Assessing transformative and synergistic capacity in cooperative climate initiatives: A comparative analysis of multi-stakeholder and single-sector partnerships

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides a comparative framework for evaluating partnership effectiveness across thematic areas, challenging the assumed superiority of multi-stakeholder approaches.

🏢実務担当者:Helps sustainability teams decide whether to join multi-stakeholder or single-sector partnerships based on their goals and context.

🏛政策担当者:Informs the design of partnership frameworks by highlighting the importance of thematic focus over partnership structure.

Abstract The adoption of the 2030 Agenda marked a global commitment to address interconnected challenges through the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Multi-stakeholder partnerships (MSPs) – involving public, private, and civil society actors – have been widely promoted as vital instruments for achieving the SDGs due to their potential for pooling diverse resources and fostering cross-sector collaboration. However, empirical evidence of their effectiveness remains mixed. This study investigates whether MSPs are more synergistic and transformative compared to single-sector partnerships (SSPs), focusing on their integration of economic, environmental, and social dimensions, and their contributions to norm, regulatory, and behavioral change. Using a matched case selection design, we compare MSPs and SSPs registered on the Global Climate Action Portal (GCAP), analyzing their visions, outputs, and outcomes across different thematic areas: sustainable urban mobility, climate-focused finance, energy efficiency and sustainable land use. Findings indicate that differences in synergistic and transformative capacity are more strongly influenced by thematic area than by partnership type. While MSPs occasionally exhibit broader transformative capacity, SSPs – both public and private – also demonstrate significant normative outputs and normative and behavioral outcomes. Notably, integration of all three sustainability pillars is more apparent in stated visions than in realized outputs or outcomes. These findings challenge assumptions about the inherent superiority of MSPs, and underscore the importance of context and thematic focus in shaping partnership performance. By comparing MSPs and SSPs directly, and by evaluating both outputs and outcomes, this study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of what makes partnerships effective in advancing sustainable development.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-026-09721-4first seen 2026-05-21 04:33:29