“Meta-analysis of the literature related to SDG 3 and its investment”

2020 revealed the vulnerability of the healthcare systems in most countries. It also highlighted their failure to generate serious progress in the fulfillment of Sustainable Development Goal 3 (SDG 3): Ensure healthy lives and promote welfare for all at all ages. One of the key problems inhibiting its progress is the lack of financial resources. Based on a comprehensive meta-analysis of the literature related to SDG 3 and its in- vestment, it aims to demonstrate that lack of appropriate academic support is a part of the failure to generate serious progress in the fulfillment of SDG 3. To do this academic literature published in the period 2010–2019 is analyzed. SciVal Elsevier, VosViewer, and Google Trends tools are applied for analysis. The results show that there is a sig- nificant interest in the academic circles on SDG 3 alone. However, this interest is concentrated toward its medical aspects while economic aspects, including investment, are poorly represented. This study shows that the reason for the current investment gap in SDG 3 is the lack of academic support to provide a theoretical, methodological, and analytical framework for tackling the financing problem for SDG 3. development, training, and retention of the healthcare workforce in developing countries, especially in the least developed ones…” (Target 3.8 and Goal 3.c). The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 showed that the healthcare systems of most countries were on the cusp of collapse; thus, many countries failed to achieve serious progress in the fulfillment of SDG 3, one of the most crucial sustainable development goals (Seshaiyer & McNeely, 2020; United Nations, 2020a, p. 28). One of the key problems in achieving SDG 3 is the lack of financing. To fill this gap, investment can be used as an alternative form of financing (alternative to government spending, etc.). Responsible investment is an investment approach that explicitly acknowledges the relevance to the investors of environmental, social, and governance factors, and it should be widely used in SDG 3 financing. The academic literature must provide the theoretical and methodological framework of these


INTRODUCTION
In 2015, the United Nations provided the main reference points for global human development until 2030, which included global food and sanitary challenges, improving healthcare systems, irreversible climate change, poverty, and gender inequality. These reference points took the form of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and their 169 targets at global and national levels (United Nations, 2015a, p. 1). One of the 17 SDGs is directly related to healthcare issues, namely SDG 3: "Ensure healthy lives and promote welfare for all at all ages". It aims "substantially to increase health financing and the recruitment, development, training, and retention of the healthcare workforce in developing countries, especially in the least developed ones…" (Target 3.8 and Goal 3.c). The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 showed that the healthcare systems of most countries were on the cusp of collapse; thus, many countries failed to achieve serious progress in the fulfillment of SDG 3, one of the most crucial sustainable development goals (Seshaiyer & McNeely, 2020; United Nations, 2020a, p. 28).
One of the key problems in achieving SDG 3 is the lack of financing. To fill this gap, investment can be used as an alternative form of financing (alternative to government spending, etc.). Responsible investment is an investment approach that explicitly acknowledges the relevance to the investors of environmental, social, and governance factors, and it should be widely used in SDG 3 financing. The academic literature must provide the theoretical and methodological framework of these

