Businesses’ Role in the Fulfillment of the 2030 Agenda: A Bibliometric Analysis

Citation: Garrido-Ruso, M.; Aibar-Guzmán, B.; Monteiro, A.P. Businesses’ Role in the Fulfillment of the 2030 Agenda: A Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148754 Academic Editor: Gisela Cebrián Received: 31 May 2022 Accepted: 11 July 2022 Published: 18 July 2022 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). sustainability Article Businesses’ Role in the Fulfillment of the 2030 Agenda: A Bibliometric Analysis María Garrido-Ruso 1,* , Beatriz Aibar-Guzmán1and Albertina Paula Monteiro 2 1Department of Financial Economics and Accounting, University of Santiago de Compostela, 15782 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; [email protected] 2Porto Accounting and Business School, Polytechnic of Porto, 4465-004 Matosinhos, Portugal; [email protected] *Correspondence: mariagarrido.r[email protected] Abstract: Companies worldwide can play a fundamental role in the fulfillment of the 2030 Agenda. This paper aims to determine the scope of the existing literature about the role that organizations play in contributing to the advancement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A bibliometric analysis is conducted considering the papers specifically focused on SDGs and businesses published from 2015 to 2021 in journals indexed in the Scopus database. The analysis shows that approximately 80% of the studies on this topic have been published in the last three years. Moreover, only one journal (Sustainability) has published more than the 50% of the publications on the subject. The final sample is divided into 11 clusters that analyze different perspectives within the same research topic, and, in all these clusters, practically all of the papers have been published in the last two years, which confirms that this issue is increasing its presence in the academic world. This work extends the existing research on the subject, taking into account the publications of the last year, so it is an update on this “hot topic”. Moreover, it contributes to providing a reference frame of the state of the art of this research topic and can orientate researchers in the development of future studies Keywords: Agenda 2030; sustainable development goals; business; private sector 1. Introduction The world is changing and the impact that activities have on our planet is provoking more and more negative consequences, which has meant that the main institutions worldwide have made a global commitment necessary to stop this deterioration. That is why the United Nations [ 1 ] proposed to continue the world’s economic development in a sustainable way [ 2 ] and established the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in September 2000 [1–3]. Fifteen years later, more ambitious goals were set to continue on the path of the MDGs, and the UN defined the 2030 Agenda and their 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with the intention of achieving a better world [ 4 – 6 ]. The main difference between the two proposals is that the SDGs are more global and involve not only government institutions, but also any type of private organization, so that companies can acquire a fundamental role, from this moment, to contribute to sustainable development [7]. The main difference between the ODM and the ODS is that the latter considers that any type of company can provide solutions for greater sustainability. It is about creating value and avoiding damage to the environment by carrying out their activity as little as possible, based on sustainable business models [ 8 ]. Therefore, companies worldwide can play a fundamental role in the fulfillment of the 2030 Agenda [9]. During the last few years, a stream of research about the implications of the SDGs for business strategies started. This study aims to analyze the state of the art in such research with the intention of determining the main issues surrounding this topic. The methodology followed was a bibliometric analysis of papers focused on the role that companies have Sustainability 2022,14, 8754. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148754 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 2 of 35 in contributing to the fulfillment of the SDGs published from 2015 to 2021 in journals indexed on the Scopus database. We evaluated the temporal evolution of publications, the number of publications per journal and year, the number of publications per country, and the number of publications by author. This study contributes to the SDG literature with a very complete analysis of the existing research on the role that businesses can play in achieving the SDGs and provides a clear summary of the subject. Consequently, we provide a systematization of the extant research on this subject that allows the identification of knowledge flows, active research topics, and lead authors, among other issues. Thus, this study’s findings depict the current status of the research on the role of businesses in the fulfillment of SDGs and provide a frame of reference that could guide researchers regarding the direction of future studies on this subject. The rest of this paper is structured as follows: after this introduction, the next section contextualizes the SDGs and explains the role that companies can play in achieving them. Section 3contains the empirical framework of the analysis and, consequently, in Section 4, the main findings are presented. Finally, Section 5presents the main conclusions of the study, the implications of the findings, and some limitations and topics for future researchers. 2. Theory 2.1. Sustainable Development Goals The SDGs were defined in September 2015 by the United Nations at the United Nations General Assembly in New York [ 10 ]. The highest authorities of more than 150 countries met to approve the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [ 2 ]. Under the name “Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”, a number of proposals were defined, and the 193 countries that are members of the UN committed to fulfilling this plan [2,11,12]. The main objective of this meeting was to achieve a commitment to a better world; therefore, the 2030 Agenda included 169 targets and 261 indicators, grouped into 17 SDGs (Figure 1), with the aim of improving our environment by guaranteeing sustainable development in all possible areas (social, economic, and environmental) [ 1 – 3 , 13 – 16 ]. Specifically, the 17 objectives are: (1) no poverty, (2) zero hunger, (3) good health and well-being, (4) quality education, (5) gender equality, (6) clean water and sanitation, (7) affordable and clean energy, (8) decent work and economic growth, (9) industry, innovation, and infrastructure, (10) reduced inequalities, (11) sustainable cities and communities, (12) responsible consumption and production, (13) climate action, (14) life below water, (15) life on land, (16) peace, justice, and strong institutions, and (17) partnerships for the goals. As we can see, most of the SDGs deal with issues as important and serious as human rights, and they cover actions for eradicating inequalities (e.g., poverty, hunger, health, or education) and the bad habits that exist today on our planet, proposing a sustainable way of living [ 13 , 17 – 19 ]. The exception is SDG 17 “Partnerships for the goals”—this objective is the only one that, instead of establishing a purpose to be achieved, indicates the procedure to be followed to meet the other objectives. Compliance with the SDGs is not just a matter for the public institutions of each country—it is necessary that all agents align themselves to achieving a better world. This means that not only should governments implement policies and actions to meet these goals by 2030, but private organizations should also be involved in these objectives [6,20]. Moreover, it is necessary to highlight the correlation that exists between the objectives set by the UN. This means that any defined plan to improve one of the 17 objectives will have an impact on the others, so organizations should consider these goals as a whole [ 12 , 21 , 22 ]. They should not focus on one specific objective, since the interrelationship that exists between the 17 should lead to the design of a joint action plan to have an impact on several of these objectives [12]. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 3 of 35 Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 36 Figure 1. Source: https://www.un.org/es/sustainable-development-goals (accessed on 23 May 2022). As we can see, most of the SDGs deal with issues as important and serious as human rights, and they cover actions for eradicating inequalities (e.g., poverty, hunger, health, or education) and the bad habits that exist today on our planet, proposing a sustainable way of living [13,17–19]. The exception is SDG 17 “Partnerships for the goals”—this objective is the only one that, instead of establishing a purpose to be achieved, indicates the procedure to be followed to meet the other objectives. Compliance with the SDGs is not just a matter for the public institutions of each country—it is necessary that all agents align themselves to achieving a better world. This means that not only should governments implement policies and actions to meet these goals by 2030, but private organizations should also be involved in these objectives [6,20]. Moreover, it is necessary to highlight the correlation that exists between the objectives set by the UN. This means that any defined plan to improve one of the 17 objectives will have an impact on the others, so organizations should consider these goals as a whole [12,21,22]. They should not focus on one specific objective, since the interrelationship that exists between the 17 should lead to the design of a joint action plan to have an impact on several of these objectives [12]. If the deadlines established by the UN are met, within 8 years, these 17 objectives should have been achieved. That is why, at the beginning of the 2020–2030 decade, the leaders involved in this mission defined a plan to “accelerate the compliance with the SDGs by 2030” [6] (p. 61). However, no one could imagine that this plan would be threatened by the COVID-19 pandemic [17,23]. In the year 2020, an unthinkable situation in the 21st century caused economic life to remain stagnant and the priority of governments to be managing the health situation that was being experienced. Consequently, the 2030 Agenda became something that remained in the background [23]. Practically, all of the SDGs have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic that we have been experiencing since 2020, but SDG 3 has been affected in a more pronounced way [17]. 2.2. Business and SDGs As SDG 17 establishes, the SDGs should be achieved by partnerships [24]. This means that this is not an issue that only affects public institutions or governments—companies are a key element in achieving the SDGs [14,18,25–28]. The SDGs are of such magnitude that it is not enough for one actor to commit to them; commitments of Figure 1. Source: https://www.un.org/es/sustainable-development-goals (accessed on 23 May 2022). If the deadlines established by the UN are met, within 8 years, these 17 objectives should have been achieved. That is why, at the beginning of the 2020–2030 decade, the leaders involved in this mission defined a plan to “accelerate the compliance with the SDGs by 2030” [ 6 ] (p. 61). However, no one could imagine that this plan would be threatened by the COVID-19 pandemic [ 17 , 23 ]. In the year 2020, an unthinkable situation in the 21st century caused economic life to remain stagnant and the priority of governments to be managing the health situation that was being experienced. Consequently, the 2030 Agenda became something that remained in the background [ 23 ]. Practically, all of the SDGs have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic that we have been experiencing since 2020, but SDG 3 has been affected in a more pronounced way [17]. 