The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development has been criticized for its institutional weakness. It assumed that governance commitments and the multilateral order would remain unchanged until 2030. The COVID-19 has challenged both assumptions. The response deployed by the countries has made international cooperation dependent on the solution of internal problems. What will be the impact of the pandemic on the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals? What changes can be expected in the institutional design of the Agenda to face this challenge? To address these questions we have gathered and systematized 152 documents issued by the top think tanks on International Development since the outbreak of COVID-19, to identify the main design features of the Agenda that should be modified according to the functional-rationalist approach to institutional design. Our study shows that a higher level of centralization of authority and a redefinition of control and flexibility mechanisms are needed in order to improve the governance of the Agenda. Despite the temptation of focusing on a narrow set of goals, a broad scope is recommended, necessary to safeguard its holistic approach. These findings can provide insights for addressing the governance and institutional design of other international arrangements of similar nature.

In 2015, the 2030 Agenda was formally adopted by the United Nations, establishing a set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). SDG 3 seeks to promote Global Health and the quality of public health systems in developing countries. The achievement of these goals requires the commitment of all signing countries, but the COVID-19 crisis is changing the behavior of the main stakeholders in the international arena. What do the experts think about these changes? Could these changes threaten the 2030 Agenda and Global Health? To answer these questions, we conduct a content analysis of 152 documents written by experts from the 15 main think tanks on international development policy. The results point out that the new scenario brought about by the pandemic is hindering the necessary cooperation between countries to achieve global health goals and to guarantee public health coverage in developing countries. To deal with these challenges, more delegation of powers to international organizations and a reform of the international cooperation system are needed. With this analysis, we launch a warning about potential weaknesses of the institutional design of the 2030 Agenda in order for it to survive in a post-COVID-19 world and remain a valid instrument to promote health worldwide.

The sustainable development goals (SDGs) were established by the United Nations as an international call to eradicate poverty, safeguard the environment, and guarantee that everyone lives in peace and prosperity by 2030. The SDGs aim to balance growth and sustainability in three dimensions: social, economic and environmental. However, in the post-pandemic era, when resources for public development policies are scarce, nations face the problem of prioritizing which SDGs to pursue. A lack of agreement is one of the determinants of low performance levels of the SDGs, and multicriteria decision analysis tools can help in this task, which is especially relevant in developing countries that are falling behind in achieving the SDGs. To test the feasibility and appropriateness of one of these tools, the Fuzzy Logarithm Methodology of Additive Weights, we apply it to prioritize the SDGs in the Dominican Republic, to see if the priorities established are consistent. Seventeen experts were surveyed, and the main result was that Decent work and economic growth was the most important goal for the country. Our findings, consistent with the literature, show the path to similar applications in other developing countries to enhance performance levels in the achievement of the SDGs.