LITERATURE REVIEW
2020 has shown that the key issues challenging the achievement of SDG3 are a lack of financing. This is not a new problem as the limited financial resources (allocated by the government to the implementation of health-related sustainable development goals) is one of the most mentioned challenges in the academic literature Georgeson & Maslin, 2018;Siddiqi et al., 2020). As the number of large out-of-pocket expenses has increased and will continue to increase in the future, the United Nations has reported that the achievement of universal healthcare coverage remains a global challenge. Over 1 billion people are estimated to spend at least 10% of their household budget on healthcare in 2020, particularly in lowand middle-income countries (United Nations, 2020a, p. 31; United Nations, 2020b, p. 6). These statements underline the importance of financing and investments in healthcare systems worldwide to achieve SDG 3. Bansal et al. (2020) and Smiianov et al. (2020) state that in the context of post pandemic recovery there is a huge influence of Covid-19 for the consumer's buying behavior, health and economic growth. In such conditions the concept of SDGs should be considered in terms of global threats (Stukalo et al., 2021) because SDGs could be an effective tool for strategic planning and further development (Petrushenko et al., 2020;Brin & Nehme, 2021). In order to enhance the ability to manage the efficient management decisions there is a need for implementation of innovative financing approaches for sustainability of entities' performance (Lehenchuk et al., 2020;Chigrin et al., 2014).
During 2016-2020, five forums on Financing for Development at the UN level were conducted. The last was focused on the significant and systematic lack of investment to achieve the SDGs. Summits in Addis Ababa (United Nations, 2015b) and New York (United Nations, 2015a), the Conference of the Parties (COP21) of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2015 (United Nations, 2015c) also discussed the issues of sustainable development financing, including new investment technologies and financial products, to bridge the existing gaps. There are more than 300 instruments of responsible investment, including both individual financial products and technologies (green and energy bonds) as well as the comprehensive restructuring of the FM on a responsible basis (capital market union agenda, circular economy finance support platform, and 2030 climate and energy framework).
Despite these efforts and the general knowledge that new sources of funding are needed to (fully) achieve SDG 3 (Bhutta et al., 2020), considering that the financial resources are insufficient to meet the SDGs in general (Georgeson & Maslin, 2018), it is surprising that there are hardly any insights in the research or implementation proposals for practices that the policymakers can access as potential solutions. The World Health Organization estimates that the investments gap (necessary for the achievement of the SDG 3 targets) in countries across the world will be EUR 54 billion annually by 2030. One of the possible reasons for this failure is the lack of adequate academic support to provide a theoretical, methodological, and analytical framework to solve the problem of SDG 3 financing. Research in this regard is quite important as it increases the attention focused on current problems in society, provides best practices to solve these problems, develops methodology, and presents empirical results. All these factors are crucial to tackling current problems in the achievement of SDGs. Peters et al. (2019) have shown that the lack of data on the costs and comparative benefits of investing in health management reflects the reluctance to invest adequately in systems.
The present literature on SDG 3, its methodological and theoretical substantiation as well as its financing is rather fragmentary and unstructured. Thus, meta-analytical studies on the SDG 3 financial and investment support were conducted considering the progress in achieving all the 17 SDGs and their integration (Table 1)   . In addition to VosViewer, SciVal, Google Trends, and Google Books Ngram Viewer were used to analyze the informational and analytical provision of SDG 3. Sweileh (2020) paid special focus on SDG 3. However, the aspects of investment have not been disclosed. Moreover, currently, SDG 3 meta-analysis focuses on medical issues, rather than financial tools, to ensure progress in achieving this goal. This paper aims to fill in this gap showing that the shortage of financial resources in SDG3 achievement is partially caused by the lack of an appropriate academic framework.

METHODOLOGY
A meta-analysis is a general systematic summary of information drawn from different studies that have addressed a specific topic or several related topics (Browne & Rabash, 2009, p. 477). Card and Casper (2013, pp. 705-706) state that inclusion and exclusion criteria and search techniques should be used to find relevant literature. The keywords "SDG 3 good health and well-being", "SDG 3 and investment", "SDG 3 and responsible investment", "SDG 3 and finance (financing)", and "responsible investment" were employed. Their choice, as suggested by Adams et al. (2014, p. 46), is based on the goals and studies presented in Table 1. VosViewer is a software tool for bibliometric construction and visualization; for example, based on the bibliography parameters of the articles indexed in Scopus. The current study used the following features of VosViewer: co-occurrence and co-authorship cluster analysis and visualization maps. The data and results from SciVal were imported into VOSViewer. Google Trends is an analytical instrument for comparing the terms searched via internet requests in different counties and languages. Using Google Trends, this paper provides a regional and dynamic comparative analysis of the internet requests concerning defined keywords in each area (SDG 3, investment, financing, and responsible investment). Google Books Ngram Viewer analyzes the frequency of terms appearing in Google Books from 1518 within a defined linguistic corpus (English 2019 is used in this study).
The period from 2010 to 2019 was chosen as the period for the meta-analysis. It includes the following steps: 1) SciVal was used to perform: • Static analysis of the general parameters for the selected research area. These parameters are built in SciVal by Elsevier (number of topics and topics cluster in a specific research area, number of publications, and citations) on the date of analysis; • Dynamic analysis of the publications by year and geographical terms (scholarly output in each research area during 2010-2019 worldwide and in Europe); • Research contribution to SDG 3 and its investment by countries and affiliates (top 10 institutions, sectors, and countries in each research area based on scholarly output) • Scientists' contribution to the development of this topic (top 10 authors based on scholarly output and citation in each research area).
2) SciVal and VosViewer are used to analyze the subject area, the thematic focus of research, keywords, and their clustering (the most prominent clusters were analyzed).

3) Google Trends and Google Books Ngram
Viewer were used to analyze the existing trends in Internet queries and frequency of mentions in Google Books concerning predefined research areas.
Based on the obtained results, key authors and articles in this field were selected, and their results were analyzed solely.

