How does research influence SDG policy in a global context?

To assess how different countries are influencing SDG-related policy internationally, we examined the author affiliation country for each cited scholarly publication using OpenAlex data. Publications with multiple authors were counted once per author country, giving a clearer picture of how research from different national systems contributes to policy influence. We focus here on the top ten most cited countries, alongside a selection of countries from the Global South, specifically Argentina, Brazil, Egypt, Kenya, India, Mexico, Nigeria, and South Africa. They were chosen based on the volume of SDG articles published by authors from these countries over the past decade.   

2.1. Global North research is disproportionately cited in SDG-related policy  

Figure 10 shows the share of unique research publications cited at least once in policy, providing an indication of how widely policy documents draw on research from different countries. 78% of research cited at least once in SDG-related policy includes authors based solely in the Global North, including the US, UK, Canada, and EU member states. The US alone accounts for almost 47% of these publications, with the UK contributing around 18%. While both SDG and non-SDG policy documents display this trend, SDG policy shows slightly broader international engagement. These findings are likely due to a mix of factors, for example variations in knowledge economies, evidence access and usage, and coverage in the Overton database (see Appendix). 

Figure 10: Share of research publications cited in policy by top 10 countries and SDG status 

This figure shows the share of distinct research publications cited in SDG-related policy documents that had at least one author from the twenty most frequently cited research countries. Countries are split by whether the citing policy document was classified as SDG-related or not. Research country is determined from OpenAlex author affiliation data, and publications can be counted under multiple countries if they had international co-authors. Percentages are calculated relative to the total number of unique publications cited in SDG-related versus non-SDG-related policy documents, so values across countries can sum to more than 100%.

What is noteworthy is that the US and UK share of SDG policy citations is substantially higher than their share of SDG published articles (Table 2). Although this may in part reflect Overton’s strong coverage of these countries, the consistent pattern in policy citations across countries suggests that there is a disproportionate interest in research from these countries when shaping policy. 

Table 2: Percentage of SDG article publications and percentage of distinct research publications cited in SDG policy, by country 2015–2024.     

Although they don’t appear in the top 10 countries by volume of research cited in SDG policy, China and India are important producers of SDG research. Articles from China accounted for 16% of all SDG articles published 2015–2025 while articles from India accounted for 5% of all SDG articles in the same time period.

Looking at the share of total citations in SDG-related policy provides further evidence of this imbalance, giving a sense of how heavily policy draws on evidence from an individual country. The heatmap below (Fig. 11) shows the percentage breakdown of research citations in each country’s SDG-related policy documents, based on the author’s country of origin. A high percentage here signals that a country’s research exerts a strong influence on policy, even if concentrated in a relatively small number of highly cited outputs. 

Here too, the USA’s share of citations is higher than that of any other country, making up around 30-40% of citations in many countries’ policy documents. US research is also heavily used domestically, making up 50% of SDG citations from US policy to US-only authored research.  

The UK consistently ranks second, with particular prominence in Commonwealth countries including Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa. At the same time, both the USA and UK draw extensively on international research: in the USA, research without any US authors accounts for over 30% of citations in SDG-related policy; in the UK, over 65% of citations in SDG-related policy are to research with no UK-based authors.  

Figure 11: Country of origin for research citations in SDG-related policy

This figure shows the share of citations in SDG-related policy documents by the country of origin of the cited research. The policy source country is defined as the country of the institution publishing the policy document. The research country is based on the author affiliations of the cited research (from OpenAlex). Because research publications often have authors from more than one country, a single citation may be attributed to multiple research countries, meaning row percentages can sum to more than 100%. The analysis is limited to a set of selected countries (listed along both axes of the heatmap). Percentages are calculated as the share of all citations from each policy source country that included at least one author from the given research country.

2.2. Most countries cite their own research infrequently – Australia, India and Brazil are exceptions  

For most of the countries we examined, citation of domestic research is rare, often representing less than 20% of SDG policy citations. Australia, India, and Brazil stand out as exceptions.

Of the three countries, Australia records the highest domestic rate, with 43% of citations including at least one Australian author. This likely reflects the country’s “whole of Australia” approach to the SDGs, embedded across government, universities, civil society and business. Initiatives such as Transforming Australia demonstrate close collaboration between researchers and policymakers.^x

In India, 41% of SDG citations include at least one Indian author. Of these, 28% are exclusively authored by Indian researchers, and 13% are international collaborations involving Indian authors. A driver for this domestic citation pattern may be the concentration of government-funded research, which makes up over half of India’s total research output.^xi The burgeoning volume of SDG-related research from India, and the inclusion of researchers from top Indian institutes on policy advisory committees, are other likely factors.^xii,xiii

Brazil also shows a high domestic citation rate, with nearly 40% of SDG-related policy citations referencing Brazilian authors. Here, domestic research is especially influential in environment, health, and social development, where national research strengths align closely with policy needs.

2.3. Low- and middle-income countries remain highly dependent on research from high-income countries

Despite the global nature of SDG challenges, there is relatively lower local representation in research cited by national policies among the LMICs we examined. Policy documents across Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East tend to cite research from high-income countries, especially the USA and UK. In Mexico and South Africa, just 19% and 22% of SDG policy citations are to domestically authored work respectively.

There is also little evidence of citing research from regional peers: few of the countries we looked at in the Global South cite each other’s research, suggesting that despite shared challenges, there is a gap in South-to-South knowledge exchange.

This lack of regional integration highlights structural barriers, such as limited visibility of Southern research, linguistic divides, and uneven participation in global publishing systems. As previous research has highlighted, the systemic exclusion of Global South researchers from policy can reduce its relevance, and therefore impact, failing to reflect local priorities or lived realities.^xiv

2.4 Chinese-affiliated research is cited widely in international SDG policies

Overton’s data on Chinese policy are comparatively limited, due to access constraints (many documents are not readily accessible or publicly available). This limits our ability to analyse Chinese policy citation patterns. However, we can examine where Chinese research is cited in policy from other countries, offering insight into its global policy impact.

We’ve separated out policy documents published by IGOs and EU institutions from other countries. Policy documents from IGOs such as the United Nations, UNESCO, WHO, IMF, and OECD are attributed to “IGO”, rather than to the country where the organisation is headquartered. The same approach applies to documents produced by European Union institutions (including the Publications Office of the European Union, the Joint Research Centre, and the European Central Bank), which are attributed to the “EU” rather than to their host country. This distinction reflects the international remit of these organisations and prevents distortion of domestic policy figures.

Outside of China, Chinese-affiliated research is widely cited in SDG policy documents, with China appearing in the top 15 most cited countries for SDG policy. Chinese research is widely cited in SDG related policy documents produced by IGOs, followed by policy documents from the USA which account for 22% of SDG policy citations to Chinese research. This is then followed by the UK (8%), the EU (7%) and Germany (6%) (Fig. 12).

Figure 12: Top ten locations citing Chinese research in policy by SDG status 

This figure shows the top 10 countries citing Chinese-authored research in SDG and non-SDG related policy documents.