Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Analysis
  • Published:

Impacts of international trade on global sustainable development


The United Nations has adopted 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with 169 targets. International trade has substantial influences on global sustainability and human well-being. However, little is known about the impacts of international trade on progress towards achieving the SDG targets. Here we show that international trade positively affected global progress towards achieving nine environment-related SDG targets. International trade improved the SDG target scores of most (65%) of the evaluated developed countries but reduced the SDG target scores of over 60% of the evaluated developing countries. The SDG target scores of developed countries were higher than those of developing countries when trade was accounted for, but those scores would be lower than those of developing countries if trade were not a factor. Furthermore, trade between distant countries contributed more to achieving these global SDG targets than trade between adjacent countries. Compared with adjacent trade, distant trade was more beneficial for achieving SDG targets in developed countries, but it more negatively affected SDG target scores in developing countries. Our research suggests that enhancing the accounting for and management of virtual resources embedded in trade is essential for achieving and balancing sustainable development for all.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: The temporal change and spatial pattern of SDG target scores.
Fig. 2: Impacts of international trade on SDG targets differed between developed and developing countries.
Fig. 3: Comparison of SDG target scores between a distant-trade scenario and an adjacent-trade scenario.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All the source data described in the ‘Data’ section can be obtained from the World Input–Output Database (WIOD) and World Bank. The intermediate data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Source data are provided with this paper.

Code availability

All computer code used in conducting the analyses summarized in this paper is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.


  1. Global Indicator Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals and Targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Report No. A/RES/71/313 (United Nations Statistics Division, 2017).

  2. Steen-Olsen, K., Weinzettel, J., Cranston, G., Ercin, A. E. & Hertwich, E. G. Carbon, land, and water footprint accounts for the European Union: consumption, production, and displacements through international trade. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 10883–10891 (2012).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Blanco, E. & Razzaque, J. Ecosystem services and human well-being in a globalized world: assessing the role of law. Hum. Rights Q. 31, 692–720 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dalin, C., Konar, M., Hanasaki, N., Rinaldo, A. & Rodriguez-Iturbe, I. Evolution of the global virtual water trade network. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 5989–5994 (2012).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Feng, K. et al. Outsourcing CO2 within China. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 11654–11659 (2013).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lenzen, M. et al. International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations. Nature 486, 109–112 (2012).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Liu, J. Forest sustainability in China and implications for a telecoupled world. Asia Pac. Policy Stud. 1, 230–250 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Smith, R. D. Trade and public health: facing the challenges of globalisation. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 60, 650–651 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Laboy-Nieves, E. N., Schaffner, F. C., Abdelhadi, A. & Goosen, M. F. A. Environmental Management, Sustainable Development and Human Health (CRC Press, 2009).

  10. Givens, J. E., Huang, X. & Jorgenson, A. K. Ecologically unequal exchange: a theory of global environmental injustice. Sociol. Compass 13, e12693 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Asheim, G. B. Hartwick’s rule in open economies. Can. J. Econ. 19, 395–402 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Proops, J. L., Atkinson, G., Schlotheim, B. F. V. & Simon, S. International trade and the sustainability footprint: a practical criterion for its assessment. Ecol. Econ. 28, 75–97 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Atkinson, G., Agarwala, M. & Muñoz, P. in Inclusive Wealth Report 2012: Measuring Progress Toward Sustainability (eds UNU-IHDP & UNEP) 87–117 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2012).

  14. Pendrill, F., Persson, U. M., Godar, J. & Kastner, T. Deforestation displaced: trade in forest-risk commodities and the prospects for a global forest transition. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 055003 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Harris, J. & White, A. The sociology of global health: a literature review. Soc. Dev. 5, 9–30 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Anderson, E. W. International Boundaries: A Geopolitical Atlas (Routledge, 2003).

  17. Colson, D. A. & Smith, R. W. International Maritime Boundaries Vol. 5 (Martinus Nijhoff, 2005).

  18. Liu, J. et al. Systems integration for global sustainability. Science 347, 1258832 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Liu, J. et al. Framing sustainability in a telecoupled world. Ecol. Soc. 18, 26 (2013).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu, J. Integration across a metacoupled world. Ecol. Soc. 22, 29 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gao, L. & Bryan, B. A. Finding pathways to national-scale land-sector sustainability. Nature 544, 217–222 (2017).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Chaudhary, A., Gustafson, D. & Mathys, A. Multi-indicator sustainability assessment of global food systems. Nat. Commun. 9, 848 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Singh, R. K., Murty, H. R., Gupta, S. K. & Dikshit, A. K. An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecol. Indic. 15, 281–299 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Moran, D. D., Wackernagel, M., Kitzes, J. A., Goldfinger, S. H. & Boutaud, A. Measuring sustainable development—nation by nation. Ecol. Econ. 64, 470–474 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Siche, J. R., Agostinho, F., Ortega, E. & Romeiro, A. Sustainability of nations by indices: comparative study between environmental sustainability index, ecological footprint and the emergy performance indices. Ecol. Econ. 66, 628–637 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Cord, A. F., Seppelt, R. & Turner, W. Monitor ecosystem services from space. Nature 525, 33 (2015).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Chen, B. et al. Global land–water nexus: agricultural land and freshwater use embodied in worldwide supply chains. Sci. Total Environ. 613–614, 931–943 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Oita, A. et al. Substantial nitrogen pollution embedded in international trade. Nat. Geosci. 9, 111–115 (2016).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Wiedmann, T. O. et al. The material footprint of nations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 6271–6276 (2015).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Jorgenson, A. Environment, development, and ecologically unequal exchange. Sustainability 8, 227 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  31. World Bank Open Data (World Bank Group, 2017);