SDG 3 and investment: static, dynamic, and structural analyses based on SciVal
The review is provided for three main search queries in three research areas: "SDG 3 good health and well-being" (predefined area), "SDG 3 and investment, SDG 3, and responsible investment as of March 31, 2021", and two additional supplementary research areas, namely "responsible investment and SDG 3" and "finance (financing)". The results are shown in Table 2.
According to the quantitative parameters of each area, the widest in terms of topics, there are several publications and citations on SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being. It has 6.227 million publications, grouped under 74,831 topics in 1,495 thematic clusters. Within its framework, it has been identified as a narrow research area related to SDG 3 and investment (61 publications, which is 0.0009% of the total number of SDG 3 publications on 43 topics in 30 clusters). Against the background of related topics, the request-responsible investment publications on SDG 3 are uncommon. The allocation of the field "SDG 3 and responsible investment" depicts underdevelopment in the scientific sphere and there are a small number of publications (seven publications within six topics and thematic clusters). Dynamic analysis of these areas in terms of publication number (scholarly output, Table 3) allows drawing the following conclusions: 1) While the topics related to the prevention and treatment of human disease in the context of SDG 3 were studied before the adoption of the UN Global Goals in 2015, investment support in this area became a research subject only after the New York Summit 2015; 2) Academic attention is growing; however, issues of SDG 3 and its investment are unexplored; 3) Half of the publications on SDG 3 and its investment are published by European scholars.
The topics of "responsible investment and SDG 3" and "SDG 3 and finance (financing)" are in- The most productive and cited authors in each of the research areas are presented in Appendix C, Table  C1. Each of the 10 most-cited authors worked only in their research area. The study of the three outlined research areas shows the prevalence of medical sciences within them (Appendix A, Figures  A1-A3). The share of research in the fields "SDG 3: good health and well-being" is over 48%, "SDG 3 and investment" has 30%, and "SDG 3 and responsible investment" -27%. At the same time, only    Figure 1. Results of the analysis of keyphrases for "SDG 3: good health and well-being" from 2015 to 2020 within the last two fields, purely economic sciences areas are considered such as economics, econometrics and finance, business, management, and accounting. In the field of "SDG 3 and investment," the share of economics, econometrics, and finance is 4%; in "SDG 3 and investment," the share of the business, management, and accounting is 9%. This indicates that the study of SDG 3 is largely beyond the economic context. This fact is confirmed by the analysis of key phrases (Figure 1) for SDG 3 from 2015 to 2020. The font size in the figure indicates the frequency of the presence of the studied keywords, which are selected from the subject area based on the Elsevier fingerprint engine, natural language processing, and document abstracts.

Responsible investment
As can be seen from the analysis of the keyword, SDG 3 investment is not mainstreamed in the publications. Key phrase analysis operates with the Elsevier Fingerprint Engine to extract distinctive key phrases within the research area. Size font is correlated to the key phrase frequency in academia. While green color phrases are more recent, blue ones are older. The top 50 key phrases by relevance to SDG 3 do not include any finance or investment keywords.
The cluster presentation of topics for each of the research areas is made using bubble size by scholarly output (Appendix D, Figure D1). The results are consistent with the analysis of the subject areas. In the mode of displaying topics and thematic clusters in the research field of SDG 3 within the top 100 topics by scholarly output, subject areas such as BUSI Business, Management and Accounting, ECON Economics, Econometrics and Finance, DECI Decision Sciences, and MULT Multidisciplinary are not highlighted in general. The study's broader focus confirms the presence of an economic context in the study of SDG 3 and its investment (Table 4). The presentation of thematic clusters in the descending order of the prominence percentile (scholarly output, citation, publication share, %) indicates the prevalence of industry, marketing, business research, and CSR research in the field of "SDG 3 and investment." The topics of social entrepreneurship, hybrid organizations, and im-pact investing need special attention. The study of the topics of the most recent publications in 2021 is presented in Figure 2. This indicates the financial and economic context in SDG 3 study, particularly in terms of financial markets, volatility, and exchange rates during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Source: Compiled by authors via SciVal by Elsevier.

Figure 2. Newly emerged topics for SDG 3 in 2021
Source: Compiled by authors via VosViewer. Figure 3. Bibliometric map of the publications concerning "SDG 3 and investment" and "SDG 3 and responsible investment" by keywords

SDG 3 and investment: cluster analysis based on VosViewer
Analysis of the publication clusters by keywords and scientific scholars is carried out using VosViewer for two research fields: "SDG 3 and investment" and "SDG 3 and responsible investment" (Figures 3 and 4). The results show that "SDG 3 and investment" is insufficiently researched.
Thus, the network links between the keywords in these areas were rather weak, and the number of keywords itself was insignificant. VosViewer has identified three main research fields on "SDG 3 and investment": climate change, environment protection, and global health.
Extensive publication research involved in the fields of "SDG 3 and investment", "SDG 3", and "responsible investment" and their filtering based on citation indicators and relevance to the "SDG 3 and investment" allowed the formation of a final list of articles for the analysis of scholarly output (Appendix E, Table E1). Based on this list, the key findings are summarized. Most of the authors focused on cost estimations to achieve SDG 3 and its targets.   For example, financial and investment instruments to be used, efficiency estimations, new financial products and technologies, specifics of investment processes, and many others. These aspects are not usually discussed in the academic literature related to SDG 3. While Walker (2016) justified the necessity of shifting health funding sources from aid and loans to innovative domestic funding sources that prioritize health, he provided no concrete recommendations and steps. To fill these gaps, academics should shift the focus of research activity towards investment and responsible investment as the key elements of SDG 3 achievement.

SDG 3 and investment: analysis using Google Trends and Google Books Ngram
The modern data analysis tools enable the assessment of the priority and popularity of the research subject given the internet queries (Google Trends) and the frequency of the use of certain language units based on sources in Google Books (Google Books Ngram Analysis). Figure 5 shows the search queries for "SDG 3 good health and well-being", "SDG 3 and investment", "SDG 3", and "responsible investment", confirming the findings of the bibliometric analysis on the lack of popularity of investment and responsible investment in SDG 3.
However, responsible investment is more popular than SDG 3. The surge in search activity for these queries was observed during 2019-2021, which is due to the economic challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. Google Books Ngram Viewer ( Figure  6) allowed emphasizing that SDG 3 is not sufficiently highlighted in Google Books in the context of traditional investments.
Concerning SDG 3 and responsible investment, a significant frequency increase in thematic areas has been observed since 2000 for responsible investment, and since 2015 for SDG 3. A special surge has been observed in recent years.

CONCLUSIONS
Achievement of the 17 SDGs and their 169 targets by 2030 is of extreme importance at global and national levels. It solves the most crucial issues of humanity, such as global food and sanitary challenges, the need to improve healthcare systems, irreversible climate change, poverty, and gender inequality. In 2020, due to the COIVD-19 pandemic, special attention has been directed towards SDG 3. The inability of national healthcare systems to counteract pandemics reveals the serious problems hindering the achievement of SDG 3 (United Nations, 2020a, p. 28). One of the key reasons for this is the lack of financial resources. The size of the current investment gap measures hundreds of billions of dollars.
This paper aims to show that one of the possible reasons for this failure is the lack of sufficient academic support to provide a theoretical, methodological, and analytical framework for tackling the financing problem for SDG 3. Thus, a meta-analysis of SDG 3 and investment literature was conducted. Using SciVal Elsevier, VosViewer, Google Trends, and Google Books Ngram Viewer, articles published during 2010-2019 on SDG 3 and investment were analyzed. While there is significant interest in academic circles towards SDG 3 alone, it is focused mainly on medical aspects. The economic part, including investment, is poorly researched. This leads to the lack of theoretical support and proper empirical evidence to tackle the financing problem that hinders SDG 3 achievement.
Therefore, it is concluded that there is a research gap in this economically highly relevant policy field, which must be filled in to counter the problems outlined in the introduction. Without viable solutions in the area of financing and investment, there is a risk that the SDG 3 targets will not be achieved to the full extent, which will particularly affect the population in low-and medium-income countries (Nabukalu et al., 2020; United Nations, 2020a, p. 31). To fill in the financial gaps and thereby trigger the achievement of SDG 3, other (non-governmental) sources of funding are needed in addition to public finance (Cerf, 2019; United Nations, 2019, p. 32).
A very limited number of articles (less than 0.01% of publications are devoted to SDG 3) discuss the issue of investment and related topics. To fill these gaps, academics should shift the focus of research activity towards investment and responsible investment as the key elements necessary for achieving SDG 3. The most prominent objects of future research are financial and investment instruments (green and energy bonds, ESG-related ETFs, etc.), efficiency estimations, new financial products and technologies, specifics of investment processes, and others that are yet to be researched in academic literature.

APPENDIX A. Research area by subjects, 2010-2019
Source: Authors' compilation. Figure A1. Structural analysis by subjects for "SDG 3" Figure A2. Structural analysis by subjects for "SDG 3 and investment" Figure A3. Structural analysis by subjects for "SDG 3 and responsible investment"