76 | Nature | Vol 577 | 2 January 2020
Article
Anhui
Beijing
Chongqing
Fujian
Gansu
GuangxiGuangdong
Guizhou
Hainan
Hebei
Heilongjiang
Henan
Hubei
Hunan
Inner Mongolia
Jiangsu
Jiangxi
Jilin
Liaoning
Qinghai Ningxia
Shaanxi
Shandong
Shanghai
Shanxi
Sichuan
Taiwan
Tianjin
Tibet
Xinjiang
Yunnan
Zhejiang
1,000 km
N
40° N
30° N
20° N
40° N
30° N
20° N
40° N
30° N
20° N
40° N
30° N
20° N
a b
90° E 100° E 110° E120° E90° E100° E110° E120° E
90° E 100° E 110° E120° E90° E100° E110° E120° E
c d
SDG Index
<40
40–4 2
42–43
43–4 4
44–4 5
45–4 8
48–5 0
50–5 1
51–5 5
55–5 8
>58
NA
Fig. 2 | Spatial pattern of SDG Index scores in 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2015 for
31 Chinese provinces. a, 2000. b, 2005. c, 2010. d, 2015. The data for the base
map was derived from the Resource and Environment Data Cloud Platform^39
and we generated the scores. For other data sources, see Methods. NA, not
available.
30
40
50
60
70
Bottom 5 developing provinces Top 5 developed provinces
SDG Index score SDG Index score
Year
2000
2005
2010
2015
Year
2000
2005
2010
2015
a
30
40
50
60
70
Developing provinces Developed provinces
b
Fig. 3 | Comparison of average SDG Index scores for different groups of
provinces in China. a, The top five developed (richest) provinces and the
bottom five developing (poorest) provinces in China in 2000, 2005, 2010 and
2015 are compared. b, The developed provinces and developing provinces in
China in 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2015 are compared. The vertical lines within the
bar indicate the standard error in SDG Index scores (n = 80). For the data
sources and a detailed definition for each category of province, see Methods.