Examining linkages among multiple sustainable development outcomes is key for understanding sustainability transitions. Yet rigorous evidence on social and environmental outcomes of sustainable development policies remains scarce. We conduct a national-level analysis of Brazil’s flagship social protection program, Zero Hunger (ZH), which aims to reduce food insecurity and poverty. Using data from rural municipalities across Brazil and quasi-experimental causal inference techniques, we assess relationships between social protection investment and outcomes related to sustainable development goals (SDGs): "no poverty" (SDG 1), "zero hunger" (SDG 2), and "health and well being" (SDG 3). We also assess potential perverse outcomes arising from agricultural development impacting "climate action" (SDG 13) and "life on land" (SDG 15) via clearance of natural vegetation. Despite increasing daily per capita protein and kilocalorie production, summed ZH investment did not alleviate child malnutrition or infant mortality and negligibly influenced multidimensional poverty. Higher investment increased natural vegetation cover in some biomes but increased losses in the Cerrado and especially the Pampa. Effects varied substantially across subprograms. Conditional cash transfer (Bolsa Familia [BF]) was mainly associated with nonbeneficial impacts but increased protein production and improved educational participation in some states. The National Program to Strengthen Family Farming (PRONAF) was typically associated with increased food production (protein and calories), multidimensional poverty alleviation, and changes in natural vegetation. Our results inform policy development by highlighting successful elements of Brazil’s ZH program, variable outcomes across divergent food security dimensions, and synergies and trade-offs between sustainable development goals, including environmental protection.

检查多个可持续发展成果之间的联系对于理解可持续性转变至关重要。但是，关于可持续发展政策的社会和环境成果的严格证据仍然很少。我们对巴西的旗舰社会保护计划“零饥饿”（ZH）进行了国家级分析，该计划旨在减少粮食不安全和贫困。我们使用来自巴西农村城市的数据和准实验因果推断技术，评估了社会保护投资与与可持续发展目标（SDG）相关的结果之间的关系：“无贫困”（SDG 1），“零饥饿”（SDG 2） ，以及“健康与福祉”（可持续发展目标3）。我们还评估了农业发展影响“气候行动”（可持续发展目标13）和“