Equal protection index
Safety	Interpersonal violence Intimate partner violence Money stolen Feeling safe walking alone Transportation-related injuries
Water and sanitation	Basic water service Basic sanitation service Unsafe water, sanitation, and hygiene Satisfaction with water quality

Stage	Description
Data collection	Gathering data from the Sustainable Development Report (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2023) and social progress index (SPI) (Social Progress Imperative, 2023) datasets
Variable identification	Categorizing variables into different domains (e.g., health, education, environmental quality, and so on)
Data preprocessing	Cleaning data, ensuring no missing values, and discretizing variables into three performance states (low, medium, and high) using a uniform-width discretization scheme
Model selection	Adopting Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) for its ability to capture dependencies among the selected variables
Algorithm implementation	Using the Augmented Naive Bayes (ANB) algorithm to model cause-and-effect relationships effectively
Model validation	Performing k-fold cross-validation to evaluate model accuracy and generalizability
Analysis and interpretation	Examining model outputs, including key dependencies and their impact on sustainability performance

State category		Predicted sustainability state
State category		s1	s2	s3
Actual sustainability state	s1	16	6	0
	s2	6	48	13
	s3	0	13	60
Accuracy (%)		72.73	71.64	82.19

SPI component	Mean	Variance	SD	Min	Max	Sample size
Advanced education	40.48	482.10	21.96	6.16	85.35	162
Basic education	76.11	350.27	18.72	26.38	99.12	162
Environmental quality	58.30	146.86	12.12	25.17	80.67	162
Freedom and choice	62.34	229.57	15.15	22.88	90.87	162
Health	55.39	294.43	17.16	16.67	87.14	162
Housing	76.66	360.80	18.99	21.78	96.90	162
Inclusive society	55.37	323.70	17.99	8.88	93.82	162
Information and communications	67.54	273.97	16.55	23.05	94.28	162
Nutrition and medical care	77.24	316.99	17.80	21.84	96.74	162
Rights and voice	61.66	689.30	26.25	4.66	98.12	162
Safety	69.09	187.46	13.69	32.74	93.31	162
Water and sanitation	77.19	411.96	20.30	10.45	99.26	162
Sustainability performance	67.70	107.12	10.35	39.00	87.00	162