Guidelines for Operationalizing Policy Coherence for Development (PCD) as a Methodology for the Design and Implementation of Sustainable Development Strategies

Policy Coherence for Development (PCD) is considered a pillar of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda. It aims to promote whole of government approaches to sustainable development. Despite its prominence in development cooperation discussions, many national development professionals or stakeholders have not heard of PCD, indicating that its effectiveness is significantly limited. This article contends that the impact of PCD has not been maximized because it has been presented as a political objective or a policy tool by multilateral organizations and their member states. Instead, the article argues that PCD should be implemented as a methodology that can be adopted by domestic government and non-governmental actors alike, in order to understand trade-offs and co-benefits within and between policy sectors, thus promoting a participative approach. I-GAMMA is a research project in Mexico that examines data-driven public policy in order to promote PCD. It is based on in-depth reviews of policy documents and interviews with development actors. It is committed to open data, evidence-based policymaking, and collaborative dialogue between academics, government officials, and representatives of civil society organizations in sustainable development discussions. In the results section of this article, the project proposes participative PCD as a methodology for policy analysis through which a plurality of actors can identify mechanisms that either reinforce or undermine sustainable development strategies. This section then applies the methodology to the governance of protected natural areas in Mexico. The discussion section and the conclusions highlight the relevance of this approach for participative policymaking in sustainable development.

Normative policy coherence for development and policy networks

English abstract: The European Union (EU) is often understood as a normative power. However, based on a case study of European policy networks in Vietnam, this article shows that despite the EU’s commitment to norms and transformative development, norms are not a priority in the implementation of development policies. Rather, norm promotion is delegated to political and diplomatic representatives, whereas development and trade representatives are responsible for technical work. Consequently, policy networks created around these four sectors tend to operate separately from each other, undermining the spillover of norms from diplomatic and political networks to development and trade networks. As a result, this article shows that the structural–institutional separation of sectoral policy networks is one of the EU’s systemic characteristics that restrict normative policy coherence for development.Spanish abstract: La Unión Europea (UE) es considerada un poder normativo, comprometida con las normas y el desarrollo transformativo. En cambio, usando un caso de estudio de redes europeas políticas en Vietnam, este artículo demuestra que las normas no son prioridad en la implementación de políticas de desarrollo. Al contrario, la promoción de normas se delega a representantes políticos y diplomáticos, mientras que los representantes del desarrollo y comercio se hacen cargo del trabajo técnico. Consecuentemente las redes políticas de estos cuatro sectores tienden a aislarse, dificultando la transferencia de las normas de redes políticas y diplomáticas a redes de desarrollo y comercio. El resultado demuestra que la separación estructuro–institucional de las redes políticas sectoriales es una de las características sistémicas de la UE que restringen la coherencia normativa de políticas para el desarrollo.French abstract: L’Union européenne est souvent considérée comme une puissance normative. Cependant, sur la base d’une étude de cas de réseaux de politiques publiques au Vietnam, cet article montre que, malgré son engagement normatif et de développement réformateur, les normes ne sont pas une priorité dans la mise en oeuvre des politiques de développement. Au contraire, leur promotion est déléguée aux représentants politiques et diplomatiques, tandis que les représentants du développement et du commerce sont responsables des travaux techniques. Par conséquent, les réseaux politiques créés autour de ces quatre secteurs ont tendance à fonctionner séparément les uns des autres, ce qui compromet le transfert des normes des réseaux diplomatiques et politiques aux réseaux de développement et du commerce. Ainsi, cet article montre que la séparation structuro-institutionnelle des réseaux sectoriels de politiques publiques est l’une des caractéristiques systémiques de l’UE qui restreint leur cohérence normative en matière de développement.

Saving the baby while discarding the bathwater: the application of policy coherence for development analysis to payment for watershed services

One of the most debated tools for the implementation of sustainable development is “payment for ecosystem services”, of which “payment for watershed services” (PWS) is one of the most developed. While proponents argue that such payments provide market value to the services that ecosystems provide for development, opponents claim that this approach commodifies the environment and promotes inequalities. This article presents an analysis of PWS programs by applying methodologies based on policy coherence for development (PCD), defined as a policy tool aimed at eliminating incoherence within sustainable development strategies that undermine their effectiveness as well as between such strategies and other policy arenas, which are also considered harmful to sustainability. By employing a PCD methodology, the article aims to identify policy mechanisms that undermine PWS programs so that stakeholders can make adjustments, thus, metaphorically ensuring that “the baby” (PWS) is not discarded with “the bathwater” (policy incoherence for sustainable development).

Akteure in Sekretariaten internationaler Organisationen. Das OECD-Sekretariat im Kontext der Policy Coherence for Development-Debatte

Mit dem zunehmend transnationalen Charakter komplexer politischer Probleme rücken Akteure internationaler Verwaltungen immer stärker in den Fokus. Dieser Beitrag untersucht die Interaktionen von Akteuren am Beispiel der Policy Coherence for Development-Abteilung der OECD und fragt, ob es sich dabei um einen Entrepreneur in der internationalen Kohärenzdebatte handelte. Das Hauptaugenmerk liegt somit auf dem OECD-Sekretariat, wo die Kohärenzidee bereits seit 1990 verankert ist. 2015 wurde Policy Coherence for Development zuletzt im Rahmen der globalen Agenda 2030 für Nachhaltige Entwicklung von Staats- und Regierungschefs bestätigt. Die Untersuchung zeigt, dass die Kohärenzabteilung im Generalsekretariat der OECD in vielschichtigen internationalen Entscheidungsprozessen zu Kohärenzfragen sowohl organisationsintern als auch -extern zunehmend autonom agierte und dabei wechselnde Rollen als Entrepreneur und Broker einnahm. Dadurch soll schließlich zu einem besseren Verständnis dynamischer Interaktionsformen von Akteuren der internationalen Verwaltung beigetragen werden.