2.2. Business and SDGs As SDG 17 establishes, the SDGs should be achieved by partnerships [ 24 ]. This means that this is not an issue that only affects public institutions or governments—companies are a key element in achieving the SDGs [ 14 , 18 , 25 – 28 ]. The SDGs are of such magnitude that it is not enough for one actor to commit to them; commitments of businesses, governments, non-governmental organizations, and stakeholders are needed [1,2,28,29]. The United Nations defend the key role that organizations play in this context. Specifically, the 2030 Agenda states that “we acknowledge the diversity of the private sector, ranging from micro-enterprises to cooperatives to multinationals. We call upon all businesses to apply their creativity and innovation to solving sustainable development challenges” [1] (p. 29). Therefore, the question that companies must ask themselves is how to collaborate with SDGs and how to incorporate this into their strategy [ 3 , 26 , 28 ]. Organizations must design their business plans from a more sustainable perspective considering two premises: harm the SDGs as little as possible and implement actions to help achieve those goals (e.g., save energy, reduce emissions, circular economy, etc.) [ 6 , 15 , 26 , 29 – 31 ]. This is the new challenge for businesses to not just maximize their benefits; now, they must do so in a sustainable way and collaborate with the environment that surrounds us [28,32]. We must consider that, these days, the economic objective is not the only factor that moves an organization. With all of the inequalities and problems mentioned above, it is essential that the commitment of companies to the SDGs has fundamental importance within the organizations, because it is a key tool to be competitive in the long-term [ 30 ]. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 4 of 35 Until recently, the commitment of companies to society was based on specific actions, such as donations or participation in some social activity, but this is not enough [ 30 ]. This mission involves a huge complexity for existing companies, since it is very difficult to change the general perspective of work; for startups, or for new companies or entrepreneurs, the idea would be to create a concept from scratch, based on the sustainable economy [ 4 , 26 ]. Moreover, this is an opportunity for businesses to work in a sustainable way, showing their stakeholders their commitment to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities [17,18,26,33] . At the beginning of the 2030 Agenda, and after a survey carried out at a company level, “more than 70% of global corporations plan to incorporate SDGs into their business and more than 40% plan to include SDGs in their business strategy within five years” [30] (p. 202). This fundamental role that companies are playing in achieving the SDGs is reflected in the academic field. A stream of research is investigating the relationship between business and the SDGs. It is a relatively new topic, considering that the SDGs were defined in 2015. The main question is how companies can incorporate the SDGs within their corporate strategy [ 34 , 35 ]. Khaled et al. demonstrated the importance of this topic, affirming that “it is crucial to explore potential frameworks that would guide companies on how they can align their strategies as well as measure and communicate their contribution to the SDGs” [ 14 ] (p. 1). There are many questions about the relationship between the SDGs and business performance (e.g., if they prioritize SDGs or focus on a global perspective, if they elaborate on SDGs reports, if these activities have economic advantages for companies, and how the SDGs are perceived by their stakeholders) [26,29,34,36]. Taking into account the fundamental role of companies in contributing to the SDGs, the UN Global Compact, the GRI, and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development elaborated a document, the SDG Compass, to help businesses to include the SDGs in their plans [ 37 ]. This guide explains to companies how to include the SDGs in their strategy and how they should communicate it so that this information reaches their stakeholders [ 36 , 38 ]. Specifically, the SDG Compass defines five steps: (1) Understanding the SDGs; (2) Defining priorities; (3) Setting goals; (4) Integrating; and (5) Reporting. 3. Data and Methods 3.1. Sample Selection With the objective of answering the research question, we conducted a bibliometric analysis. The first step in this process was to select the papers that we were going to analyze. First of all, we started a literature review focused on the topic and, after reviewing a considerable number of articles related to the topic, we defined our search criteria: 1. As we explained before, the SDGs were defined in 2015 by the United Nations, so we started our search that year and we covered until the year 2021 to be able to analyze all of the possible complete years from its definition to the present; 2. Papers were selected from Scopus, because it includes a wide range of studies about this topic, has more journals indexed than the Web of Science, and is a very common tool used for bibliometric studies [39,40]; 3. We focus our search on journal articles, rejecting other results, such as conferences or books chapters, among others; 4. To obtain a more complete and interdisciplinary result, no filter referring to the different areas of knowledge was included; 5. The articles should be written in English; 6. Our search criteria were: “Title, keywords, or abstract”. Following these steps, we introduced into the Scopus database the following search: (TITLE (“SDG”) OR TITLE (“Sustainable Development Goal”) OR TITLE (“SDG*”) OR TITLE (“Sustainable Development Goal*”) OR TITLE (“GLOBAL AGENDA”) OR TITLE (“2030 agenda”) OR TITLE (“Agenda 2030”) OR TITLE (“SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AGENDA”) AND KEY (“SDG”) OR KEY (“SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOAL”) AND ABS (“organisation”) OR ABS (“firm”) OR ABS (“corporat*”) OR ABS (“com Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 5 of 35 pany”) OR ABS (“business”) OR ABS (“ENTERPRISE”) OR ABS (“PRIVATE SECTOR”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (SRCTYPE, “j”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “ar”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2021) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2020) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2019) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2018) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2017) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2016) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2015)) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “English”)). This search returned 543 empirical and non-empirical studies. Once we obtained these results, we firstly read the abstracts of all of the articles to check if they really dealt with the topic that we wanted to investigate. After this first impression, in which some invalid results were already eliminated, we started the next step, in which each of the authors separately read and analyzed the papers, summarizing their main characteristics, and, subsequently, the results were compared. In this analysis, papers focused on public organizations or those conducted in an academic setting were eliminated. Finally, 196 papers were identified. Figure 2summarizes the steps taken to obtain the final sample. Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 36 alyze. First of all, we started a literature review focused on the topic and, after reviewing a considerable number of articles related to the topic, we defined our search criteria: 1. As we explained before, the SDGs were defined in 2015 by the United Nations, so we started our search that year and we covered until the year 2021 to be able to analyze all of the possible complete years from its definition to the present; 2. Papers were selected from Scopus, because it includes a wide range of studies about this topic, has more journals indexed than the Web of Science, and is a very common tool used for bibliometric studies [39,40]; 3. We focus our search on journal articles, rejecting other results, such as conferences or books chapters, among others; 4. To obtain a more complete and interdisciplinary result, no filter referring to the different areas of knowledge was included; 5. The articles should be written in English; 6. Our search criteria were: “Title, keywords, or abstract”. Following these steps, we introduced into the Scopus database the following search: (TITLE (“SDG”) OR TITLE (“Sustainable Development Goal”) OR TITLE (“SDG*”) OR TITLE (“Sustainable Development Goal*”) OR TITLE (“GLOBAL AGENDA”) OR TITLE (“2030 agenda”) OR TITLE (“Agenda 2030”) OR TITLE (“SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AGENDA”) AND KEY (“SDG”) OR KEY (“SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOAL”) AND ABS (“organisation”) OR ABS (“firm”) OR ABS (“corporat*”) OR ABS (“com pany”) OR ABS (“business”) OR ABS (“ENTERPRISE”) OR ABS (“PRIVATE SECTOR”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (SRCTYPE, “j”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “ar”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2021) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2020) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2019) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2018) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2017) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2016) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBYEAR, 2015)) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “English”)). This search returned 543 empirical and non-empirical studies. Once we obtained these results, we firstly read the abstracts of all of the articles to check if they really dealt with the topic that we wanted to investigate. After this first impression, in which some invalid results were already eliminated, we started the next step, in which each of the authors separately read and analyzed the papers, summarizing their main characteristics, and, subsequently, the results were compared. In this analysis, papers focused on public organizations or those conducted in an academic setting were eliminated. Finally, 196 papers were identified. Figure 2 summarizes the steps taken to obtain the final sample. Figure 2. Search process. 3.2. Data Analysis and Procedure Once we obtained our final sample, we analyzed the data using the software VOSviewer, specifically version 1.6.18. It was created by Nees Jan van Eck and Ludo Waltman CWTS Leiden University, The Netherlands, with the objective of “creating maps based on network data and visualizing and exploring maps” [41] (p. 3). This visuFigure 2. Search process. 3.2. Data Analysis and Procedure Once we obtained our final sample, we analyzed the data using the software VOSviewer, specifically version 1.6.18. It was created by Nees Jan van Eck and Ludo Waltman CWTS Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands, with the objective of “creating maps based on network data and visualizing and exploring maps” [ 41 ] (p. 3). This visualization software package was adopted because of “its powerful user graphic-interface that can generate maps to describe the connections of each analysis unit” [42] (p. 304). Although there are other instruments that can be used for conducting literature reviews (e.g., PRISMA-statement and SciMAT), we chose VOSviewer because it has been broadly used in previous studies [43,44]. 4. Findings 4.1. Scientific Production on the Role That Business Has in the Achievement of the SDGs Our analysis shows that we are facing an emerging issue in the academic world. Although it is true that the SDGs were established in 2015, it was not until 2019 that this topic began to gain strength in the literature. This evidence confirms that, initially, compliance with the SDGs was considered the responsibility of public organizations, while, in the last two years, the role of business has been promoted as a fundamental factor when it comes to meeting these objectives. Figure 3shows the chronological evolution of the publications on the role that businesses play in the achievement of the SDGs since 2015. As can be seen, the research on this topic actually started in 2016. with the work of Scheyvens et al. in the journal Sustainable Development, and increased its presence in the literature from the year 2019 until today. Most papers were published during the last two years, specifically 161, which is 82.14% of the total published papers, so the trend of this topic is clearly increasing. Table 1reports the number of publications per journal. We selected journals with five or more articles published about the topic, because the vast majority published four (1 journal), three (3 journals), two (11 journals), or fewer (66 journals) studies. Sustainability is clearly the journal with the highest number of publications, at 50 papers, with a great difference from the second journal, which is the Journal of Cleaner Production, at 15 publications. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 6 of 35 Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 36 alization software package was adopted because of “its powerful user graphic-interface that can generate maps to describe the connections of each analysis unit” [42] (p. 304). Although there are other instruments that can be used for conducting literature reviews (e.g., PRISMA-statement and SciMAT), we chose VOSviewer because it has been broadly used in previous studies [43,44]. 4. Findings 4.1. Scientific Production on the Role That Business Has in the Achievement of the SDGs Our analysis shows that we are facing an emerging issue in the academic world. Although it is true that the SDGs were established in 2015, it was not until 2019 that this topic began to gain strength in the literature. This evidence confirms that, initially, compliance with the SDGs was considered the responsibility of public organizations, while, in the last two years, the role of business has been promoted as a fundamental factor when it comes to meeting these objectives. Figure 3 shows the chronological evolution of the publications on the role that businesses play in the achievement of the SDGs since 2015. As can be seen, the research on this topic actually started in 2016. with the work of Scheyvens et al. in the journal Sustainable Development, and increased its presence in the literature from the year 2019 until today. Most papers were published during the last two years, specifically 161, which is 82.14% of the total published papers, so the trend of this topic is clearly increasing. Figure 3. Number of documents by year. Table 1 reports the number of publications per journal. We selected journals with five or more articles published about the topic, because the vast majority published four (1 journal), three (3 journals), two (11 journals), or fewer (66 journals) studies. Sustainability is clearly the journal with the highest number of publications, at 50 papers, with a great difference from the second journal, which is the Journal of Cleaner Production, at 15 publications. Table 1. Total number of publications per journal. Source Documents Sustainability 50 Journal o f Cleaner Production 15 Business Strategy and the Environment 7 Sustainable Development 6 Business Strategy and Development 5 Figure 3. Number of documents by year. Table 1. Total number of publications per journal. Source Documents Sustainability 50 Journal of Cleaner Production 15 Business Strategy and the Environment 7 Sustainable Development 6 Business Strategy and Development 5 Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 5 Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes 5 Source: Scopus database. Figure 4provides the growth of sources attending to the number of articles published since 2015. The “Sustainability” journal has shown exponential growth in the number of articles published related to SDGs as the number of articles published in this journal in 2015 was 0, which has increased to 23 during the last year. Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 36 Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 5 Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes 5 Source: Scopus database. Figure 4 provides the growth of sources attending to the number of articles published since 2015. The “Sustainability” journal has shown exponential growth in the number of articles published related to SDGs as the number of articles published in this journal in 2015 was 0, which has increased to 23 during the last year. Figure 4. Documents per year by source. The fact that we are working with such a novel topic in the academic world means that the authors who are dedicated to investigating this subject have not yet had time to publish a large number of articles on the topic. Figure 5 shows the authors that have published more than two papers about this topic. We can see that the maximum number of articles belonging to a researcher is four, a situation that García-Sánchez, van Tulder, and van Zanten share. Figure 5. Documents by author. Figure 6 shows the distribution of the papers on the role that businesses have in the achievement of the SDGs. In total, we found more than 50 countries, and 29 with two or Figure 4. Documents per year by source. The fact that we are working with such a novel topic in the academic world means that the authors who are dedicated to investigating this subject have not yet had time to publish a large number of articles on the topic. Figure 5shows the authors that have published more than two papers about this topic. We can see that the maximum number of articles belonging to a researcher is four, a situation that García-Sánchez, van Tulder, and van Zanten share. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 7 of 35 Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 36 Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 5 Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes 5 Source: Scopus database. Figure 4 provides the growth of sources attending to the number of articles published since 2015. The “Sustainability” journal has shown exponential growth in the number of articles published related to SDGs as the number of articles published in this journal in 2015 was 0, which has increased to 23 during the last year. Figure 4. Documents per year by source. The fact that we are working with such a novel topic in the academic world means that the authors who are dedicated to investigating this subject have not yet had time to publish a large number of articles on the topic. Figure 5 shows the authors that have published more than two papers about this topic. We can see that the maximum number of articles belonging to a researcher is four, a situation that García-Sánchez, van Tulder, and van Zanten share. Figure 5. Documents by author. Figure 6 shows the distribution of the papers on the role that businesses have in the achievement of the SDGs. In total, we found more than 50 countries, and 29 with two or Figure 5. Documents by author. Figure 6shows the distribution of the papers on the role that businesses have in the achievement of the SDGs. In total, we found more than 50 countries, and 29 with two or fewer publications. In Figure, 6 we included those that have three or more articles about this topic in Scopus. As can be seen, the country that has published the most papers on the role that business has in the achievement of the SDGs is Spain, with 30 articles, followed by the United Kingdom, with 27 papers. Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 36 fewer publications. In Figure, 6 we included those that have three or more articles about this topic in Scopus. As can be seen, the country that has published the most papers on the role that business has in the achievement of the SDGs is Spain, with 30 articles, followed by the United Kingdom, with 27 papers. In Figure 6, we can see how the countries with the most published studies on this subject are developed countries, specifically, European countries (Spain, the United Kingdom, and Italy), followed by the United States. However, it should be noted that two countries of the BRICS, Brazil and China, are also among the top ten with a higher number of publications. This could mean that these countries are beginning to become involved in compliance with the SDGs, and their companies are already becoming aware of a more sustainable business model. Ali et al. reported on how BRICS countries are making efforts to engage their activities with the SDGs, but the main conclusion is that they are focusing only on some objectives, instead of covering them as a whole [45]. Figure 6. Number of documents by country. Finally, Table 2 shows the number of publications depending on the organization. To elaborate the table, we considered the most relevant organizations (those that have published three or more articles), since the vast majority have published two (35 institutions) or one (111 organizations). As can be seen, the most productive universities are located in Europe. The University of Salamanca is the only one with five publications. Although the first places belong mostly to European universities, it is worth highlighting the second place of the University of Sao Paulo. Table 2. Documents by organization. Organization TP University of Salamanca 5 University of Sao Paulo 4 University Rey Juan Carlos 4 University College London 4 Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam 4 Parthenope University of Naples 4 University of Santiago de Compostela 4 Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University 4 University of Valencia 3 University of Oviedo 3 Vaal University of Technology 3 Massey University 3 Figure 6. Number of documents by country. In Figure 6, we can see how the countries with the most published studies on this subject are developed countries, specifically, European countries (Spain, the United Kingdom, and Italy), followed by the United States. However, it should be noted that two countries of the BRICS, Brazil and China, are also among the top ten with a higher number of publications. This could mean that these countries are beginning to become involved in compliance with the SDGs, and their companies are already becoming aware of a more sustainable business model. Ali et al. reported on how BRICS countries are making efforts to engage their activities with the SDGs, but the main conclusion is that they are focusing only on some objectives, instead of covering them as a whole [45]. Finally, Table 2shows the number of publications depending on the organization. To elaborate the table, we considered the most relevant organizations (those that have published three or more articles), since the vast majority have published two (35 institutions) Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 8 of 35 or one (111 organizations). As can be seen, the most productive universities are located in Europe. The University of Salamanca is the only one with five publications. Although the first places belong mostly to European universities, it is worth highlighting the second place of the University of Sao Paulo. Table 2. Documents by organization. Organization TP University of Salamanca 5 University of Sao Paulo 4 University Rey Juan Carlos 4 University College London 4 Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam 4 Parthenope University of Naples 4 University of Santiago de Compostela 4 Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University 4 University of Valencia 3 University of Oviedo 3 Vaal University of Technology 3 Massey University 3 Technical University of Denmark 3 University of Waterloo 3 University of the Aegan 3 Syddansk University 3 Copenhagen Business School 3 Uinversity Studi di Roma Tor Vergata 3 Sant’Anna Scuola Universitaria Superiore Pisa 3 London South Bank University 3 University of South Australia 3 Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology 3 Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment 3 TP: total publications; Source: data collected from Scopus. 4.2. Research Subtopics We conducted a bibliographic coupling analysis with the objective of identifying different research subtopics within the sample. This analysis was based on the idea that “the relatedness of items is determined based on the number of references they share” (vosViewer software, version 1.6.18; Nees Jan van Eck and Ludo Waltman, CWTS Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands). In this case, 13 out of the 196 publications did not have any kind of connection. Thus, the largest set of connected items was made up of 183 publications. Figure 7shows the bibliographic coupling analysis of the publications on the role that business has in the achievement of the SDGs without considering the ones that are not connected to each other. Van Eck and Waltman claimed that the “clusters that are located close to each other tend to be strongly related in terms of citations, while clusters that are located further away from each other tend to be less strongly related” [ 46 ] (p. 1062). Figure 7shows the eleven clusters generated by the bibliographic coupling analysis. VosViewer detected that three articles formed individual clusters and consequently, they are graphically represented in points completely separated from each other and from the main clusters, so we decided not to take them into account in this section. In addition, the initial result produced 11 clusters, but the reality was that the last two did not have enough links to be considered relevant. Therefore, below, we expose information on the first nine clusters in this analysis. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 9 of 35 Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 36 Technical University of Denmark 3 University of Waterloo 3 University of the Aegan 3 Syddansk University 3 Copenhagen Business School 3 Uinversity Studi di Roma Tor Vergata 3 Sant’Anna Scuola Universitaria Superiore Pisa 3 London South Bank University 3 University of South Australia 3 Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology 3 Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment 3 TP: total publications; Source: data collected from Scopus. 4.2. Research Subtopics We conducted a bibliographic coupling analysis with the objective of identifying different research subtopics within the sample. This analysis was based on the idea that “the relatedness of items is determined based on the number of references they share” (vosViewer software, version 1.6.18; Nees Jan van Eck and Ludo Waltman, CWTS Leiden University, The Netherlands). In this case, 13 out of the 196 publications did not have any kind of connection. Thus, the largest set of connected items was made up of 183 publications. Figure 7 shows the bibliographic coupling analysis of the publications on the role that business has in the achievement of the SDGs without considering the ones that are not connected to each other. Van Eck and Waltman claimed that the “clusters that are located close to each other tend to be strongly related in terms of citations, while clusters that are located further away from each other tend to be less strongly related” [46] (p. 1062). Figure 7 shows the eleven clusters generated by the bibliographic coupling analysis. Figure 7. Bibliographic coupling analysis. Source: vosViewer. VosViewer detected that three articles formed individual clusters and consequently, they are graphically represented in points completely separated from each other and from the main clusters, so we decided not to take them into account in this section. In addition, the initial result produced 11 clusters, but the reality was that the last two did not have enough links to be considered relevant. Therefore, below, we expose information on the first nine clusters in this analysis. Figure 7. Bibliographic coupling analysis. Source: vosViewer. -Cluster 1 (colored red)—How businesses address the SDGs: Twenty-five papers that analyzed the business contribution to the SDGs make up this cluster. The main topic of these works is how companies can perform to achieve Agenda 2030. The articles with the highest number of links were those by Ordóñez-Ponce et al. (2021), Calabrese et al. (2021), van Zanten and van Tulder (2018), and Vildasen (2018). With regards to the articles’ impacts, the paper with the highest number of citations, both in absolute and in relative terms, was that by Scheyvens et al. (2016) [ 47 ]. The following papers with higher academic impact were those by van Zanten and van Tulder (2018) [ 34 ] and Gunawan et al. (2020) [ 48 ]. Conversely, the papers with a lower number of citations were those by Bianchi (2021) [ 25 ], Andrian et al. (2021) [ 49 ], and Shah and Acharya (2021) [ 50 ]. These papers had no citations. Almost all of the articles belonging to this cluster were written by multiple authors ( 20 papers ), whereas there were 5 publications that were written by single authors. None of the authors in this group have published more than one article. Within this subtopic, the journal with more papers published was Sustainability (four papers), followed by Marketing Intelligence and Planning (three papers) and the Journal of Cleaner Production and Sustainable Development, with two papers each. The first published article of this cluster dated from 2016, and the year with more publications was 2021; almost all of the papers belonging to this cluster were published in the last two years (18 papers), which is consistent with our statement above. Moreover, European countries were the most analyzed. Table 3shows the papers belonging to this cluster, their journal, the number of links between papers, the country or region of study, and their impact or influence measured by the total number of citations and the average number of citations per year from the date of publication (NIY) [ 51 ]. It should be noted that the last column reflects the “acceleration” of the impact in time weighting. Thus, under equal conditions of the date of publication, a greater NIY means greater academic interest in the paper. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 16 of 35 Table 6. Cont. RO Author Links Journal Country Citations NIY 17 Bhaskar and Kumar (2019) [122]54 Journal of Indian Business Research n.a. 5 1.67 18 Singh and Rahman (2021) [123]93 Cogent Business and Management India 0 0 19 Gallardo-Vázquez et al. (2021) [124]66 Sustainability (Switzerland) Spain 0 0 20 Socoliuc et al. (2020) [125]23 Polish Journal of Environmental Studies Rumania 0 0 21 Yu and Kuo (2021) [126]20 Sustainability (Switzerland) China 1 1 22 Nobrega et al. (2021) [127]7Sustainability (Switzerland) Brazil 0 0 23 Bukalska et al. (2021) [4]6Energies Poland 0 0 RO: ranking order; NIY: normalized citations per year; Source: Scopus. -Cluster 5—Business Interactions with the SDGs: Twenty-two papers that analyzed the nexus between business and SDGs, raising questions as to whether the different characteristics of companies cause them to interact differently with SDGs, make up this cluster. The articles with the highest number of links were those by Rygh et al. (2021), van Zanten and van Tulder (2021), and Javeed et al. (2021). With regards to the articles’ impact, the paper with the highest number of citations in relative terms was that by van Zanten and van Tulder (2021) [ 128 ], whereas the paper with more total citations was that by Fleming et al. (2017) [129]. Conversely, there were three papers with no citations. Almost all of the articles belonging to this cluster were written by multiple authors (17 papers), whereas there were five publications by single authors. The authors with a higher number of publications were van Tulder, R., and van Zanten, J.A., with three papers each. Within this subtopic, the journal with more papers published was Sustainability (four papers), followed by Business Strategy and Development (three papers), Business Strategy and the Environment (two papers), and Corporate Governance (two papers). The first published article of this cluster dated from 2017, and the year with more publications was 2021, with 13 papers published during that year. Table 7shows the papers belonging to this cluster, their journal, the number of links between papers, the country or region of study, and their impact or influence measured by the total number of citations and the average number of citations per year from the date of publication (NIY) [ 51 ]. It should be noted that the last column reflects the “acceleration” of the impact in time weighting. Thus, under equal conditions of the date of publication, the greater the NIY, the greater the academic interest in the paper. Table 7. Cluster 5. RO Author Links Journal Country Citations NIY 1 van Zanten and van Tulder (2021) [130] 102 Business Strategy and the Environment n.a. 25 25 2 van Zanten and van Tulder (2021) [131] 66 International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology n.a. 25 25 Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 17 of 35 Table 7. Cont. RO Author Links Journal Country Citations NIY 3 van Zanten and van Tulder (2021) [28] 76 Business Strategy and the Environment - 14 14 4Sinkovics et al. (2021) [132]72 Multinational Business Review n.a. 11 11 5Gutberlet (2021) [133]12 World Development Brazil 9 9 6Pineda-Escobar (2019) [134]73 Corporate Governance (Bingley) Colombia 25 8.33 7Fleming et al. (2017) [128]20 Marine Policy Australia 38 7.6 8 Liou and Rao-Nicholson (2021) [135] 58 Journal of International Business Policy n.a. 6 6 9 Blagov and Petrova-Savchenko (2021) [136] 57 Corporate Governance (Bingley) Russia 5 5 10 Dahlmann et al. (2019) [137]97 Anthropocene Review n.a. 15 5 11 Redman (2018) [138]49 Business Strategy and Development n.a. 15 3.75 12 Arnold (2018) [139]77 Business Strategy and Development International 13 3.25 13 Fei et al. (2021) [12]40 Sustainability (Switzerland) International 3 3 14 Malay and Aubinet (2021) [140] 86 Ecological Economics Belgium 2 2 15 Buczacki et al. (2021) [141]37 Sustainability (Switzerland) n.a. 2 2 16 Lisowski et al. (2020) [142]67 Sustainability (Switzerland) International 3 1.5 17 Macellari et al. (2018) [143]58 Business Strategy and Development Italy 5 1.25 18 Khalique et al. (2021) [144]6 Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal India 1 1 19 Fagerlin et al. (2019) [129]44 Sustainability (Switzerland) Japan 1 0.33 20 Rygh et al. (2021) [145]106 Critical Perspectives on International Business n.a. 0 0 21 Javeed et al. (2021) [146]99 Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development Pakistan 0 0 22 Matteucci (2020) [147]13 Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes international 0 0 RO: ranking order; NIY: normalized citations per year; Source: Scopus. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 18 of 35 -Cluster 6 (colored light blue)—Performance, business model, and SDG measurement: Nineteen papers that analyzed the relationship between performance and business model with SDGs in addition to articles dealing with SDG measurement make up this cluster. The articles with the highest number of links were those by Ejarque and Campos (2020), Cordova and Celone (2019), and Nechita et al. (2020). With regards to the articles’ impact, the paper with the highest number of citations, both in absolute and in relative terms, was that by Mina et al. (2021) [ 148 ]. The following papers with a higher academic impact were those by Lassala et al. (2021) [ 149 ] and Núñez et al. (2020) [ 150 ]. Conversely, the paper with the lowest number of citations was that by Kandler Rodríguez (2020) [ 151 ], with no citations. Almost all of the articles belonging to this cluster were written by multiple authors (18 papers), whereas there was only 1 paper written by a single author. The authors with a higher number of publications were Mansell, P., and Philbin, S.P., with three papers each, followed by Mozas-Moral, A., Bernal-Jurado, E., Fernández-Uclés, D., and Medina-Viruel, M.J., with two papers each. Within this subtopic, the journal with more papers published was Sustainability. The first published article of this cluster dated from 2019, and the year with more publications was 2020, with 11 papers, and 2021, with 8 papers. Moreover, Spain was the most analyzed country in this cluster. Table 8shows the papers belonging to this cluster, their journal, the number of links between papers, the country or region of study, and their impact or influence measured by the total number of citations and the average number of citations per year from the date of publication (NIY) [ 51 ]. It should be noted that the last column reflects the “acceleration” of the impact in time weighting. Thus, under equal conditions of the date of publication, the greater the NIY, the greater the academic interest in the paper. Table 8. Cluster 6. RO Author Links Journal Country Citations NIY 1Mina et al. (2021) [148]3Journal of Cleaner Production - 33 33 2Lassala et al. (2021) [149]67 Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja Spain 13 13 3Núñez et al. (2020) [150]4Sustainability (Switzerland) Spain 14 7 4 Cordova and Celone (2019) [152] 89 Sustainability (Switzerland) n.a. 15 5 5Mozas-Moral et al. (2020) [153]4Sustainability (Switzerland) Spain 8 4 6Mozas-Moral et al. (2021) [2]10 Technological Forecasting and Social Change Spain 3 3 7Raiden and King (2021) [154]7Resources, Conservation and Recycling England 3 3 8 Zhou and Etzkowitz (2021) [155] 3Sustainability (Switzerland) n.a. 3 3 9Nechita et al. (2020) [156]84 Sustainability (Switzerland) East Europe 6 3 10 Mansell et al. (2020) [157]43 Sustainability (Switzerland) United Kingdom 6 3 11 Mansell et al. (2020) [158]25 Sustainability (Switzerland) United Kingdom 5 2.5 Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 19 of 35 Table 8. Cont. RO Author Links Journal Country Citations NIY 12 Mansell and Philbin (2020) [159] 43 Journal of Modern Project Management n.a. 4 2 13 Jiménez et al. (2020) [160]67 Sustainability (Switzerland) Spain 3 1.5 14 Gambetta et al. (2021) [7]72 Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues - 1 1 15 Jiménez et al. (2021) [161]23 Sustainability (Switzerland) Spain 1 1 16 de la Casa and Caballero (2021) [162] 4 CIRIEC-Espana Revista de Economia Publica, Social y Cooperativa Spain 1 1 17 Ejarque and Campos (2020) [163] 101 Sustainability (Switzerland) Europe 2 1 18 Iona¸scu et al. (2020) [164]66 Sustainability (Switzerland) n.a. 2 1 19 Kandler Rodríguez (2020) [151] 9Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes Costa Rica 0 0 RO: ranking order; NIY: normalized citations per year; Source: Scopus. -Cluster 7 (colored orange)—SDG reporting. Its use with legitimation purpose: Nineteen papers that analyzed the SDG reporting as a legitimation purpose make up this cluster. As mentioned above, the articles belonging to this subtopic had a closer link to those that formed clusters 3 and 8. The articles with the highest number of links were those by Elalfy et al. (2020), Elalfy et al. (2020), Calabrese et al. (2021), and van der Waal et al. (2021). With regards to the articles’ impact, the paper with the highest number of citations in relative terms was that by van der Waal et al. (2021) [ 165 ], whereas the paper with more total citations was that by Ike et al. (2019) [ 166 ]. Conversely, there were two papers with no citations: Caldana et al. (2021) [167], and Galleli et al. (2021) [17]. Almost all of the articles belonging to this cluster were written by multiple authors ( 18 papers ), while there was only 1 publication by a single author. The authors with a higher number of publications were ElAlfy, A., Khare, A., Krüger, C., LourenÇao, M., Pennabel, A.F., and Webber, O., with two papers each. Within this subtopic, the journals with more papers published were the Journal of Cleaner Production and Sustainability, with three papers each, followed by Business Strategy and the Environment (two papers). The first published article of this cluster dated from 2018, and the year with more publications was 2021, with twelve papers published during that year. Table 9shows the papers belonging to this cluster, their journal, the number of links between papers, the country or region of study, and their impact or influence measured by the total number of citations and the average number of citations per year from the date of publication (NIY) [ 51 ]. It should be noted that the last column reflects the “acceleration” of the impact in time weighting. Thus, under equal conditions of the date of publication, the greater the NIY, the greater the academic interest in the paper. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 20 of 35 Table 9. Cluster 7. RO Author Links Journal Country Citations NIY 1van der Waal et al. (2021) [165]101 Journal of Cleaner Production International 25 25 2Johnsson et al. (2020) [168]67 Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews n.a. 32 16 3Khan et al. (2021) [169]20 Business Strategy and the Environment n.a. 15 15 4Ordonez-Ponce et Khare (2021) [170]100 Journal of Environmental Planning and Management - 14 14 5Ike et al. (2019) [166]66 Journal of Cleaner Production Japan 41 13.67 6Jan et al. (2021) [171]21 Sustainability (Switzerland) Islamic countries 8 8 7ElAlfy et al. (2020) [172]109 Sustainable Development International 14 7 8Calabrese et al. (2021) [173]108 Journal of Cleaner Production - 6 6 9Szennay et al. (2019) [174]67 Resources n.a. 18 6 10 Warmate et al. (2021) [175]11 Business Strategy and the Environment International 5 5 11 Russell et al. (2018) [176]11 Sustainability (Switzerland) United Kingdom 20 5 12 Gerged and Almontaser (2021) [13] 54 Resources Policy Libya 3 3 13 Diaz-Sarachaga (2021) [29]100 Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management Spain 2 2 14 Lourenção et al. (2021) [177]35 World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development - 2 2 15 Lee and Kim (2021) [30]14 Social Indicators Research International 2 2 16 Elalfy et al. (2020) [178]121 Journal of Applied Accounting Research - 4 2 17 Vogel-Pöschl et al. (2020) [179]51 Zeitschrift fur Evaluation - 2 1 18 Caldana et al. (2021) [167]35 Benchmarking Brazil 0 0 19 Galleli et al. (2021) [17]34 Sustainability (Switzerland) Brazil 0 0 RO: ranking order; NIY: normalized citations per year; Source: Scopus. -Cluster 8 (colored brown)—SDG reporting. Nature and orientation: Eleven papers that analyzed that analyze the nature and orientation of SDG reporting by companies make up this cluster. These articles are connected with those belonging to clusters 3 and 7. The articles with the highest number of links were those by Pzzi et al. (2020) and Izzo et al. (2020). With regards to the articles’ impact, the paper with the highest number of citations, both in absolute and in relative terms, was that by Rosati and Faria (2019) [ 9 ]. The following papers with a higher academic impact were those by Pizzi et al. (2021) [ 180 ] and de Villiers et al. (2021) [181]. Conversely, there were two papers with no citations. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 21 of 35 All of the articles belonging to this cluster were written by multiple authors. The author with the highest number of publications was Mukherjee, M., with two papers. Within this subtopic, the journal with more papers published was Sustainability (three papers), followed by the Journal of Cleaner Production (two papers). The first published article of this cluster dated from 2019, and the year with more publications was 2021, with seven papers published during that year. Table 10 shows the papers belonging to this cluster, their journal, the number of links between papers, the country or region of study, and their impact or influence measured by the total number of citations and the average number of citations per year from the date of publication (NIY) [ 51 ]. It should be noted that the last column reflects the “acceleration” of the impact in time weighting. Thus, under equal conditions of the date of publication, the greater the NIY, the greater the academic interest in the paper. Table 10. Cluster 8. RO Author TL Journal Country Citations NIY 1Rosati and Faria (2019) [9]96 Journal of Cleaner Production International 161 53.67 2Pizzi et al. (2020) [180]118 Journal of Cleaner Production n.a. 73 36.5 3de Villiers et al. (2021) [181]65 Journal of Business Research n.a. 20 20 4Izzo et al. (2020) [182]115 Sustainability (Switzerland) Italy 27 13.5 5Di Vaio et al. (2021) [183]36 Maritime Policy and Management n.a. 6 6 6Ghosh and Rajan (2019) [184]9International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology International 16 5.33 7Gambetta et al. (2021) [7]43 Sustainability (Switzerland) Spain 5 5 8Mukherjee and Wood (2021) [185]10 Sustainability (Switzerland) Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines 2 2 9 Franco-Riquelme and Rubalcaba (2021) [186] 30 Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity Spain 1 1 10 Nguyen and Ngo (2021) [187]39 Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja Vietnam 0 0 11 Boffa and Maffei (2021) [188]7FME Transactions n.a. 0 0 RO: ranking order; NIY: normalized citations per year; Source: Scopus. -Cluster 9 (colored pink)—SDGs and business strategies: Six papers that analyzed SDGs and their relationship with business strategies, analyzing which strategies facilitate SDGs’ implementation, make up this cluster. The articles with the highest number of links were those by Mio et al. (2020). With regards to the articles’ impact, the paper with the highest number of citations, both in absolute and in relative terms, was that by Mio et al. (2020) [ 39 ]. The following paper with a higher academic impact was that by El-Haddadeh et al. (2021) [ 189 ]. Conversely, the paper with the lower number of citations was that by van den Broek (2020) [190]. All the articles belonging to this cluster were written by multiple authors except for one, and all the authors had one published article about this subtopic. Within this subtopic, the journal with more papers published was Sustainability (two papers), while the other journals had one article each. The first published article of this cluster dated from 2019, and Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 22 of 35 the year with more publications was 2021, with three papers published during that year. Moreover, European countries were the most analyzed. Table 11 shows the papers belonging to this cluster, their journal, the number of links between papers, the country or region of study, and their impact or influence measured by the total number of citations and the average number of citations per year from the date of publication (NIY) [ 51 ]. It should be noted that the last column reflects the “acceleration” of the impact in time weighting. Thus, under equal conditions of the date of publication, the greater the NIY, the greater the academic interest in the paper. Table 11. Cluster 9. RO Author Links Journal Country Citations NIY 1Mio et al. (2020) [39]121 Business Strategy and the Environment n.a. 55 27.5 2El-Haddadeh et al. (2021) [189]3Journal of Business Research United Kingdom 15 15 3 Shereni (2019) [ 191 ] 1African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure Sub-Saharan African countries 7 2.33 4Jimenez et al. (2021) [192]50 Sustainability (Switzerland) n.a. 2 2 5Camodeca and Almici (2021) [193]20 Sustainability (Switzerland) Italy 2 2 6van den Broek (2020) [190]63 Corporate Communications French 2 1 RO: ranking order; NIY: normalized citations per year; Source: Scopus. Moreover, we conducted a co-occurrence analysis, which is based on the idea that “the relatedness of items is determined based on the number of documents in which they occur together” (vosViewer database). In this case, the unit of analysis is the keywords (considering all keywords). We established a minimum number of occurrences of a keyword (5) and, from the 1.148 keywords of our sample, 59 met these conditions. Figure 8shows the results of the co-occurrence analysis. The most used keywords were: sustainable development (total link strength: 380), sustainable development goal (total link strength: 353), sustainable development goals (total link strength: 269), and sustainability (total link strength: 239). It is remarkable that “private sector” was only repeated 15 times and “business” 17, when they constitute the other fundamental point of the articles that we are analyzing. This suggests that the most specific keywords are not really being used to classify the papers, since it seems necessary to use some reference to the private sector as a keyword to differentiate the works that analyze the business sector from those that deal with the public sector or NGOs. In our final sample, we found 5.975 cited sources, of which only 22 journals received more than 40 citations. Table 12 shows the ten journals that received the highest number of citations, as well as the number of citations per year. These numbers clearly reflect the importance of the Journal of Cleaner Production in the discussion of the role of companies in meeting the SDGs. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 23 of 35 Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 23 of 36 Figure 8. Keywords. Source: vosViewer and Scopus. In our final sample, we found 5.975 cited sources, of which only 22 journals received more than 40 citations. Table 12 shows the ten journals that received the highest number of citations, as well as the number of citations per year. These numbers clearly reflect the importance of the Journal of Cleaner Production in the discussion of the role of companies in meeting the SDGs. Table 12. Number of citations per journal. Journal Citations NIY Journal of Cleaner Production 700 116.67 Journal of Business Ethics 526 87.67 Sustainability 366 61 Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 272 45.33 Business Strategy and the environment 155 25.83 Sustainable Development 131 21.83 Academy of Management Review 75 12.5 Nature 57 9.5 Strategic Management Journal 51 8.5 A ccounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 49 8.17 NIY: normalized citations per year; Source: vosViewer and Scopus. On the other hand, we found 17.826 cited authors, of which only 21 had been cited more than 40 times. Table 13 shows the ten authors who were cited more than 60 times, as well as the number of citations per year. Table 13. Number of citations per author. Authors Citations NIY Rosati, F. 93 15.5 Kolk, A. 81 13.5 Van Tulder, R. 72 12 Griggs, D. 68 11.33 García-Sánchez, I.M 66 11 Figure 8. Keywords. Source: vosViewer and Scopus. Table 12. Number of citations per journal. Journal Citations NIY Journal of Cleaner Production 700 116.67 Journal of Business Ethics 526 87.67 Sustainability 366 61 Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 272 45.33 Business Strategy and the environment 155 25.83 Sustainable Development 131 21.83 Academy of Management Review 75 12.5 Nature 57 9.5 Strategic Management Journal 51 8.5 Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 49 8.17 NIY: normalized citations per year; Source: vosViewer and Scopus. On the other hand, we found 17.826 cited authors, of which only 21 had been cited more than 40 times. Table 13 shows the ten authors who were cited more than 60 times, as well as the number of citations per year. Finally, from the 13.967 cited references, only two had been cited more than 10 times (Table 14). This makes sense because, as we stated, this is a very current research topic, so the two most cited articles are among the oldest. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 24 of 35 Table 13. Number of citations per author. Authors Citations NIY Rosati, F. 93 15.5 Kolk, A. 81 13.5 Van Tulder, R. 72 12 Griggs, D. 68 11.33 García-Sánchez, I.M 66 11 Scheyvens, R. 64 10.67 Rockstrom, J. 61 10.17 Bebbington, J. 60 10 Schaltegger, S. 59 9.83 Unerman, J. 59 9.83 NIY: normalized citations per year; Source: vosViewer and Scopus. Table 14. Most cited references. Reference Citations NIY Sullivan, K., Thomas, S., & Rosano, M. (2018). Using industrial ecology and strategic management concepts to pursue the Sustainable Development Goals. Journal of Cleaner Production,174, 237–246. 13 4.33 Scheyvens, R., Banks, G., & Hughes, E. (2016). The private sector and the SDGs: The need to move beyond ‘business as usual’. Sustainable Development,24(6), 371–382. 10 2 NIY: normalized citations per year; Source: vosViewer and Scopus. 5. Discussion 5.1. Main Characteristics of the Papers In this section, we summarize the main characteristics of the papers under study. In addition to the issues analyzed so far, is interesting to expose the theories on which they have been based, the SDGs that they analyze, or the characteristics of the sample. It is interesting to analyze this information jointly, since issues are observed that provide relevant data regarding the status of existing research on the role that companies play in the development of the SDGs. Much of the work obtained in this bibliographic review resorted to the theories that have been commonly used in CSR research to reinforce their work, as can be seen in Table 15. Moreover, the papers that used a theoretical framework mainly did so individually, although there were some works that combined several of these theories. Other papers based their research on the theoretical framework of the SDGs, but were not based on specific theories (e.g., [ 181 , 184 ]). It should be noted that, in the first cluster the most used theories were the stakeholder theory and the institutional theory. Without a doubt, the third cluster was the one that showed the greatest variety of theories, and it was also the cluster that presented a greater number of studies that based their framework on an existing theory. Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 25 of 35 Table 15. Theories used in the papers analyzed. Theory Papers Activity theory Saz-Gil et al. (2020) [81] Agency theory Gambetta et al. (2021) [ 7 ]; Khaled et al. (2021) [ 14 ]; García-Meca and Martínez-Ferreiro (2021) [93]; García-Sánchez et al. (2019) [95]; Kazemikhasragh et al. (2021) [107]; Lassala et al. (2021) [149] Continuity theory Saz-Gil et al. (2020) [81] Grounded theory Jan et al. (2021) [171] Impression management theory García-Sánchez et al. (2020) [38] Institutional theory Rosati and Faria (2019) [9]; Gerged and Almontaser (2021) [13]; Galleli et al. (2021) [17]; van Zanten and van Tulder (2018) [34]; García-Sánchez et al. (2020) [36]; Hepner et al. (2021) [61]; Erin and Bamigboye (2021) [97]; Izzo et al. (2020) [101]; García-Sánchez et al. (2019) [103]; Ordonez-Ponce and Khare (2021) [170] Legitimacy theory Gambetta et al. (2021) [7]; Rosati and Faria(2019) [9]; García-Sánchez et al. (2020) [38]; Yu et al. (2020) [56]; Curtó-Pagès et al. (2021) [91]; García-Meca and Martínez-Ferreiro (2021) [93]; Izzo et al. (2020) [101]; Kazemikhasragh et al. (2021) [107]; De Luca et al. (2020) [ 116 ]; Yu and Kuo (2021) [ 126 ]; Lassala et al. (2021) [ 149 ]; Khan et al. (2021) [ 169 ]; ElAlfy et al. (2020) [172] Natural resource-based view Ilyas et al. (2020) [111] Organizational identity theory Liou and Rao-Nicholson (2021) [135] Paradox theory Vildåsen (2018) [64] Resource-based view Ordonez-Ponce et al. (2021) [18] Signaling theory Rosati and Faria(2019) [9]; Diaz-Sarachaga (2021) [29]; Khan et al. (2021) [169] Social and environmental justice theory Gutberlet (2021) [133] Stakeholder theory Gambetta et al. (2021) [7]; Rosati and Faria(2019) [9]; Diaz-Sarachaga (2021) [29]; Jonsdottir et al. (2021) [35]; Gunawan et al. (2020) [48]; Lopez (2020) [59]; García-Sánchez et al. (2019) [95]; Gallego-Sosa et al. (2021) [96]; Erin and Bamigboye (2021) [97]; Nishitani et al. (2021) [99]; Jun and Kim (2021) [104]; Modgil et al. (2020) [ 115 ]; Phan et al. (2020) [ 120 ]; Gallardo-Vázquez et al. (2021) [ 124 ]; Lassala et al. (2021) [149]; Jimenez et al. (2021) [192] Temporality theory van den Broek (2020) [190] Theory of resource dependence Gallego-Sosa et al. (2021) [96] Upper Echelons theory Gallego-Sosa et al. (2021) [96]; Ilyas et al. (2020) [111] Value theory Olofsson and Mark-Herbert (2020) [83] Voluntary disclosure theory Izzo et al. (2020) [182] On the other hand, a sign that the research on the subject is recent is that it can be seen that most of the studies approach the analysis from a generic point of view, focusing on the SDGs as a global concept. There is still not much specialized research on each of the SDGs. However, as shown in Table 16, some studies have conducted an analysis on a particular objective. Among these articles, we observed that the objective that received the most attention was 12 (Responsible consumption and production), followed by SDGs 8, 9, and 17. The only SDGs that had not been specifically analyzed were 2 and 16. The clusters that presented the most specialized studies on a specific SDG were 1, 5, and 6. In each of them, the most analyzed SDGs were also 12, 8, and 9 Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 32 of 35 94. Di Vaio, A.; Varriale, L. SDGs and airport sustainable performance: Evidence from Italy on organisational, accounting and reporting practices through financial and non-financial disclosure. J. Clean. Prod. 2020,249, 119431. [CrossRef] 95. García-Sánchez, I.; Rodríguez-Ariza, L.; Aibar-Guzmán, B.; Aibar-Guzmán, C. Do institutional investors drive corporate transparency regarding business contribution to the sustainable development goals? Bus. Strat. Environ. 2020 ,29, 2019–2036. [CrossRef] 96. Gallego-Sosa, C.; Gutiérrez-Fernández, M.; Fernández-Torres, Y.; Nevado-Gil, M.T. Corporate Social Responsibility in the European Banking Sector: Commitment to the 2030 Agenda and Its Relationship with Gender Diversity. Sustainability 2021 , 13, 1731. [CrossRef] 97. Erin, O.A.; Bamigboye, O.A. Evaluation and analysis of SDG reporting: Evidence from Africa. J. Account. Organ. Chang. 2021 , 18, 369–396. [CrossRef] 98. Martínez-Ferrero, J.; García-Meca, E. Internal corporate governance strength as a mechanism for achieving sustainable development goals. Sustain. Dev. 2020,28, 1189–1198. [CrossRef] 99. Nishitani, K.; Nguyen, T.B.H.; Trinh, T.Q.; Wu, Q.; Kokubu, K. Are corporate environmental activities to meet sustainable development goals (SDGs) simply greenwashing? An empirical study of environmental management control systems in Vietnamese companies from the stakeholder management perspective. J. Environ. Manag. 2021,296, 113364. [CrossRef] 100. Haywood, L.K.; Boihang, M. Business and the SDGs: Examining the early disclosure of the SDGs in annual reports. Dev. S. Afr. 2021,38, 175–188. [CrossRef] 101. Izzo, M.; Strologo, A.D.; Granà, F. Learning from the Best: New Challenges and Trends in IR Reporters’ Disclosure and the Role of SDGs. Sustainability 2020,12, 5545. [CrossRef] 102. Sardianou, E.; Stauropoulou, A.; Evangelinos, K.; Nikolaou, I. A materiality analysis framework to assess sustainable development goals of banking sector through sustainability reports. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021,27, 1775–1793. [CrossRef] 103. García-Sánchez, I.; Aibar-Guzmán, B.; Aibar-Guzmán, C.; Somohano-Rodríguez, F. The drivers of the integration of the sustainable development goals into the non-financial information system: Individual and joint analysis of their influence. Sustain. Dev. 2021 . [CrossRef] 104. Jun, H.; Kim, M. From Stakeholder Communication to Engagement for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A Case Study of LG Electronics. Sustainability 2021,13, 8624. [CrossRef] 105. Battaglia, M.; Annesi, N.; Calabrese, M.; Frey, M. Do agenda 2030 and Sustainable Development Goals act at local and operational levels? Evidence from a case study in a large energy company in Italy. Bus. Strat. Dev. 2020,3, 603–614. [CrossRef] 106. Sekarlangit, L.; Wardhani, R. The Effect of the Characteristics and Activities of the Board of Directors on Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Disclosures: Empirical Evidence from Southeast Asia. Sustainability 2021,13, 8007. [CrossRef] 107. Kazemikhasragh, A.; Cicchiello, A.F.; Pietronudo, M.C. Factors influencing the adoption of SDG reporting by large African and Asian companies. Int. J. Technol. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2021,20, 43–60. [CrossRef] 108. van der Waal, J.W.; Thijssens, T. Corporate involvement in Sustainable Development Goals: Exploring the territory. J. Clean. Prod. 2020,252, 119625. [CrossRef] 109. Chams, N.; García-Blandón, J. On the importance of sustainable human resource management for the adoption of sustainable development goals. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019,141, 109–122. [CrossRef] 110. Horne, J.; Recker, M.; Michelfelder, I.; Jay, J.; Kratzer, J. Exploring entrepreneurship related to the sustainable development goals-mapping new venture activities with semi-automated content analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2020,242, 118052. [CrossRef] 111. Ilyas, S.; Hu, Z.; Wiwattanakornwong, K. Unleashing the role of top management and government support in green supply chain management and sustainable development goals. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020,27, 8210–8223. [CrossRef] 112. Centobelli, P.; Cerchione, R.; Esposito, E. Pursuing supply chain sustainable development goals through the adoption of green practices and enabling technologies: A cross-country analysis of LSPs. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020 ,153, 119920. [CrossRef] 113. Muhmad, S.N.; Muhamad, R. Sustainable business practices and financial performance during preand post-SDG adoption periods: A systematic review. J. Sustain. Finance Invest. 2021,11, 291–309. [CrossRef] 114. Acuti, D.; Bellucci, M.; Manetti, G. Company disclosures concerning the resilience of cities from the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) perspective. Cities 2020,99, 102608. [CrossRef] 115. Modgil, S.; Gupta, S.; Bhushan, B. Building a living economy through modern information decision support systems and UN sustainable development goals. Prod. Plan. Control 2020,31, 967–987. [CrossRef] 116. De Luca, F.; Cardoni, A.; Phan, H.-T.; Kiseleva, E. Does Structural Capital Affect SDGs Risk-Related Disclosure Quality? An Empirical Investigation of Italian Large Listed Companies. Sustainability 2020,12, 1776. [CrossRef] 117. Jha, M.K.; Rangarajan, K. The approach of Indian corporates towards sustainable development: An exploration using sustainable development goals based model. Sustain. Dev. 2020,28, 1019–1032. [CrossRef] 118. Adeola, O.; Gyimah, P.; Appiah, K.O.; Lussier, R.N. Can critical success factors of small businesses in emerging markets advance UN Sustainable Development Goals? World J. Entrep. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2021,17, 85–105. [CrossRef] 119. de Oliveira Claro, P.B.; Esteves, N.R. Sustainability-oriented strategy and Sustainable Development Goals. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2021 , 39, 613–630. [CrossRef] 120. Phan, H.-T.; De Luca, F.; Iaia, L. The “Walk” towards the UN Sustainable Development Goals: Does Mandated “Talk” through NonFinancial Disclosure Affect Companies’ Financial Performance? Sustainability 2020,12, 2324. [CrossRef] Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 33 of 35 121. Chaurasia, S.; Pati, R.K.; Padhi, S.S.; Jensen, J.M.K.; Gavirneni, N. Achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals-2030 through the nutraceutical industry: A review of managerial research and the role of operations management. Decis. Sci. 2021, 1–16. [CrossRef] 122. Bhaskar, K.; Kumar, B. Electronic waste management and sustainable development goals. J. Indian Bus. Res. 2019 ,11, 120–137. [CrossRef] 123. Singh, A.P.; Rahman, Z. Integrating corporate sustainability and sustainable development goals: Towards a multi-stakeholder framework. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2021,8, 1985686. [CrossRef] 124. Gallardo-Vázquez, D.; Junior, F.H.; Gabriel, M.D.S.; Valdez-Juárez, L. On Earth as It Is in Heaven: Proxy Measurements to Assess Sustainable Development Goals at the Company Level through CSR Indicators. Sustainability 2021,13, 914. [CrossRef] 125. Socoliuc, M.; Grosu, V.; Cosmulese, C.G.; Kicsi, R. Determinants of Sustainable Performance and Convergence with EU Agenda 2030: The Case of Romanian Forest Enterprises. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2020,29, 2339–2353. [CrossRef] 126. Yu, H.-C.; Kuo, L. Corporate Philanthropy Strategy and Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability 2021 ,13, 5655. [CrossRef] 127. Nobrega, J.H.C.; Rampasso, I.S.; Sanchez-Rodrigues, V.; Quelhas, O.L.G.; Filho, W.L.; Serafim, M.P.; Anholon, R. Logistics 4.0 in Brazil: Critical Analysis and Relationships with SDG 9 Targets. Sustainability 2021,13, 13012. [CrossRef] 128. Fleming, A.; Wise, R.M.; Hansen, H.; Sams, L. The sustainable development goals: A case study. Mar. Policy 2017 ,86, 94–103. [CrossRef] 129. Fagerlin, W.P.; Shimamoto, M.; Li, R. Boundary Objects as a Learning Mechanism for Sustainable Development Goals—A Case Study of a Japanese Company in the Chemical Industry. Sustainability 2019,11, 6680. [CrossRef] 130. van Zanten, J.A.; van Tulder, R. Improving companies’ impacts on sustainable development: A nexus approach to the SDGS. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2021,30, 3703–3720. [CrossRef] 131. van Zanten, J.A.; van Tulder, R. Towards nexus-based governance: Defining interactions between economic activities and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2021,28, 210–226. [CrossRef] 132. Sinkovics, N.; Sinkovics, R.R.; Archie-Acheampong, J. The business responsibility matrix: A diagnostic tool to aid the design of better interventions for achieving the SDGs. Multinatl. Bus. Rev. 2020,29, 1–20. [CrossRef] 133. Gutberlet, J. Grassroots waste picker organizations addressing the UN sustainable development goals. World Dev. 2021 , 138, 105195. [CrossRef] 134. Pineda-Escobar, M.A. Moving the 2030 agenda forward: SDG implementation in Colombia. Corp. Gov. Int. J. Bus. Soc. 2019 , 19, 176–188. [CrossRef] 135. Liou, R.-S.; Rao-Nicholson, R. Multinational enterprises and Sustainable Development Goals: A foreign subsidiary perspective on tackling wicked problems. J. Int. Bus. Policy 2021,4, 136–151. [CrossRef] 136. Blagov, Y.E.; Petrova-Savchenko, A.A. The transformation of corporate sustainability model in the context of achieving the UN SDGs: Evidence from the leading Russian companies. Corp. Gov. Int. J. Bus. Soc. 2020,21, 307–321. [CrossRef] 137. Dahlmann, F.; Stubbs, W.; Griggs, D.; Morrell, K. Corporate actors, the UN Sustainable Development Goals and Earth System Governance: A research agenda. Anthr. Rev. 2019,6, 167–176. [CrossRef] 138. Redman, A. Harnessing the Sustainable Development Goals for businesses: A progressive framework for action. Bus. Strat. Dev. 2018,1, 230–243. [CrossRef] 139. Arnold, M.G. Sustainability value creation in frugal contexts to foster Sustainable Development Goals. Bus. Strat. Dev. 2018 , 1, 265–275. [CrossRef] 140. Malay, O.E. Improving government and business coordination through the use of consistent SDGs indicators. A comparative analysis of national (Belgian) and business (pharma and retail) sustainability indicators. Ecol. Econ. 2021 ,184, 106991. [CrossRef] 141. Buczacki, A.; Gładysz, B.; Palmer, E. HoReCa Food Waste and Sustainable Development Goals—A Systemic View. Sustainability 2021,13, 5510. [CrossRef] 142. Lisowski, S.; Berger, M.; Caspers, J.; Mayr-Rauch, K.; Bäuml, G.; Finkbeiner, M. Criteria-Based Approach to Select Relevant Environmental SDG Indicators for the Automobile Industry. Sustainability 2020,12, 8811. [CrossRef] 143. Macellari, M.; Gusmerotti, N.M.; Frey, M.; Testa, F. Embedding biodiversity and ecosystem services in corporate sustainability: A strategy to enable Sustainable Development Goals. Bus. Strat. Dev. 2018,1, 244–255. [CrossRef] 144. Khalique, F.; Madan, P.; Puri, G.; Parimoo, D. Incorporating SDG 8 for Decent Work Practices: A study of MNC Subsidiaries in India. Australas. Bus. Account. Financ. J. 2021,15, 99–114. [CrossRef] 145. Rygh, A.; Chiarapini, E.; Segovia, M.V. How can international business research contribute towards the sustainable development goals? Crit. Perspect. Int. Bus. 2021,18, 457–487. [CrossRef] 146. Javeed, A.; Khan, M.Y.; Rehman, M.; Khurshid, A. Tracking sustainable development goals—A case study of Pakistan. J. Cult. Herit. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2021. [CrossRef] 147. Matteucci, V. How can the hospitality industry increase corporate value aligned with sustainable development goals? Case examples from Hilton, Meliáand Sun. Worldw. Hosp. Tour. Themes 2020,12, 509–523. [CrossRef] 148. Mina, H.; Kannan, D.; Gholami-Zanjani, S.M.; Biuki, M. Transition towards circular supplier selection in petrochemical industry: A hybrid approach to achieve sustainable development goals. J. Clean. Prod. 2021,286, 125273. [CrossRef] 149. Lassala, C.; Orero-Blat, M.; Ribeiro-Navarrete, S. The financial performance of listed companies in pursuit of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraživanja 2021,34, 427–449. [CrossRef] Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 34 of 35 150. Núñez, R.C.; Bandeira, P.; Santero-Sánchez, R. The Social Economy, Gender Equality at Work and the 2030 Agenda: Theory and Evidence from Spain. Sustainability 2020,12, 5192. [CrossRef] 151. Rodríguez, J.M.K. Exploring the applicability of sustainable development goals in Costa Rica: Case examples from Mastatal and Conchal. Worldw. Hosp. Tour. Themes 2020,12, 597–607. [CrossRef] 152. Cordova, M.F.; Celone, A. SDGs and Innovation in the Business Context Literature Review. Sustainability 2019 ,11, 7043. [CrossRef] 153. Mozas-Moral, A.; Bernal-Jurado, E.; Fernández-Uclés, D.; Medina-Viruel, M. Innovation as the Backbone of Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability 2020,12, 4747. [CrossRef] 154. Raiden, A.; King, A. Social value, organisational learning, and the sustainable development goals in the built environment. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021,172, 105663. [CrossRef] 155. Zhou, C.; Etzkowitz, H. Triple Helix Twins: A Framework for Achieving Innovation and UN Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability 2021,13, 6535. [CrossRef] 156. Nechita, E.; Manea, C.L.; Nichita, E.-M.; Irimescu, A.-M.; Manea, D. Is Financial Information Influencing the Reporting on SDGs? Empirical Evidence from Central and Eastern European Chemical Companies. Sustainability 2020,12, 9251. [CrossRef] 157. Mansell, P.; Philbin, S.; Broyd, T. Development of a New Business Model to Measure Organizational and Project-Level SDG Impact—Case Study of a Water Utility Company. Sustainability 2020,12, 6413. [CrossRef] 158. Mansell, P.; Philbin, S.; Konstantinou, E. Delivering UN Sustainable Development Goals’ Impact on Infrastructure Projects: An Empirical Study of Senior Executives in the UK Construction Sector. Sustainability 2020,12, 7998. [CrossRef] 159. Mansell, P.; Philbin, S. Measuring Sustainable Development Goal Targets on Infrastructure Projects. J. Mod. Proj. Manag. 2020 ,8. 160. Jiménez, E.; de la Cuesta-González, M.; Boronat-Navarro, M. How Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises Can Uptake the Sustainable Development Goals through a Cluster Management Organization: A Case Study. Sustainability 2021 ,13, 5939. [CrossRef] 161. Jiménez, J.M.; Pérez, B.G.; Monteverde, M.V.P.; Cervantes, C.R. The Contribution of the Fishermen’s Guilds and the Agrarian Transformation Societies to the Sustainable Development Goals: The Case of the Canary Islands. Sustainability 2020 ,12, 5635. [CrossRef] 162. de la Casa, J.M.H.; Caballero, S.G. Communication of Sustainable Development Goals in Social Economy organizations. CIRIECEsp. Rev. Econ. Publica Soc. Coop. 2021,101, 165–191. [CrossRef] 163. Ejarque, A.T.; Campos, V. Assessing the Economy for the Common Good Measurement Theory Ability to Integrate the SDGs into MSMEs. Sustainability 2020,12, 10305. [CrossRef] 164. Iona s , cu, E.; Mironiuc, M.; Anghel, I.; Huian, M.C. The Involvement of Real Estate Companies in Sustainable Development—An Analysis from the SDGs Reporting Perspective. Sustainability 2020,12, 798. [CrossRef] 165. van der Waal, J.W.; Thijssens, T.; Maas, K. The innovative contribution of multinational enterprises to the Sustainable Development Goals. J. Clean. Prod. 2021,285, 125319. [CrossRef] 166. Ike, M.; Donovan, J.D.; Topple, C.; Masli, E.K. The process of selecting and prioritising corporate sustainability issues: Insights for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. J. Clean. Prod. 2019,236, 117661. [CrossRef] 167. Caldana, A.C.F.; Lourenção, M.; Krüger, C.; Pennabel, A.F.; dos Santos, N.M.B.F. Development of a sustainable brand identity model: Fostering the implementation of SDGs in the Brazilian power sector. Benchmarking Int. J. 2021. [CrossRef] 168. Johnsson, F.; Karlsson, I.; Rootzén, J.; Ahlbäck, A.; Gustavsson, M. The framing of a sustainable development goals assessment in decarbonizing the construction industry–Avoiding “Greenwashing”. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020 ,131, 110029. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 169. Khan, P.A.; Johl, S.K.; Johl, S.K. Does adoption of ISO 56002-2019 and green innovation reporting enhance the firm sustainable development goal performance? An emerging paradigm. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2021,30, 2922–2936. [CrossRef] 170. Ordonez-Ponce, E.; Khare, A. GRI 300 as a measurement tool for the United Nations sustainable development goals: Assessing the impact of car makers on sustainability. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2021,64, 47–75. [CrossRef] 171. Jan, A.; Mata, M.; Albinsson, P.; Martins, J.; Hassan, R.; Mata, P. Alignment of Islamic Banking Sustainability Indicators with Sustainable Development Goals: Policy Recommendations for Addressing the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2021 ,13, 2607. [CrossRef] 172. ElAlfy, A.; Darwish, K.M.; Weber, O. Corporations and sustainable development goals communication on social media: Corporate social responsibility or just another buzzword? Sustain. Dev. 2020,28, 1418–1430. [CrossRef] 173. Calabrese, A.; Costa, R.; Gastaldi, M.; Ghiron, N.L.; Montalvan, R.A.V. Implications for Sustainable Development Goals: A framework to assess company disclosure in sustainability reporting. J. Clean. Prod. 2021,319, 128624. [CrossRef] 174. Szennay, Á.; Szigeti, C.; Kovács, N.; Szabó, D.R. Through the Blurry Looking Glass—SDGs in the GRI Reports. Resources 2019 , 8, 101. [CrossRef] 175. Warmate, Z.; Eldaly, M.K.; Elamer, A.A. Offering flexible working opportunities to people with mental disabilities: The missing link between sustainable development goals and financial implications. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2021,30, 1563–1579. [CrossRef] 176. Russell, E.; Lee, J.; Clift, R. Can the SDGs Provide a Basis for Supply Chain Decisions in the Construction Sector? Sustainability 2018,10, 629. [CrossRef] 177. Lourenção, M.; Krüger, C.; Pennabel, A.F.; Pacheco, L.M.; Guimarães, F.H.C.B.; Caldana, A.C.F. Achieving sustainable value chains by adopting sustainable development goals: A mapping exercise. World Rev. Entrep. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2021 ,17, 599–623. [CrossRef] Sustainability 2022,14, 8754 35 of 35 178. Elalfy, A.; Weber, O.; Geobey, S. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A rising tide lifts all boats? Global reporting implications in a post SDGs world. J. Appl. Account. Res. 2021,22, 557–575. [CrossRef] 179. Vogel-Pöschl, H.; Martinuzzi, A.; Schönherr, N. Evaluating Corporate Impacts on the SDGs–Tools, Cases, and Future Challenges. Z. Für Eval. 2020,19, 261–290. [CrossRef] 180. Pizzi, S.; Caputo, A.; Corvino, A.; Venturelli, A. Management research and the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs): A bibliometric investigation and systematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020,276, 124033. [CrossRef] 181. de Villiers, C.; Kuruppu, S.; Dissanayake, D. A (new) role for business–Promoting the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals through the internet-of-things and blockchain technology. J. Bus. Res. 2021,131, 598–609. [CrossRef] 182. Izzo, M.F.; Ciaburri, M.; Tiscini, R. The Challenge of Sustainable Development Goal Reporting: The First Evidence from Italian Listed Companies. Sustainability 2020,12, 3494. [CrossRef] 183. Di Vaio, A.; Varriale, L.; Lekakou, M.; Stefanidaki, E. Cruise and container shipping companies: A comparative analysis of sustainable development goals through environmental sustainability disclosure. Marit. Policy Manag. 2021 ,48, 184–212. [CrossRef] 184. Ghosh, S.; Rajan, J. The business case for SDGs: An analysis of inclusive business models in emerging economies. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2019,26, 344–353. [CrossRef] 185. Mukherjee, M.; Wood, J. Consolidating Unorganised Retail Businesses through Digital Platforms: Implications for Achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability 2021,13, 12031. [CrossRef] 186. Franco-Riquelme, J.; Rubalcaba, L. Innovation and SDGs through Social Media Analysis: Messages from FinTech Firms. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021,7, 165. [CrossRef] 187. Nguyen, T.-D.; Ngo, T.Q. The role of technological advancement, supply chain, environmental, social, and governance responsibilities on the sustainable development goals of SMEs in Vietnam. Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraživanja 2021, 1–23. [CrossRef] 188. Boffa, E.; Maffei, A. Classification of Sustainable Business Models: A literature review and a map of their impact on the Sustainable Development Goals. FME Trans. 2021,49, 784–794. [CrossRef] 189. El-Haddadeh, R.; Osmani, M.; Hindi, N.; Fadlalla, A. Value creation for realising the sustainable development goals: Fostering organisational adoption of big data analytics. J. Bus. Res. 2021,131, 402–410. [CrossRef] 190. van den Broek, O. Narrative fidelity: Making the UN Sustainable Development Goals fit. Corp. Commun. Int. J. 2020 ,26, 441–460. [CrossRef] 191. Shereni, N.C. The Tourism Sharing Economy and Sustainability in Developing Countries: Contribution to SDGs in the Hospitality Sector. Afr. J. Hosp. Tour. Leis. 2019 ,8. Available online: https://www.ajhtl.com/uploads/7/1/6/3/7163688/article_14_vol_8_5_ _2019_uj.pdf (accessed on 30 May 2022). 192. Jimenez, D.; Franco, I.; Smith, T. A Review of Corporate Purpose: An Approach to Actioning the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainability 2021,13, 3899. [CrossRef] 193. Camodeca, R.; Almici, A. Digital Transformation and Convergence toward the 2030 Agenda’s Sustainability Development Goals: Evidence from Italian Listed Firms. Sustainability 2021,13, 11831. [CrossRef] 194. López-Concepción, A.; Gil-Lacruz, A.I.; Saz-Gil, I. Stakeholder engagement, Csr development and Sdgs compliance: A systematic review from 2015 to 2021. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2022,29, 19–31. [CrossRef]