  32. Meyfroidt, P., Lambin, E. F., Erb, K.-H. & Hertel, T. W. Globalization of land use: distant drivers of land change and geographic displacement of land use. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 5, 438–444 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Peters, G. P., Minx, J. C., Weber, C. L. & Edenhofer, O. Growth in emission transfers via international trade from 1990 to 2008. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 8903–8908 (2011).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Le Quéré, C. et al. Trends in the sources and sinks of carbon dioxide. Nat. Geosci. 2, 831–836 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kanemoto, K., Moran, D., Lenzen, M. & Geschke, A. International trade undermines national emission reduction targets: new evidence from air pollution. Glob. Environ. Change 24, 52–59 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Weinzettel, J., Hertwich, E. G., Peters, G. P., Steen-Olsen, K. & Galli, A. Affluence drives the global displacement of land use. Glob. Environ. Change 23, 433–438 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Afionis, S., Sakai, M., Scott, K., Barrett, J. & Gouldson, A. Consumption‐based carbon accounting: does it have a future? WIREs Clim. Change 8, e438 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Liu, J. et al. Spillover systems in a telecoupled Anthropocene: typology, methods, and governance for global sustainability. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 33, 58–69 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Vandenbergh, M. P. & Gilligan, J. M. Beyond Politics: The Private Governance Response to Climate Change (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017).

  40. Sachs, J., Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Durand-Delacre, D. & Teksoz, K. SDG Index and Dashboards Report 2017 (Bertelsmann Stiftung and SDSN, 2017).

  41. Timmer, M. P., Dietzenbacher, E., Los, B., Stehrer, R. & Vries, G. J. An illustrated user guide to the world input–output database: the case of global automotive production. Rev. Int. Econ. 23, 575–605 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kander, A., Jiborn, M., Moran, D. D. & Wiedmann, T. O. National greenhouse-gas accounting for effective climate policy on international trade. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 431–435 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Zhong, W., An, H., Fang, W., Gao, X. & Dong, D. Features and evolution of international fossil fuel trade network based on value of emergy. Appl. Energy 165, 868–877 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Genty, A., Arto, I. & Neuwahl, F. Final Database of Environmental Satellite Accounts: Technical Report on their Compilation WIOD Deliverable 4.6, Documentation (WIOD, 2012);

  45. Report of the Inter-agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (UN, 2016);

  46. Zhao, X. et al. Physical and virtual water transfers for regional water stress alleviation in China. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 1031–1035 (2015).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Wood, S. A., Smith, M. R., Fanzo, J., Remans, R. & DeFries, R. S. Trade and the equitability of global food nutrient distribution. Nat. Sustain. 1, 34–37 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Yang, H. & Zehnder, A. “Virtual water”: an unfolding concept in integrated water resources management. Water Resour. Res. 43, W12301 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Allan, J. A. Virtual water: a strategic resource. Ground Water 36, 545–547 (1998).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Xu, Z. et al. Evolution of multiple global virtual material flows. Sci. Total Environ. 658, 659–668 (2019).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Xu, Z. et al. Assessing progress towards sustainable development over space and time. Nature 577, 74–78 (2020).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Joint Research Centre, 2016).

  53. Fullman, N. et al. Measuring progress and projecting attainment on the basis of past trends of the health-related Sustainable Development Goals in 188 countries: an analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet 390, 1423–1459 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Teksoz, K., Durand-Delacre, D. & Sachs, J. D. National baselines for the Sustainable Development Goals assessed in the SDG Index and Dashboards. Nat. Geosci. 10, 547–555 (2017).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Sachs, J., Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G. & Fuller, G. Sustainable Development Report 2019 (Bertelsmann Stiftung and SDSN, 2019).

  56. Human Development Data (UNDP, 2017);

  57. Nielsen, L. Classifications of Countries Based on Their Level of Development: How It Is Done and How It Could Be Done IMF Working Paper (IMF, 2011).

  58. Timmer, M. P., Dietzenbacher, E., Los, B., Stehrer, R. & de Vries, G. J. An illustrated user guide to the world input–output database: the case of global automotive production. Rev. Int. Econ. 23, 575–605 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals: Launching a Data Revolution for the SDGs (SDSN, 2015).

  60. R Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing v.3.4.4 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2018).

Download references


We thank R. M. Scarrow and S. Nichols for their constructive comments that have greatly helped improve the paper. We are grateful for financial support from the National Science Foundation (grant nos DEB-1924111 and DEB-1340812), Michigan State University, Michigan AgBioResearch, the Environmental Science and Policy Program (ESPP) Doctoral Recruiting Fellowships and the China Scholarship Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



Z.X., Yingjie Li and J.L. designed the research. Z.X. and Yingjie Li contributed the data. Yingjie Li and Z.X. performed the data analysis and interpreted the results with support from S.N.C., J.L., T.D., C.L., L.W., J.Z., L.Z., Yunkai Li and M.G.C. Yingjie Li, Z.X. and J.L. wrote the manuscript with contributions from S.N.C. and T.D. All authors reviewed and commented on the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jianguo Liu.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figs. 1–7 and Tables 1 and 2.

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Data 1

Excel sheets for Supplementary Tables 1 and 2.

Source data

Source Data Fig. 1

Numerical source data.

Source Data Fig. 2

Numerical source data.

Source Data Fig. 3

Numerical source data.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xu, Z., Li, Y., Chau, S.N. et al. Impacts of international trade on global sustainable development. Nat Sustain 3, 964–971 (2020).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene