Ten Years of Sustainable Development Goals in Latin America and the Caribbean: A Review and Research Agenda

Abstract

Over the past decade, an increasing number of studies have been conducted on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). However, no research has assessed the advances in these studies and proposed a research agenda. Therefore, the present study aims to systematically review the existing literature to document the contribution and identify research gaps. Specifically, this bibliometric and context study examines the research landscape on the SDGs in Latin America and the Caribbean from 2015 to 2024, employing a rigorous analysis of 1646 publications indexed in Scopus. This study identifies key trends, gaps, and opportunities structured around the 5Ps framework: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnerships. Results highlight research on prosperity-related goals, such as energy, infrastructure, and economic growth, while Peace and Partnerships remain underexplored. Geographical disparities are evident, with Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia making the most considerable contributions, in contrast to the minimal representation from smaller nations. The study applies advanced bibliometric tools and categorization techniques to map the intellectual structure and collaboration networks. Findings emphasize the need for more inclusive governance research, interdisciplinary collaboration, and exploration of emerging technologies. This review aims to guide future research and inform regional policy aligned with the 2030 Agenda by addressing structural gaps and thematic imbalances.

1. Introduction

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), ratified by the United Nations in 2015 through the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, have emerged as a global policy framework guiding countries toward sustainable economic growth, social equity, and environmental preservation [1,2,3,4]. While the SDGs articulate a universally applicable set of aspirations, their interpretation and implementation are context dependent [5]. This context dependency is particularly relevant when contrasting developed and emerging regions. While high-income countries often possess stronger institutional frameworks, technological capabilities, and financial resources to advance SDG implementation, emerging regions such as LAC face persistent structural barriers, including inequality, informality, and governance gaps, that condition how the global agenda can be translated into local action. Consequently, a universal set of goals may not always perfectly align with local priorities and realities, underscoring the need for regionally sensitive approaches to both policy design and academic inquiry. LAC, for example, is a region characterized by marked socioeconomic inequalities, ecological vulnerabilities, and institutional heterogeneity [6]. In fact, according to the ranking of the “Sustainable Development Report” in LAC, there is less and more diverse implementation of the SDGs [7]. Furthermore, in the specific case of academic research on the SDGs, a global bibliometric analysis concludes that research and development are concentrated more in developed countries than in developing and underdeveloped countries [8]. In this context, governments, NGOs, and private sector actors in LAC grapple with aligning national and regional priorities with the global sustainability agenda. For its part, scholarly research, while posing significant challenges for integration with public policy development, is increasingly being incorporated into policies derived from the 2030 Agenda, especially when there is rigorous evidence and effective negotiation. Additionally, the SDGs themselves have a complementary effect by highlighting research challenges [9,10]. Therefore, understanding the contours of academic research on the SDGs within LAC is timely and necessary. Despite a growing body of literature dedicated to sustainable development topics, the precise thematic distribution, disciplinary underpinnings, research collaboration networks, and especially the countries’ evaluation of SDG-related scholarship in the region remain underexplored. Given the above, there is a need to assess the current state of SDG research developed in LAC countries and to propose a research agenda that strengthens the efforts of researchers and institutions to achieve the SDGs.

First, this study provides a rigorous and up-to-date synthesis of the literature that has elicited substantial scholarly interest over the past decade. The selected period (2015–2024) encompasses a series of critical developments, including the COVID-19 pandemic, profound technological transformations, and significant social and generational changes. Second, this research conducts a comprehensive review of studies across all research disciplines. Moreover, each paper is manually categorized based on the context—country or region—in which it was conducted and the SDGs that it addressed. Third, this study employs a bibliometric approach, using systematic analyses to provide both a quantitative and a qualitative overview of academic outputs and to offer a comprehensive view of the scientific research landscape. Through this approach, we aim to map the intellectual landscape, identify emerging research fronts, highlight influential contributions, and trace the evolution of the regional research agenda over time [11,12]. In addition, based on this methodology and categorization, the academic contribution of each country is identified and summarized for each SDG. Fourth, the main research gaps are proposed based on the results obtained. Accordingly, this research aims to synthesize the current body of knowledge, identify structural gaps in the literature, and develop conceptual frameworks to inform and advance future research on the SDGs in LAC. Consistent with the stated objective, this study seeks to explore the following research questions (RQs):

• Research Question 1: What is the trend of SDG publication in LAC?
• Research Question 2. What are the top journals, articles, authors, and institutions for SDG studies in LAC?
• Research Question 3: What thematic clusters characterize the intellectual structure of SDG-related research in LAC?
• Research Question 4: What research contexts have been explored in LAC based on the SDG?
• Research Question 5. What opportunities exist for future research?

This work provides important contributions at both the methodological and theoretical levels. First, this investigation is the first to comprehensively review the SDGs in LAC through the application of a rigorous research methodology: (i) it employs the broader Scopus database rather than the more limited Web of Science (WoS); (ii) it includes a broad period from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2024; (iii) it adopts the PRISMA 2020 protocol, thereby enhancing the transparency and reproducibility of the review process; (iv) it integrates advanced analytical tools, including the Stata 18, Rayyan and Bibliometrix package in R; (v) it systematically cross-validates all data using the SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) database to identify the publication quartile of each article, thus proposing a novel metric for evaluating publication quality within performance analysis; (vi) the papers were manually classified based on the SDGs and the context in which the study was implemented, and (vii) the papers are categorized into five dimensions within the 5Ps framework, used to classify the SDGs: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnerships. Under this procedure, 1646 published papers were collected. This methodological approach facilitated the identification of the most influential authors, highly cited publications, leading journals, and collaborative networks within the SDG research landscape in LAC. In doing so, the study addresses current scholarly calls to improve the rigor and comprehensiveness of literature reviews in this domain, e.g., Ref. [13].

On the other hand, this article also makes theoretical contributions. First, we propose a bibliometric–contextual approach to analyzing the SDGs in LAC, which allows us to identify not only the leading scientific actors in this field but also the key thematic and methodological gaps that require greater attention in the region. Second, categorizing the literature using the 5Ps framework provides a comprehensive analytical lens for examining the evolution of studies on sustainable development across its various dimensions. The findings from this framework reveal a disproportionate concentration of research on prosperity-related goals, while the pillars of Peace and Partnerships remain underexplored. This imbalance underscores the need to diversify the research agenda in the region. Third, the findings underscore the pivotal role that governance and institutional frameworks play in advancing the implementation of the SDGs across LAC. Despite the limited exploration of the relationship between governance frameworks and SDG achievement in existing literature, strengthening research in this area is essential for designing more effective and context-sensitive sustainability strategies across the region.

2. SDGs in LAC

Although many countries have made progress in implementing the SDGs, this process has revealed differences and varying emphases across geographical regions [7]. In the case of LAC, the “Sustainable Development Report” ranking, which evaluates the implementation of the SDGs in 193 countries, shows that the region’s countries present important differences. For example, the top three countries in the ranking are Chile (32), Uruguay (34), and Cuba (39), while the bottom three are Trinidad and Tobago (125), Guatemala (128), and Haiti (151) [14].

Sustainable development also requires the implementation of all the SDGs in countries where research and specialists play a key role. In the case of LAC, this situation presents relevant differences, as the most developed SDGs are “Sustainable Cities and Communities (11)” and “Climate Action (13)”, with 39% of specialists, respectively. This is followed by “Quality Education (4)”, with 29%. It is also noted that “Life Below Water (14)” has no interest from regional experts [7]. In the same vein, Berrone et al. [15] highlight the need to develop management research related to the SDGs, as more knowledge is required on SDG adoption models and analysis of SDGs, given the limited research and specialists available, along with the need to expand theoretical and methodological models for implementing SDGs. This background justifies the need to assess the progress of SDG implementation in LAC, providing a basis for a research agenda, innovation, and transparency that enable SDG compliance and transition toward sustainability in the region [7,16,17].

The SDGs are structured around five pillars, known as the 5Ps: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnerships. These pillars provide an integrated approach to tackling global challenges, grouping the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into interconnected areas to ensure inclusive, sustainable, and just development.

The People pillar focuses on eradicating poverty and hunger, ensuring health, quality education, and gender equality. The SDGs linked to this pillar are SDG 1 (End Poverty), SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 3 (Health and Well-being), SDG 4 (Quality Education), and SDG 5 (Gender Equality). In LAC, progress in these areas has been reversed by COVID-19, which deepened extreme poverty and food insecurity. Nevertheless, some countries have implemented social policies to mitigate the adverse effects on the most vulnerable sectors, reaffirming the commitment to this pillar [18].

The Planet pillar promotes the protection of natural resources and the climate to ensure long-term sustainability. The associated SDGs are SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 14 (Underwater Life), and SDG 15 (Life of Terrestrial Ecosystems). The region faces critical challenges, including deforestation, water pollution, and biodiversity loss. To address these problems, projects such as biodiverse cities and climate finance funds have been implemented to balance economic development with environmental conservation and preservation [19].

The Prosperity pillar seeks to ensure that all people enjoy fulfilling lives in harmony with nature. This pillar encompasses SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), SDG 10 (Reducing Inequalities), and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). In LAC, initiatives such as energy transition and inclusive digital transformation have been promoted to stimulate economic growth, although significant inequalities persist in the distribution of development benefits [20].

The Peace pillar promotes just, peaceful, and inclusive societies, strengthens institutions, and ensures access to justice. The SDG related to this pillar is SDG 16 (Peace, justice, and strong institutions). The region faces high levels of violence and corruption, which hinder progress towards sustainable development. Despite this, some countries have strengthened legal frameworks and public institutions to address these problems and promote more transparent and effective governance [19].

The Partnerships pillar highlights the need to mobilize resources and foster international cooperation to implement the 2030 Agenda effectively. The associated SDG is SDG 17 (Partnerships to achieve the goals). In LAC, this pillar has been key to financing sustainable development projects, such as those promoted by the Development Bank of Latin America (CAF), which has approved significant funds to support initiatives aligned with the SDGs [20].

3. Methodology

Review papers are crucial in enhancing knowledge and providing a foundation for further research. They involve analyzing and assessing various literature sources, utilizing approaches that can range from qualitative to quantitative [21]. To answer the research questions, this research employs a bibliometric analysis to examine prevailing research trends that shape the academic discourse surrounding the SDGs in LAC. This methodological approach has been widely adopted across diverse academic disciplines, including the social sciences and environmental sciences, among others, e.g., Refs. [4,5,22,23].

Academic bibliometric analysis is a rigorous quantitative method used to evaluate the advancement of a specific subject employing statistical techniques to analyze a large number of documents acknowledged within the community of scholars and practitioners [23,24]. This approach helps identify developments, trends, and the most influential scientific authors, documents, sources, institutions, and countries within a specific field. Distinguished by their precision, reliability, and verifiability [25], bibliometric analyses have been employed to quantitatively investigate the knowledge structure through performance analysis and scientific mapping.

Performance analysis thoroughly examines the performance of study units, including papers, authors, countries, journals, and affiliations [26]. In line with related research, this research applies two performance analysis approaches, namely descriptive and citation analysis. Descriptive analysis assesses the productivity of units based on the total number of publications (TP), while citation analysis evaluates the impact and influence of these units based on the total number of citations (TC). Our study also considers indicators such as the H index, a measure that combines both productivity and influence in terms of citations [24]; the citation thresholds (≥100; ≥50; ≥25; ≥5); the average number of citations per paper (AC); the distribution of published papers across journal quartiles (Q1 to Q4) as classified by the SJR; publications within a specific time frame period.

Scientific mapping is employed to construct networks that reveal hidden patterns in the conceptual, social, and intellectual structures of a particular knowledge field [27]. Among various techniques, co-occurrence analysis and co-citation analysis are the most commonly used [26,28]. To reveal the underlying conceptual structures, this study analyzes co-occurrence patterns among the fifty most frequently used author keywords. Social structures are captured through two co-authorship analyses: one using authors as the unit of analysis and the other using countries as the unit of analysis. Finally, the intellectual structure is examined using a co-citation network on the fifty most-cited articles in the field [29]. It should be noted, however, that the analysis and interpretation of these conceptual, social, and intellectual structures may entail a degree of subjectivity, as the identification of patterns or connections can vary across researchers.

Conducting a reliable literature review requires the adoption of a consistent and replicable protocol, widely regarded as best practice in systematic reviews, as it ensures both transparency and the reproducibility of results [24]. We utilized the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, as recommended by Page et al. [30], to conduct our study. According to the PRISMA protocol, a systematic literature review involves three stages: identification, screening, and final inclusion criteria. These stages are summarized in Figure 1.

3.1. Identification

The review domain encompasses SDG in LAC, while the research questions aim to provide insight into performance (RQ1 and RQ2), conceptual, intellectual, and social structure (RQ3), and context (RQ4) within that domain, as well as future research directions (RQ5). In particular, the source type refers only to conceptual and empirical “articles and reviews” in “journals”. The analysis excludes alternative publication formats such as books, conference proceedings, and editorials, as they typically do not undergo the same rigorous peer-review process as articles published in academic journals [31].

Recognized as a premier and highly reputable source of bibliographic information within the scientific community, Scopus is designed to facilitate both bibliographic searches and thematic or content analyses. In addition, it provides bibliometric information for all indexed journals and sources, including efficient forms with direct links to articles for download and review.

Since the SDGs are a well-established concept that has attracted the attention of academics and practitioners since their establishment by the United Nations (UN) in 2015, this study limits its review to the period from 2015 to 31 December 2024. To capture potential variations in terminology, an asterisk is appended to the search keywords related to the SDGs in LAC. These terms are applied within the ‘title, abstract, and keyword’ fields using the search string (“sustainable development goal” OR” “sdg” OR” “global agend” OR” “sustainable development agend” OR” “2030 agend” OR” “global goal”) AND (brazil* OR mexic* OR colombia* OR argentin* OR peru* OR venezuel* OR chile* OR ecuador* OR guatemala* OR bolivia* OR haiti* OR “Dominican Republi” OR cuba* OR hondura* OR nicaragua* OR paraguay* OR “El Salvado” OR” “Costa Ric” OR panama* OR uruguay* OR jamaica* OR” “Trinidad and Tobag” OR guyana* OR suriname* OR bahama* OR beliz* OR barbado* OR “Saint Luci” OR grenad* OR” “St. Vincent & Grenadine” OR” “Antigua and Barbud” OR dominica* OR “Saint Kitts & Nevi” OR” “Latin America” OR” “Southern Con”). The identification stage yields 3621 articles.

3.2. Screening

The first stage includes “papers and review” that are written in English, Spanish, or Portuguese and published in a journal in any research area. As a result of this protocol, 2517 publications were included, while 1104 were excluded. The second stage is subsequently conducted. The contributions identified were assessed using three exclusion criteria, including (i) the absence of a direct link to the study topic (i.e., contributions that do not address SDG in LAC); (ii) a lack of direct relevance to the scope of this research (i.e., documents unrelated to the SDGs), and (iii) a lack of geographic alignment with the study’s focus (i.e., publications not pertaining to LAC). The authors independently screened the titles, abstracts, and keywords of the identified articles, excluding those that satisfied at least one of the three predefined exclusion criteria. Following this independent screening process, a consensus was reached to eliminate 871 articles.

3.3. Inclusion

The final dataset comprises 1646 contributions deemed both relevant and impactful. On the one hand, a performance analysis was conducted using Stata 18 and Microsoft Excel to examine publication trends, as well as to identify the most influential journals, articles, authors, countries, and institutions within the field. On the other hand, a science mapping analysis was carried out using the Bibliometrix package for R, which included author and country collaboration networks, keyword co-occurrence analysis, and co-citation analysis. The agenda proposal involves a gap analysis based on the bibliometric results.

This review adheres to the conventions of past bibliometric reviews by employing a combination of figures, tables, and words, e.g., Refs. [22,23,24]. Ethical clearance has neither been requested nor required, as the review is based on secondary data that any Scopus subscriber can access. This review has not received any funding. The PRISMA 2020 checklist can be found in the Supplementary Materials.

4. Results

4.1. Performance Bibliometric Analysis

4.1.1. Publication Productivity of SDG in LAC (RQ1)

Studies on topics such as poverty reduction, peace, and gender have been published for over 100 years. However, on 25 September 2015, the United Nations proposed a set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals that were to have a global impact. The aim is to achieve a more equitable and sustainable future for all.

First, this review presents the principal subject areas under which the Scopus database classifies the scientific production.

Table 1. Total paper by subject area.

R	Area	TP
1	Social Sciences	1748
2	Environmental Science	1330
3	Energy	556
4	Engineering	515
5	Medicine	475
6	Business, Management, and Accounting	441
7	Economics, Econometrics, and Finance	422
8	Computer Science	386
9	Agricultural and Biological Sciences	310
10	Earth and Planetary Sciences	226
11	Arts and Humanities	145
12	Multidisciplinary	141
13	Decision Sciences	92
14	Mathematics	84
15	Biochemistry, Genetics, and Molecular Biology	80
16	Chemical Engineering	62
17	Physics and Astronomy	57
18	Psychology	50
19	Chemistry	41
20	Immunology and Microbiology	37
21	Health Professions	29
22	Materials Science	29
23	Nursing	26
24	Neuroscience	9
25	Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Pharmaceutics	8
26	Veterinary	7
27	Dentistry	3

Subject areas on SDGs research in LAC. TP, Total paper.

shows that the most relevant is Social Sciences, with 24% of the publications, followed by Environmental Science, with 18%. Other notable subject areas are Energy (8%); Medicine (7%); Engineering (7%); Business, Management, and Accounting (6%); Economics, Econometrics, and Finance (6%). These areas encompass nearly 80% of the total published papers, while 19 other disciplines account for less than 20% of the published articles.

Second, Figure 2 shows the evolution of publications related to the SDGs in the LAC field over time. In this figure, the blue observations represent the grouping of people, the green ones are the planet, the yellow ones are prosperity, the red ones are peace, and the purple ones are partnerships. Thus, it is possible to observe the evolution over time of the whole topic by category and by SDG.

From 2015 to 2019, identified in this study as a “formative phase,” scientific publications started slowly. However, we can highlight the work of Osborne [32] on the Tradeoffs in carbon commodification and Kanter et al. [33], who studied the participatory backcasting approach for developing national agricultural transformation pathways. Furthermore, studies in areas such as mining, e.g., Ref. [34], textiles, e.g., Ref. [35], and agriculture, e.g., Ref. [36], explicitly identify the SDG targets as a key objective of their research. The following two years (2020–2021), which this study calls the “consolidation phase”, are marked by a substantial increase in citations and papers. This boost is partially due to the COVID-19 pandemic, e.g., Refs. [37,38,39]. The period since 2022 encompasses more than half of the publications on the topic and is characterized by themes related to the prosperity category, including energy [40,41,42] and sustainability [43,44,45]. Accordingly, this period is designated as the “growth phase.”

Table 2. Citation structure of the research topic.

Year	TPSDG	TCSDG	HSDG	ACP	≥5	≥25	≥50	≥100	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
2015	3	137	3	46	1	1	1		2
2016	17	269	11	16	8	4			6	7	1	1
2017	49	1316	60	27	19	8	4	3	18	9	12	2
2018	61	1356	109	22	31	8	5	2	25	16	8	8
2019	100	2249	224	22	41	18	4	4	47	31	12	6
2020	187	3605	200	19	88	30	11	3	99	39	25	11
2021	229	2703	201	12	81	22	6	2	108	58	28	22
2022	282	2436	113	9	112	6	3	3	161	60	33	26
2023	311	1195	53	4	60	4	1		141	68	45	40
2024	407	419	2	1	15	2			184	103	62	39

TCSDG, TPSDG, HSDG, total citation, papers and H-index; ACP, average citations per paper; ≥5, ≥25, ≥50, ≥100 number of studies with more than 5, 25, 50, and 100 citations; The journal’s quartile classification (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4) corresponds to the year in which each paper was published.

presents the publications organized by year, total count, and citations received by articles published in the same year. Additionally, it reports the distribution of publications across quartiles based on the SCImago Journal & Country Rank. While the average number of publications has more than doubled in recent years, there is a decline in the average number of citations per article. Nevertheless, by incorporating quartile-based categorization, the analysis reveals significant heterogeneity and notable progress in the overall quality of the literature. For example, during the formative period, 40% of the studies were in first-quartile journals (Q1), 50% during the topic consolidation phase, and 51% in the growth phase. Therefore, more papers from the latter phase are expected to be cited in the future.

4.1.2. Top Journals for SDGs in LAC Research (RQ2)

Table 3. Top journals.

R	Journal	TCSDG	TPSDG	HSDG	ACP	SJR	People	Planet	Prosperity	Peace	Partnership
1	Sustainability	1632	145	161	11	0.61	82	111	125	12	33
2	J. Clean. Prod.	1702	40	15	43	1.74	15	50	37	3	6
3	Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ.	375	29	31	13	0.58	27	29	12	1	14
4	Water	156	20	13	8	0.67	6	31	11	2	3
5	Rev. Panam. Salud Publica Pan Am. J. Public Health	106	17	12	6	0.58	22	3	5	1	5
6	Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.	301	14	6	22	0.89	1	19	8		1
7	Energies	114	14	7	8	0.66	3	15	21		2
8	Cienc. Saude Coletiva	105	14	14	8	0.57	14	6	14	3	7
9	Sci. Total Environ.	366	13	4	28	1.74	8	22	13	1
10	PLoS ONE	134	13	5	10	1.05	2		1

R, Ranking; TCSDG, TPSDG, HSDG, total citation, papers, and H-index; ACP, average citations per paper; SJR, SCImago Journal Rank measures—Scopus 2023. People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership: number of papers in each category.

presents an organization of the ten most influential and productive journals in the field of SDGs in the LAC region. Notably, the journal in which SDGs in LAC are most concentrated is Sustainability (Switzerland), with 146 papers, and 9% of the articles published. Additionally, other highly reputed journals are noted for having publications that surpass the threshold of 100 citations. These include the Journal of Cleaner Production and the International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. It is worth noting that, when comparing the average number of citations per paper among the selected papers in the field with the total number of citations for all papers in each journal, the average is higher for SDG papers in LAC.

Another important issue revealed by Table 3 is the publication of each journal according to the categories defined above (i.e., People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnerships). The results show that almost all the top ten journals have publications in all categories. However, this study finds that in proportional terms, the Pan American Journal of Public Health stands out in the people category. For example, this journal published the article titled “Disrespect and abuse during childbirth and abortion in Latin America: Systematic review and meta-analysis” [46]. Regarding the planet category, the journal Water (Switzerland) is primarily highlighted for its contributions to SDG 6, e.g., Refs. [47,48]. The prosperity category is the most relevant, with the highest number of papers published in the top ten journals. The papers in Sustainability (Switzerland), e.g., Refs. [49,50], and the Journal of Cleaner Production, e.g., Refs. [35,51], are highlighted. The categories of peace and partnership are less addressed, providing an opportunity for future research.

4.1.3. Top Authors for SDG in LAC Research (RQ2)

This research domain has been advanced through the contributions of 6461 authors.

Table 4. Most influential authors.

R	Name	TCSDG	TPSDG	HSDG	ACP	TC	TP	H	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
1	Hone, Thomas	352	7	7	50	2263	65	94	7
2	Millett, Christopher	352	7	3	50	11,435	325	863	7
3	Rasella, Davide	339	9	3	38	2033	66	52	9
4	Barreto, M.L.	223	10	1	22	15,989	511	1169	8	1
5	Paes-Sousa, Rômulo	199	5	5	40	965	39	22	3	2
6	Oliveira Neto, Geraldo Cardoso de	199	4	1	50	1426	87	66	3
7	Silva, Paulo Cesar	188	1	1	188	188	1	1	1
8	de Oliveira Sanches, Ariane Gaiola	188	1	1	188	188	1	1	1
9	Lucato, Wagner Cezar	188	1	1	188	467	10	10	1
10	Ferreira Correia, José Manoel	188	1	1	188	269	2	2	1

R, ranking; TCSDG, TSDG, HSDG, total citation, papers and H-index in SDG in LAC field; ACP, average citations per paper; TC and TP, total citations and papers received by each author; H, H-index of each author; The journal’s quartile classification (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4) corresponds to the year in which each paper was published.

presents the ten most significant contributors, while

Table 5. Most productive authors.

R	Name	TCSDG	TPSDG	HSDG	ACP	TC	TP	H	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
1	Anholon, Rosley	159	16	16	10	2551	169	251	10	6
2	Rampasso, Izabela Simon	156	14	8	11	1718	131	81	9	5
3	Carrión-mero, Paúl	109	12	1	9	1980	131	91	6		3	2
4	Leal Filho, Walter	145	11	2	13	10,799	458	540	7	4
5	Malta, Deborah Carvalho	110	11	11	10	12,440	576	427	3	4	4
6	Barreto, M.L.	223	10	1	22	15,989	511	1169	8	1
7	Quelhas, O.L.G.	138	10	12	14	4033	164	179	7	3
8	Colmenares-Quintero, Ramón Fernando	59	10	5	6	587	49	47	2	8
9	Rasella, Davide	339	9	3	38	2033	66	52	9
10	Morante-Carballo, Fernando	94	9	3	10	1317	94	196	5		2	1

R, ranking; TCSDG, TSDG, HSDG, total citation, papers and H-index in SDG in LAC field; ACP, average citations per paper; TC and TP, total citations and papers received by each author (includes papers in other research fields); H, H-index of each author (includes documents in other research fields); The journal’s quartile classification (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4) corresponds to the year in which each paper was published.

highlights the most prolific authors. Within the core area of study, the authors with the highest citation counts—and thus the most significant scholarly impact—are Davide Rasella, Thomas Hone, and Christopher Millett. Notably, these authors are co-authors on several papers related to mortality and primary care [52,53,54]. Concerning productivity, Rosley Anholon, Izabela Rampasso, and Paúl Carrión-Mero are the top three authors. The first two authors are co-authors of several papers, focusing on the prosperity category, primarily related to SDGs 7, 8, and 9 in Brazil [55,56,57]. In contrast, Carrión’s work is rooted in water quality in Ecuador. Notably, Anholon and Rampasso have predominantly published their research in first-quartile journals, reflecting a high level of academic rigor and impact. By contrast, Carrión’s contributions have appeared mainly in third- and fourth-quartile journals, as classified by the SCR.

Given that many authors engage in interdisciplinary collaborations and contribute to multiple research domains, their scholarly output is presented at an aggregate level. The bibliometric indicators reveal that numerous leading authors have made substantial contributions to the broader scientific community. Notable examples include Deborah Malta and Mauricio Barreto, each with over 500 publications and more than 12,000 citations.

To depict the social structure of the field, a co-authorship network was constructed. As shown in Figure 3, 20 distinct clusters were identified among the 50 most significant authors. While several authors appear as isolated nodes, this does not imply a lack of collaboration among them. On the contrary, the average number of co-authors per publication is 4.4, and 9.5% of the works are authored individually.

4.1.4. Top Institutions for SDGs in LAC Research (RQ2)

The top research institutions listed in

Table 6. Top institutions.

R	Organization Name	Country	TPEE	TCEE	HEE	ACP	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
1	Universidade de São Paulo	Brazil	73	1263	59	17	31	21	12	4
2	Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais	Brazil	46	484	22	11	25	10	7	2
3	Fundacao Oswaldo Cruz	Brazil	44	674	37	15	19	17	5
4	Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro	Brazil	43	433	21	10	22	11	5	3
5	Universidade de Brasília	Brazil	41	272	37	7	14	11	10	4
6	Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México	Mexico	41	344	20	8	26	9	4	1
7	Universidade Estadual de Campinas	Brazil	35	429	30	12	20	9	3	2
8	Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas	Argentina	30	280	14	9	19	5	3	1
9	Universidade Federal Fluminense	Brazil	28	261	12	9	9	7	7	4
10	Tecnológico de Monterrey	Mexico	28	261	31	9	9	7	7	4

R, ranking; TCSDG, TSDG, HSDG, total citation, papers and H-index in SDG in LAC field; ACP, average citations per paper; The journal’s quartile classification (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4) corresponds to the year in which each paper was published.

show that Universidade de São Paulo in Brazil has contributed the most papers. Notably, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, and Universidade Estadual de Campinas are also based in Brazil. Outside of Brazil, only Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico, Tecnológico de Monterrey from Mexico, and Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas from Argentina are highlighted. An important finding is that only Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas and Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico have more than 60% of their publications in the first quartile, according to the SCR.

4.1.5. Top Articles for SDG in LAC Research (RQ2)

Another important dimension of the analysis concerns the most influential publications within this research domain—those with the highest citation counts. Citation frequency serves as a proxy for both the scholarly impact and the visibility of each work within the scientific community.

In the People category, three main themes stand out: food security and rural development, technology and quality education, and innovation in entrepreneurial universities. In the fields of food security and rural development, notable texts include Gil et al. [36], which proposes improved indicators for sustainable agriculture in Latin America, and Santos and Villatoro [58], which develops an index to assess poverty in the region. In the fields of technology and quality education, notable works include Ferguson and Roofe [59], which examines educational challenges in the Caribbean, and Buenaño-Fernández et al. [60], which utilizes machine learning to enhance academic performance in Latin America. Finally, in the context of innovation in entrepreneurial universities, Fischer et al. [61] explore how these institutions foster frugal innovation in the region.

In the Planet category, three main themes stand out: clean production and industrial sustainability, circular economy and sustainable innovation, and green entrepreneurship and climate change. In the context of clean production and industrial sustainability, the most cited text, de Oliveira Neto et al. [35], analyzes the relationship between clean production and sustainability in the textile industry. Xu et al. [40] examine the interplay between urbanization, renewable energy, and financial globalization in Brazil. From the perspective of circular economy and sustainable innovation, Rodríguez-Espíndola et al. [43] investigate how Mexican SMEs apply circular economy principles to enhance their environmental and social performance. In the context of green entrepreneurship and climate change, Alvarez-Risco et al. [37] examine sustainable entrepreneurial intentions among university students in Ecuador during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the Prosperity category, three main themes stand out: smart cities and urban sustainability, circular economy and sustainable SMEs, and globalization, energy, and urbanization. In the context of smart cities and urban sustainability, notable research includes Ferguson and Roofe [59], which examines governance in smart cities, and Fischer et al. [61], which analyzes the impact of scale on sustainable development. In circular economy and sustainable SMEs, the work by Rodríguez-Espíndola et al. [43] explores how sustainability-oriented innovation enhances the performance of Mexican SMEs. In the context of globalization, energy, and urbanization, Xu et al. [40] evaluate the impact of financial globalization and urbanization on sustainable development in Brazil.

In the Peace category, three main themes stand out: governance and sustainability in South America, educational reforms and the SDGs, and community resilience in Haiti. In governance and sustainability in South America, the most cited text, Siegel and Bastos Lima [62], analyzes how global frameworks interact with regional policies. In Educational reforms and the SDGs, Bruns et al. [63] address the challenges of implementing quality educational reforms within the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals. In community resilience in Haiti [64], and Patel and Gleason [65] explore the institutional, energy, and social conditions that contribute to resilience in vulnerable communities.

Finally, in the Partnership category, three main themes stand out: innovation and education in the context of the SDGs, public–private partnerships and sustainability in resource exploitation, and public health and quality of life. In innovation and education in the context of the SDGs, notable studies include Fischer et al. [61], which analyzes how LAC universities foster frugal innovation, and Bruns et al. [63], which addresses educational challenges in LAC to achieve the SDGs. In public–private partnerships and sustainability in resource exploitation, the study by Hancock et al. [66] focuses on Bolivia and evaluates the role of partnerships in the sustainable development of the lithium industry, a key resource for energy transition. Finally, in public health and quality of life, significant works include Ref. [39], which provides a historical perspective on health promotion policies in Brazil, and Ref. [67], which analyzes the advances and challenges of the country’s chronic disease surveillance system.

4.2. Scientific Mapping (RQ3)

This study presents a scientific mapping approach to construct networks and reveal hidden patterns, complementing the bibliometric performance analysis. This methodology enables a detailed examination of the most significant connections among the elements within a given field of study. The analysis utilizes various indicators, including bibliographic coupling, co-citation, and the co-occurrence of keywords.

This study shows the journal’s bibliographic coupling. In bibliographic coupling, the references of two articles are examined to identify common citations; if two papers share references, they are considered bibliographically coupled. The strength of the relationship between these documents increases with the number of shared citations. Figure 4 illustrates the results based on a threshold of five documents per source. The research field has experienced rapid growth in recent years, evidenced by the increasing number of journals publishing on SDGs in LAC. As depicted in Figure 4, there is considerable dispersion and interconnection among the journals.

Furthermore, we can confirm the findings presented in Table 3, which indicate that the most influential journals in this area are Sustainability (Switzerland) and the Journal of Cleaner Production, both of which receive a significant number of citations. A notable additional observation is that several LAC-focused journals maintain connections with internationally recognized journals. This phenomenon is significant, as high-impact journals also frequently reference local publications.

Additionally, a keyword co-occurrence analysis of the field has been developed. This analysis makes it possible to identify the most frequently addressed topics in the field. Figure 5 displays the main keywords, based on a threshold of thirty occurrences. The main keywords used in this field are Sustainable Development Goals, sustainability, LAC, and SDGs. These keywords represent the general field of research, and logically, authors tend to identify their research with the field of study.

As shown in Figure 5, there are three-word clusters. Energy, renewable energy, urban, local, and urban planning are the key terms encompassed in the green cluster. McCollum et al. [68] state that key energy-related interactions between SDGs relate to context dependencies, including time, geography, governance, technology, and directionality, as noted in their results. These aspects are relevant, as both environmental performance and the economic progress driven by renewable energy are expected to follow a gradual yet steady trajectory toward achieving the SDGs in LAC. Accordingly, the respective economies must engage in a more intentional and inclusive effort [69]. Health, employment, poverty, gender, and indigenous are prominent terms in the blue cluster. This cluster encompasses a significant portion of the elements considered in the study of human development, e.g., Refs. [70,71,72,73], including key factors that mediate human progress and quality of life, e.g., Refs. [39,74,75,76], as well as inclusive progress and the safeguarding of human rights, e.g., Refs. [77,78,79,80]. Finally, the red cluster includes related terms such as innovation, higher education, education, and university. Many challenges related to education outlined by the SDGs are intended to be addressed through “inclusive” or “sustainable” economic growth; however, broader social aspects, such as Indigenous learning, ecopedagogy, ecocentric education, and education for the steady-state and circular economy, should also be considered [81]. Governance and its links to the implementation of the SDGs across higher education institutions are a priority issue that obligates improving cooperation between institutions and implementing innovative management tools [82].

5. Context Analysis (RQ4)

Authors affiliated with institutions in 76 countries are represented in the SDG-related literature on LAC included in the review.

Table 7. Top countries.

R	Country	TCSDG	TPSDG	HSDG	ACSDG	≥100	≥50	≥25	≥5	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
1	Brazil	5138	545	306	9	7	9	36	134	249	150	76	50
2	United Kingdom	2946	169	278	17	7	5	20	57	102	49	10	3
3	United States	2894	202	229	14	2	12	22	79	126	52	13	3
4	Mexico	1718	218	49	8	1	7	8	56	98	62	27	17
5	Spain	1541	175	156	9	2	2	12	54	103	34	23	11
6	Colombia	1345	200	13	7		4	7	56	84	56	30	17
7	Ecuador	1178	99	90	12	2	2	11	29	45	22	19	11
8	Chile	1088	126	174	9	2	3	4	40	56	35	15	16
9	Germany	917	73	52	13		2	9	31	43	22	6	1
10	China	769	28	18	27	1	4	8	8	22	6
11	Turkey	738	23	7	32	2	3	7	5	17	4	1
12	Netherlands	692	33	9	21	1	4	3	12	20	8	2	1
13	Canada	691	55	35	13	1	3	3	16	34	15	3	2
14	Peru	677	80	56	8	1	2	6	16	33	23	16	5
15	Australia	553	34	7	16		1	8	13	19	9	1	3
16	France	550	28	10	20	1	3	2	7	17	7	2
17	Argentina	498	57	5	9	1	2	3	9	29	12	8	2
18	Sweden	441	20	23	22		3	3	8	13	2	1
19	India	416	22	30	19	1	1	3	9	12	4	3	1
20	Switzerland	412	27	44	15		2	4	11	15	7	3

R, ranking; TCSDG, TSDG, HSDG, total citation, papers and H-index in SDG in LAC field; ACP, average citations per paper; ≥100, ≥50, ≥25, ≥5, number of paper with more than 100, 50, 25, and 5 citations; The journal’s quartile classification (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4) corresponds to the year in which each paper was published.

reports the 20 most productive countries based on total citation counts. Brazil emerges as the leading nation across all indicators, with 545 publications and 5139 citations, reflecting both its productivity and influence. This prominent position is consistent with the country’s size and research capacity. Following Brazil, the most influential countries in terms of citations are the United States, the United Kingdom, Mexico, and Spain. These data are exciting as they show that studies on the topic have been addressed not only by authors from LAC but also by authors from other countries. This is also shown in Figure 6.

Another noteworthy finding concerns the publication productivity of countries in high-impact journals. Specifically, China, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, Canada, Australia, and France each published over 55% of their articles in first-quartile journals, as classified by the SCR. This indicates that non-LAC countries exhibit the highest proportions of research output in top-tier journals. In contrast, Latin American countries such as Brazil, Mexico, and Chile have less than 50% of their publications appearing in Q1 journals.

To gain a deeper understanding of the distribution of SDG-related studies in LAC, each study was manually classified by the country or countries where the study was implemented, regardless of the authors’ nationalities. The results are presented in

Table 8. Number of papers by category and country.

	People						Planet						Prosperity
Country	1	2	3	4	5	TP	6	12	13	14	15	TP	7	8	9	10	11	TP	16	17	Total	Paper/1 M
Argentina	7	6	6	3	3	25	5	8	12	1	7	33	5	3	1	6	7	22	3	7	90	1.9
Bahamas, The	0	1	0	0	0	1	1	1	2	1	0	5	1	1	0	0	1	3	0	0	9	22.4
Barbados	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	1	3.5
Belize	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	1	2	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	4	8.8
Bolivia	2	4	6	2	0	14	6	4	3	0	5	18	1	1	2	5	4	13	2	1	48	3.9
Brazil	31	43	99	58	26	257	59	123	116	15	59	372	47	41	58	99	80	325	51	84	1089	5.3
Chile	7	3	8	19	5	42	7	16	30	1	6	60	5	4	9	19	10	47	6	15	170	8.5
Colombia	19	10	34	34	17	114	19	35	48	4	12	118	21	19	21	51	40	152	27	27	438	8.4
Costa Rica	0	0	1	2	0	3	0	0	1	0	1	2	0	2	1	1	2	6	0	0	11	2.1
Cuba	1	2	6	6	4	19	0	4	7	0	1	12	3	4	2	6	1	16	1	3	51	4.6
Dominican Republic	0	0	1	1	2	4	0	1	2	0	0	3	0	1	0	6	1	8	0	2	17	1.6
Ecuador	5	11	9	16	4	45	18	28	36	2	18	102	13	12	9	11	15	60	9	16	232	13.7
El Salvador	1	1	1	1	1	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	1	5	2	0	12	1.7
Guatemala	1	3	5	6	5	20	5	2	3	0	0	10	1	2	2	6	0	11	1	3	45	2.6
Guyana	0	0	1	0	0	1	0	0	2	0	2	4	0	1	1	0	0	2	0	0	7	8.6
Haiti	3	0	5	2	1	11	5	1	5	0	0	11	2	3	2	5	3	15	3	5	45	3.8
Honduras	1	2	3	1	1	8	2	0	3	0	2	7	1	0	1	4	1	7	1	1	24	2.5
Jamaica	0	0	2	2	1	5	0	0	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	1	2	2	1	11	4.0
LAC	15	9	21	20	11	76	13	14	21	3	9	60	8	10	9	32	10	69	18	32	255
Mexico	14	16	22	24	9	85	24	35	46	6	24	135	16	24	23	52	26	141	29	41	431	3.3
Nicaragua	2	1	0	3	1	7	0	1	2	0	1	4	0	3	2	3	0	8	0	3	22	3.2
Panama	0	0	0	0	1	1	0	1	0	0	1	2	0	0	0	3	0	3	0	1	7	1.6
Paraguay	1	0	3	0	2	6	0	1	0	0	3	4	0	0	0	5	0	5	0	2	17	2.8
Peru	6	2	10	5	4	27	8	11	11	0	3	33	1	6	3	13	4	27	8	16	111	3.3
Suriname	0	0	2	1	1	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	3	0	4	0	0	8	12.8
Trinidad and Tobago	1	0	1	10	2	14	2	7	10	2	1	22	5	4	5	4	2	20	4	4	64	46.7
Uruguay	2	2	8	7	2	21	3	4	4	5	5	21	4	4	3	4	2	17	3	4	66	18.5
Venezuela, RB	2	2	2	3	4	13	4	5	5	0	6	20	1	4	3	4	3	15	1	2	51	1.6

We highlight the countries or regions where the SDGs were most studied. These are Brazil, e.g., Ref. [83], Colombia, e.g., Ref. [84], Mexico, e.g., Ref. [85], studies covering all of LAC, e.g., Ref. [42], and Ecuador, e.g., Ref. [86]. However, when standardizing the measurement through the indicator of paper per one million inhabitants, the countries with the most studies implemented in their region were Trinidad and Tobago [87], Uruguay [88], Ecuador [89], Chile [90], and Colombia [91].

Moving on to the pillars, countries classified as having lower levels of development, such as Suriname [92], Jamaica [93], Guatemala [94], El Salvador [95], or Cuba [96] tend to prioritize their research in the people pillar. While countries where natural resources are the basis for their development, such as Guyana [97], The Bahamas [98], Belize [99], Ecuador [100], or Venezuela [101], focus their research on the planetary pillar. In the prosperity pillar, countries such as Barbados, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Panama, and El Salvador stand out. On the other hand, countries with internal problems, such as El Salvador, Mexico, or Haiti, have prioritized the peace pillar. Finally, Peru, Panama, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic have given greater relevance to the study of the partnership pillar.

6. Discussion and Future Research Agenda (RQ5)

Since the establishment of the 17 SDGs in 2015, an increasing number of studies have focused on the progress of the SDGs in LAC. However, most of these studies approach the subject from a policymaking perspective rather than an academic one [5]. Furthermore, in the case of scientific research on each of the SDGs topics, a global bibliometric analysis has shown that there is a concentration in developed countries and less development in developing and underdeveloped countries, such as those in LAC [8]. Therefore, future research on SDG analysis from an academic perspective may face challenges in deriving clear implications for achieving the SDGs in LAC. To address this, we conducted a comprehensive review to map out the existing literature on advancing the SDGs in LAC. We performed a bibliometric and contextual review of 1646 papers authored by 6461 scholars, published over the past decade (2015–2024). This study provides multiple contributions across theoretical, methodological, and managerial domains.

First, for researchers, SDGs in LAC present a significant opportunity for future research. (i) The social network analysis revealed 20 clusters of co-authors among the most influential scholars, suggesting that collaboration is concentrated within exclusive groups. However, about 9.5% of the publications in the dataset are single-authored. This indicates that the field presents relatively low barriers to entry, with contributions concentrated among a limited group of specialized authors. Therefore, these results should motivate more scholars to consider contributing to this field. (ii) It has been observed that 6461 authors contributed to the development of this research topic, addressing SDG issues in LAC in all fields within 10 years (2015–2024). The topic has gained significant attention in recent years, but publications remain fragmented. This justifies the need for systematization work, but specific to each pillar, SDG, or area of study (e.g., social sciences or business). (iii) The study identifies fragmented collaboration networks among researchers, with limited integration across countries. Strengthening international and interdisciplinary collaborations could help bridge knowledge gaps, promote innovation, and enhance the scalability of solutions tailored to regional needs. (iv) The significant growth in SDG-related publications since 2015 underscores the increasing recognition of sustainability as a regional priority. However, there is a notable imbalance in thematic coverage. While the prosperity pillar (SDGs 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11) dominates research output, areas such as peace (SDG 16) and partnerships (SDG 17) remain underexplored. This disparity highlights the need to expand research efforts in governance, institutional strengthening, and collaborative frameworks, which are essential for long-term sustainability. (v) The distribution of research efforts across countries within LAC reflects pronounced disparities. Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia are leading contributors, whereas smaller or less developed nations, such as Suriname and Guyana, have minimal representation. This geographic concentration suggests that resource allocation and institutional capacities have a significant influence on research productivity. Addressing these disparities is vital for fostering inclusive and regionally representative knowledge production. (vi) The keyword co-occurrence analysis map shows a lack of new topics, e.g., how emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, blockchain, and renewable energy innovations can support the achievement of specific SDGs in the region. This absence may be explained, at least in part, by the strong concentration of research on traditional development challenges in LAC, as well as by limited interdisciplinary collaboration and restricted access to cutting-edge data infrastructures. To stimulate the incorporation of emerging themes, future research agendas could encourage cross-disciplinary projects, foster collaboration between academia, government, and industry, and promote investment in digital and technological capacities that enable the exploration of topics such as artificial intelligence, big data, and the bioeconomy in relation to regional sustainability.

Second, this is the first mixed-methods research (combining bibliometrics and context analysis) on academic studies across all areas of the SDGs in LAC. We have only found one article with a global focus that does not classify the studies within the framework of the 5Ps and each of the SDGs [8]. This study offers several methodological contributions to the literature. (i) It utilizes Scopus, a comprehensive and extensive database, rather than more limited sources like WoS; (ii) it covers an extended temporal scope, including publications from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2024; (iii) it adopts the PRISMA 2020 protocol, thus enhancing the transparency and reproducibility in the review process; (iv) it integrates advanced analytical tools, including the Rayyan, and Stata 18 and Bibliometrix package in R; (v) it triangulates data with the SJR Rank database to classify publications by quartile, introduce a new metric for measuring publication quality in performance analysis, and (vi) the papers were manually categorized based on the SDGs and the context in which the study was implemented.

Third, from a management and policymaking perspective, this study provides key insights for decision-makers seeking to align national and regional strategies with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in LAC. First, our findings highlight the need to address the imbalance in research focus, as policies and investments have predominantly concentrated on prosperity-related SDGs, while critical areas such as Peace and Partnerships remain underexplored. This aligns with current scenarios, such as the resurgence of new FARC movements in Colombia following the signing of the Peace Agreement three years ago. This suggests that governments and regional organizations should adopt a more comprehensive approach and actively promote the study of these underexplored pillars. Second, the identification of fragmented research networks underscores the importance of fostering not only international and interdisciplinary collaborations but also strengthening cooperation among academia, government, and the private sector. This could lead to more evidence-based policymaking and strategies better suited to regional challenges. Finally, the methodological rigor of this study provides policymakers with a reliable map of the current knowledge landscape, enabling them to prioritize funding for future research, design targeted policy instruments for less-explored issues, and effectively monitor progress toward the 2030 Agenda. By bridging the gap between academic research and policymaking, this study contributes to the development of more inclusive, context-sensitive, and impactful sustainability strategies in the region.

Despite its contributions, this study is subject to several methodological limitations that warrant acknowledgment. While efforts were made to mitigate the inherent limitations of both quantitative and qualitative research approaches by integrating them, the qualitative component remains particularly susceptible to potential researcher bias. In this case, the subjectivity primarily concerns the interpretation of the figures and networks generated through scientific mapping, where the identification of patterns, clusters, or connections may vary depending on the researchers’ perspectives. To minimize this risk, the interpretation was based on predefined and jointly agreed-upon criteria among the researchers, combining visual analysis of graphical representations with quantitative indicators derived from bibliometric analysis. This approach aimed to provide greater objectivity and consistency to the analysis, though we acknowledge that subjective interpretation cannot be entirely eliminated.

Furthermore, the scope of the analysis is constrained by the inclusion and exclusion criteria defined in the study. As a result, the findings and conclusions apply only to the subset of literature that met these predefined parameters and may not be generalizable to the entire body of research on the topic. Moreover, this research examined only articles written in English, Spanish, and Portuguese from the Scopus database. Therefore, the analysis did not include studies reported in other languages, databases, or formats such as policy briefs and reports. In particular, we recognize that this exclusion may have left out relevant research of a more local or applied nature, commonly published in regional databases such as SciELO or others. Future reviews could expand the scope to address these limitations and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the SDG research landscape in LAC.

7. Conclusions

This study offered the first comprehensive bibliometric–contextual review of the SDGs in LAC from 2015 to 2024. By analyzing 1646 publications indexed in Scopus, the study mapped the intellectual structure of the field, identified collaboration patterns, and uncovered thematic and geographic imbalances. Findings reveal that most research is concentrated on prosperity-related goals, particularly energy, infrastructure, and economic growth, while peace (SDG 16) and partnerships (SDG 17) remain underexplored.

Geographically, Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia dominate scholarly production, whereas smaller nations contribute minimally, reflecting disparities in research capacity. Although collaboration networks are expanding, they remain fragmented, limiting interdisciplinary integration. Methodologically, this review advanced the field through the application of PRISMA 2020 protocols, advanced bibliometric tools, and novel performance metrics, providing transparency and a replicable framework for future studies.

From a policy perspective, the study underscored the urgency of diversifying research agendas to strengthen governance, institutional capacity, and collaborative frameworks. It also highlighted opportunities to integrate emerging technologies—such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, and renewable energy innovations—into SDG research. Overall, advancing the SDG agenda in LAC requires not only greater inclusivity and collaboration but also a commitment to aligning academic inquiry with the pressing challenges of sustainable development.