Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as an integrated set represents a major challenge for all governments. Policy coherence for sustainable development (PCSD) provides a solution to overcoming institutional silos and fragmented action. Experience shows that the ability to implement coherent policies is dependent on the institutional mechanisms used by governments to manage and co-ordinate policy. This chapter highlights institutional mechanisms for enhancing PCSD in light of good emerging practices in eight key areas: 1) Commitment and leadership, 2) Long-term vision, 3) Policy Integration, 4) Coordination, 5) Regional and local involvement, 6) Stakeholder engagement, 7) Policy impacts, and 8) Monitoring and reporting. It provides examples of recent institutional practices in 30 OECD countries, which have presented Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) to the UN High Level Political Forum (HLPF).
Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2019
Chapter 2. Institutional approaches to policy coherence for sustainable development
Abstract
Introduction
Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as an integrated set, taking account of the synergies and trade-offs between them, is a major challenge faced by all governments. Each SDG cuts across multiple policy domains, as they integrate economic, social and environmental dimensions. As illustrated in Chapter 1, the actions (either environmental, social or economic) under one SDG can reinforce progress on other SDGs provided that the interlinkages between sectoral areas are taken into account in policy design and implementation. Conversely, there is a risk of making progress in one goal at the expense of another when the interlinkages are neglected.
Policies, action plans and strategies for achieving the SDGs, therefore, require organisational support that transcends compartmentalised structures of government. A silo approach to SDG planning or fragmented government action in implementation can lead to unsustainable policy decisions and pathways that would make it more difficult to achieve all SDGs. Another significant challenge is to ensure that domestic policies contribute to global sustainability, while avoiding negative economic, social and environmental externalities beyond national borders, and for future generations.
Policy coherence for sustainable development (PCSD) provides a solution to overcoming policy silos and fragmented governmental action. PCSD is fundamental to realise the benefits of synergistic actions across the SDGs and effectively manage their potential trade-offs. It is also an essential tool for policy makers to prevent domestic policies that undermine sustainable development and wellbeing elsewhere and for future generations. The experience of the OECD in promoting policy coherence over the past two decades shows that the ability to implement coherent policies is dependent on the institutional mechanisms, i.e. processes, structures and working methods, used by governments to manage and co-ordinate policy.
The purpose of this chapter is to draw together insights on institutional mechanisms for enhancing PCSD in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. It provides examples of recent institutional practices in 30 OECD countries, which have presented Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) to the UN High Level Political Forum (HLPF) so far (Table 2.1). The chapter draws from Voluntary National Reviews, the results of the 2018 OECD Survey on PCSD, as well as other published official sources and reports. The country examples included are presented according to eight building blocks for PCSD identified by the OECD (OECD, 2017[1]) and featured in previous reports (OECD, 2018[2]).
Table 2.1. OECD Countries that have presented VNRs to the HLPF 2016-18
Note: Mexico and Switzerland presented VNRs in 2016 and 2018.
Source: UN (n.d.[3]), UN Voluntary National Reviews Database, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/vnrs/ (accessed on 8 January 2019).
This chapter provides background material to support the current work on updating the Recommendation of the OECD Council on Policy Coherence for Development. It also supplements the report “Governance as an SDG Accelerator: Country experiences and tools” (OECD, 2019[4]).
Building blocks of policy coherence for sustainable development
Enhancing policy coherence is one of the persistent challenges of the governance for sustainable development. Experience shows that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to improve PCSD. Nevertheless, there are common good institutional practices and mechanisms for enhancing PCSD, which can be relevant for different contexts. The OECD has identified a set of institutional mechanisms (building blocks) that are helping to bring greater policy coherence for sustainable development in governments from different political and administrative traditions (Figure 2.1). These are:
1. political commitment and leadership – to mobilise whole-of-government action, and translate commitment to PCSD into concrete measures at the local, regional, national and international levels;
2. long-term vision and planning horizons – to reconcile short- and long-term priorities and make informed choices about sustainable development considering the long-term implications of today’s policy decisions on the well-being of future generations;
3. policy integration – to integrate sustainable development into policy and finance, and capitalise on synergies, manage trade-offs between economic, social and environmental policy areas, as well as to ensure consistency with internationally agreed goals;
4. policy and institutional co-ordination – to anticipate and resolve divergences between sectoral priorities and policies, and ensure mutually supporting efforts across sectors and institutions for sustainable development;
5. regional and local involvement – to align priorities and ensure co-ordinated action and consistency across all levels of government for sustainable development;
6. stakeholder engagement – to ensure that PCSD measures are understood and accepted by the population and supported by key stakeholders; that actions are aligned; and that knowledge and resources for PCSD are mobilised;
7. analysis and assessments of policy impacts – to provide decision-makers with informed evidence on positive and negative impacts of domestic policies on sustainable development at home and abroad (transboundary impacts);
8. monitoring, reporting and evaluation – to collect and evaluate information on the impact of policies on sustainable development, and report regularly to governing bodies and the public about progress on PCSD and on how policies have been implemented regarding the SDGs and adjusted in light of negative effects.
Figure 2.1. Building Blocks of Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development
Source: Adapted from OECD (2018[2]), Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2018: Towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264301061-en.
These PCSD building blocks were identified based on over two decades of experience gained by OECD countries in promoting policy coherence. They build on the experience of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members in promoting policy coherence for development (PCD), as well as on the experiences of OECD members in implementing national sustainable development strategies (NSDS) that emerged from the Rio Earth Summit and Agenda 21.
These building blocks represent institutional structures, systems, processes and working methods, which are essential drivers for improving policy coherence in pursuing the SDGs. They reflect the universal, integrated and indivisible nature of the SDGs. These institutional mechanisms are essential to consider in policy-making key principles such as: sustainability; integrated and balanced approaches to economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development; long-term vision in planning and policy; local and regional involvement; and multi-stakeholder engagement, all of which feature prominently in the 2030 Agenda (Table 2.2).
Table 2.2. Relevant principles for SDG implementation included in the 2030 Agenda
Source: UNGA (2015[5]), A/70/L.1: Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E.
Political commitment and leadership
Strong political commitment and leadership are a precondition for policy coherence. Explicit, public political commitment to PCSD expressed at the highest level and backed by strategies, action plans, policies, legislation, instructions and incentives is essential to enable all branches and levels of government to pursue the SDGs in a coherent manner. Strong political leadership also helps to build ownership of PCSD efforts across government and among key actors, and facilitates the enactment of specific measures to avoid that policies in different sectors conflict with or undermine each other.
The majority of OECD countries covered in this chapter (27 of the 30 countries) have made an explicit commitment to PCSD either as part of their SDG implementation plans or their development co-operation policy (Figure 2.2) In Mexico, for example, the National Strategy for the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda, launched in November 2018, underscores PCSD as a national target for SDG implementation, and emphasises the need to promote the necessary legislative initiatives with a view to create the enabling environment to enhance PCSD (Presidencia de la República Mexico, 2018[6]). In Poland, the principle of policy coherence was incorporated in the Multiannual Development Cooperation Programme 2016 -2020 adopted by the Council of Ministers with an explicit link to support SDG implementation and ensure consistency with the global goals.
Practice can take many forms. For example, the Swiss development co-operation has made strategic use of the sustainable development agenda to raise awareness and increase efforts on policy coherence across the administration. Switzerland committed to policy coherence in strategic documents such as the Dispatch 2017-2020 Strategy and the Switzerland Sustainable Development Strategy 2016-2019 (OECD, 2016[7]). Germany has taken a similar approach (see Box 2.1). In Denmark eight out of nine parties in the Danish parliament endorsed in 2017 “The World 2030 – Denmark’s strategy for development policy and humanitarian action”, which emphasises policy coherence especially in the European Union and across the humanitarian-development-peace nexus.
Japan established the SDGs Promotion Headquarters in 2016. Led by the Prime Minister, this mechanism acts as control tower to ensure a whole-of-government approach to SDG implementation, and fosters co-operation among ministries. In December 2018, the SDG Promotion Headquarters adopted the SDGs Action Plan 2019, recognising the indivisibility of the 169 targets and the need for integrated approaches to implementation (OECD, 2018[2]).
Figure 2.2. Explicit commitment to PCSD
Sources: VNRs (available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/vnrs) and OECD (2018[8]), Report on Survey Findings: Applying the Eight Building Blocks of PCSD in the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda, http://www.oecd.org/pcsd/Report%20on%20PCSD%20Survey%20Findings.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2019).
Box 2.1. Germany – Using the momentum of the 2030 Agenda to promote policy coherence
The German National Sustainable Development Strategy contains the Federal Government’s concrete ambition to use the 2030 Agenda as an opportunity to increase its efforts for policy coherence, with particular reference to SDG 17.14. Various policy areas are bundled to achieve greater coherence in light of the large number of systemic interdependencies. Ministry Coordinators for Sustainable Development have been appointed in all Ministries.
Source: OECD (2018[2]), Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2018: Towards Sustainable and Resilient Societieshttps://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264301061-en.
Other countries have taken targeted measures to overcome policy and institutional silos in SDG implementation, thereby fostering PCSD implicitly. In Canada, the Government established a SDG Unit to facilitate the coordination, monitoring and evaluation of implementation activities of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy (Government of Canada, 2018[9]). In Chile, the government established the National Council for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, which is composed by the ministries of Foreign Affairs, Economy and Tourism, Social Development, and Environment, with the aim to foster an integrated approach to SDG implementation (Government of Chile, 2017[10]). In Greece, the General Secretariat of the Government is formally mandated to lead the SDG integration into the national strategy, and an Inter-ministerial Co-ordination Network involving all ministries has been established, which provides also a forum for dialogue with regional and local authorities as well as other key stakeholders (OECD, 2019[11]). The process leading to the elaboration of a 4-year National Implementation Plan for the SDGs, in 2019, is underway. This National Implementation Plan is expected to be aligned with the provisions of the National Strategy for Sustainable and Fair Growth 2030 and will aim at promoting cross-sectoral approaches and actions among line Ministries.
Long-term strategic vision and planning horizons
In adopting the 2030 Agenda, world leaders committed to “implement the Agenda for the full benefit of all, for today’s generation and for future generations” (UNGA, 2015[5]). Long-term vision and planning horizons are essential to support present needs and those of future generations in a balanced manner. They are also fundamental to ensure that efforts on SDG implementation go beyond electoral cycles, government programmes or cabinet compositions. Previous experiences have shown that balancing short- and long-term priorities and sustaining commitment over time have been major challenges in implementing strategies and policies for sustainable development.
Most OECD countries covered in this chapter have adopted a long-term perspective in developing strategies and implementation plans for the SDGs. Some countries such as Slovenia, Finland and Belgium have developed long-term visions with a timeline up to 2050 through inclusive processes and used them as a basis for designing their national sustainable development strategies. In Ireland, the implementation of the SDGs takes place within the context of Project Ireland 2040, which is the Government’s overarching policy initiative that sets out values and 10 strategic objectives consistent with the SDGs (Government of Ireland, 2018[12]). Portugal has adopted a long-term roadmap to carbon neutrality and Norway has established a fund to save for future generations and compensate for a loss of petroleum revenues (Box 2.2).
In Hungary, the Fundamental Law that came into force in 2012 advocates the mainstreaming of sustainability into public policies and contains key principles on the rights of future generations. Since 2012, the Deputy-Commissioner Responsible for the Protection of the Interests of Future Generations within the Office of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights is responsible for protecting fundamental rights to sustainable development for current and future generations (Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Hungary, 2018[13]), joining countries with similar institutions such as Australia, Canada and Norway.
Finland’s Committee for the Future and Germany’s Parliamentary Advisory Council on Sustainable Development are examples of parliamentary bodies that evaluate medium- and long-term developments and their policy implications. A plethora of tools and fora are used throughout the OECD countries to consult with youth, academia, citizens and civil society organisations on key issues for future generations. Such fora include for example the Czech Youth Forum, an inter-ministerial body for co-ordination on youth issues (OECD, 2018[14]).
Box 2.2. Norway – Government Pension Fund to save for future generations
In 1990, the Norwegian government established the Government Pension Fund Global to save for future generations and compensate for a loss of petroleum revenues after phasing-out of oil extraction. The fund is managed by Norges Bank Investment Management on behalf of the Ministry of Finance under a strict management mandate. Benefiting from regular capital transfers from the State’s petroleum revenues and investment returns, the fund’s market value reached 8.497 billion Norwegian kroner in 2018 (roughly 1 trillion US Dollars). Withdrawals by the government are limited to 4%, making the fund truly long-term. The first withdrawal was made in 2016.
Source: Norges Bank Investment Management (2017[15]), Government Pension Fund Global: Annual Report 2017.
Policy integration
In adopting the 2030 Agenda, governments committed to “achieving sustainable development in its three dimensions – economic, social and environmental – in a balanced and integrated manner” (UNGA, 2015[5]). Policy integration is central to balancing the often divergent economic, social and environmental priorities, and to maximising synergies and minimising trade-offs at all stages of the policy-making process. This is important to: (i) avoid the risk that progress on one goal occurs at the expense of another, for example food (SDG 2) and energy (SDG 7) production can compete for the same water (SDG 6) or land (SDG 15) resources; and to (ii) ensure that domestic policies are aligned with internationally agreed goals.
Observations from most countries covered in this chapter would indicate the need for mandates and specific measures for policy integration as well as strategic or institutional frameworks that allow for a new logic of cross-sectoral collaboration and shared priorities to emerge. Different measures, including budgetary, have been put in place to incorporate sustainable development into the work of each national institution and align sectoral objectives with the SDGs (Table 2.3).
An overarching national strategy or action plan for 2030 Agenda implementation can serve as a common framework to integrate the SDGs into sectoral programmes. In Japan, for example, the SDGs Promotion Headquarters adopted the SDGs Implementation Guiding Principles with a view to mobilise all ministries and government agencies to integrate the SDGs into their plans, strategies, policies and activities, as well as follow-up and review mechanisms. The guidelines set out five implementation principles (universality, inclusiveness, participation, integration, and transparency and accountability) across eight priority areas (including 140 specific measures to be implemented both domestically and through international co-operation) (OECD, 2018[2]).
In the Czech Republic, the Strategic Framework 2030, adopted by the Government in 2017, is the main reference document for national SDG implementation. It guides the work of the Government Council on Sustainable Development, an advisory body to the government for inter-sectoral co-ordination (Government of the Czech Republic, 2017[16]). Greece has endorsed eight national priorities for adapting the SDGs to national circumstances, which are also aligned to the new National Growth Strategy (General Secretariat of the Government, 2018[17]).
Table 2.3. Institutional mechanisms in support of policy integration
Sources: VNRs (available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/vnrs) and OECD (2018[2]), Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2018: Towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264301061-en.
Ex-ante impact assessments are another frequently used tool to integrate economic, social and environmental dimensions in policy and legislative proposals. In Belgium, a Sustainable Impact Assessment (SIA) tool was integrated into the Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) in 2014 (OECD, 2018[2]). The SIA aims for policy coherence by assessing the possible effects of the preliminary draft regulations on all three dimensions of sustainable development and the public services.
A good emerging practice is to use the budget – a key policy and priority-setting document – as a mechanism for policy integration and coherence (Figure 2.3). Several countries are using budgetary processes to align actions and programmes with the SDGs. Half of the countries covered in this chapter have reported ongoing measures to link the SDGs to the national budget (Figure 2.3). Canada, for example, has reported that the 2018 federal budget reaffirmed the country’s commitment to the 2030 Agenda with support for data strengthening, monitoring and reporting and greater coordination to ensure continued progress on efforts on the SDGs both domestically and internationally (Government of Canada, 2018[9]). The budget sets aside USD 59.8 million over 13 years, starting in 2018, allocated from existing departmental resources, for programs to support the implementation of the SDGs (UNDESA, 2019[18]). In Slovakia, the Government aims to integrate the national priorities for the 2030 Agenda identified through participatory processes into sectoral strategies and investment plans of line ministries. A National Investment Plan will be prepared as part of the National Development Strategy (Deputy Prime Minister’s Office for Investments and Informatization, 2018[19]).
In Mexico, a new provision incorporated into its Guidelines for the Programming and Budgeting Process for the Fiscal Year 2018, established dates and specific actions so that federal agencies and entities could link their authorised programme structures with the SDGs. In Norway, the Ministry of Finance is responsible for ensuring a co-ordinated budget to foster SDG implementation. It assigns each of the 17 Goals to a co-ordinating ministry who must co-operate with other ministries involved in the follow-up of relevant, cross-cutting targets. Ministries’ progress reports are compiled by the Ministry of Finance and submitted to the parliament as part of the national budget annual White Paper.
Box 2.3. Finland – State budget planning as a tool for policy integration
In September 2018, the Finnish Ministry of Finance presented a proposal for the 2019 State Budget to the Parliament with a comprehensive consideration of sustainable development. The budget focuses in particular on carbon-neutrality, sustainable resource consumption and production. The proposal takes the budgetary impacts on climate action, bio-economy, circular economy, clean-tech innovations and sustainable public procurement into account, and bears international environmental agreements, development cooperation policy and climate investments in mind. This is an important step in mainstreaming sustainable development into all sectoral policies and financial instruments. In addition, the government has launched work on a phenomenon-based approach to budgeting that will allow for more tailored solutions that consider cross-sectoral, transboundary and intergenerational policy impacts.
Source: PMO Finland (2018[20]), “SDG implementation in Finland: Input on lessons learned and challenges ahead for the SDG Hub Case Study”, Unpublished.
Figure 2.3. Linking the SDGs to the national budget
Sources: VNRs and OECD (2018[8]), Report on Survey Findings: Applying the Eight Building Blocks of PCSD in the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda, http://www.oecd.org/pcsd/Report%20on%20PCSD%20Survey%20Findings.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2019).
Policy integration is also essential to align resources - public, private, domestic, and international – in support of sustainable development. Integration in this context entails enhancing the sustainable development impact of existing and future additional resources by using them more effectively and making the most of their interactions. For example, greater policy integration and improved coherence of policies in donor countries can enhance impact of resources on sustainable development by strengthening tax policy for ODA-funded goods and services (Box 2.4).
At the operational level, policy integration can help actors to improve co-ordination across the development finance landscape to face the challenge of increased complexity of interactions. Policy integration can also help align financing strategies with countries’ development strategies (see Box 2.5). Greater coordination between actors at the diagnostic phase is essential to align financing mixes to each country’s needs and deliver on integrated national financing frameworks. New country diagnostic tools need to be developed to integrate actors from multiple layers of governance into the design of financing strategies.
Box 2.4. Netherlands and Norway - Transparency of policy for official development assistance-funded goods and services
The tax status of ODA-provided goods and services is one area where official providers may wish to start using development finance as catalysts for increased domestic revenues. In many countries, official providers have requested tax exemptions on goods and services, which can have potentially significant impact on domestic revenue mobilisation, especially for low-income countries where ODA often represents a higher share of the economy. Some countries, among them Netherlands and Norway, have changed their policy and no longer seek such tax exemptions on ODA-funded goods and services. But this is not yet common practice. The Platform for Collaboration on Tax is planning to review the draft guidelines from 2007 to assist countries in reviewing their policies in this area.
Source: OECD (2018[21]), “OECD Global outlook survey on financing for sustainable development”, Unpublished, OECD, Paris.
Box 2.5. Germany and Mexico – Co-ordinating support for development and financing strategies
Support provided by BMZ/GIZ for the Mexican federal government illustrates how to promote the alignment of development and financing strategies tailored to specific countries, sectors, and policy goals. BMZ/GIZ supports the Mexican federal government in developing a comprehensive architecture for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda based on national development priorities. At the same time, support is provided to ensure that sufficient financing is raised to achieve the plan. This includes advisory work for a more sustainable fiscal framework, promotion of innovative multi-stakeholder financing mechanisms at the sub-national level, (e.g. results-based payments to finance the SDGs); and a planned collaboration to jointly foster enabling conditions for a financing sustainable development system.
Source: OECD (2018[21]), “OECD Global outlook survey on financing for sustainable development”, Unpublished, OECD, Paris.
Policy co-ordination
The integrated nature of the SDGs requires mechanisms for policy and institutional co‑ordination at multiple levels. Given the potential for tensions among diverse interests on economic, social and environmental issues, appropriate co-ordination mechanisms are needed to anticipate, manage and resolve conflicts and inconsistencies between policies. Dedicated co-ordination mechanisms are essential to allow ministries, public sector agencies and other key stakeholders to efficiently share information and allocate responsibilities and resources for SDG implementation.
Most countries covered in this chapter have co-ordination mechanisms for SDG implementation in place. Half the OECD countries rely on the centres of government to steer and co-ordinate SDG implementation either on their own or with the support of line ministries. In other countries, responsibility for co-ordination has been assigned to line ministries with cross-sectoral influence, such as the Ministry of Finance or Foreign Affairs (Figure 2.4).
Figure 2.4. Leadership in coordinating the implementation of the SDGs
Sources: VNRs (available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/vnrs) and OECD (2018[8]), Report on Survey Findings: Applying the Eight Building Blocks of PCSD in the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda, http://www.oecd.org/pcsd/Report%20on%20PCSD%20Survey%20Findings.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2019).
Experience shows that co-ordination mechanisms can only be effective in promoting policy coherence if they go beyond information sharing. A good emerging practice is to provide the coordination mechanisms with a clear mandate to anticipate and resolve policy divergences and tensions arising from different sectoral interests (Box 2.6). The ability to influence policy as a result of the co-ordination is essential for PCSD. In Switzerland, policies with potential impact on developing countries are flagged and addressed at the operational level. In the Swiss governance system, inter-departmental consultations are required throughout the process of legislative initiatives, where the Swiss Agency for Development and Co-operation, the Economic Co-operation and Development Division of the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) and the Human Security Division (HSD) provide technical comments on other departments’ policy initiatives. When incoherencies cannot be resolved at this level, the Federal Council arbitrates and decides on unresolved issues (OECD, 2019[22]).
Box 2.6. Spain – A High Commissioner to co-ordinate implementation of the 2030 Agenda
In 2018, the Spanish government established, under the President of the Government, the High Commissioner for the 2030 Agenda and the associated office for special support. The High Commissioner has as a key mandate to addresses conflicts between policies. It aims to improve policy co‑ordination, promote integrated SDG implementation and strengthen focal points in the various ministries. The High Commissioner’s functions include: (i) monitoring the actions of the authorities responsible for the SDGs, (ii) promoting the development of plans and strategies for the 2030 Agenda, (iii) assessing and sharing information on progress on SDG implementation, (iv) collaborating with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation on international action concerning the 2030 Agenda, and (v) promoting data collection and the creation of information systems to assess progress on SDG implementation.
Source: Government of Spain (2018[23]), Spain’s Report for the 2018 Voluntary National Review: A National Blueprint.
Regional and local involvement
The 2030 Agenda emphasises that “government and public institutions will work closely on implementation with regional and local authorities” (UNGA, 2015[5]). It is estimated that 65% of the 169 targets underlying the 17 SDGs will not be reached without proper engagement of, and co-ordination with, local and subnational governments (SDSN, 2016[24]). Regional and local governments are essential for delivering a wide range of public services as well as the economic, social and environmental transformations needed to achieve the SDGs. Subnational governments were responsible for 59.3% of total public investment in 2015 throughout the OECD area and for almost 40% worldwide (OECD/UCLG, 2016[25]). Most investments were related to infrastructure for basic services (e.g. education, health, social infrastructure, drinking water, sanitation, solid waste management, transport, and housing) for which cities and/or regions have core competences, and correspond to dedicated SDGs.
Most OECD countries have involved regional and local levels of government to prepare national SDG strategies, action plans or VNRs. In several OECD countries, municipalities and regions have representatives in national commissions or councils in charge of implementing the 2030 Agenda. Some countries have created new mechanisms for co-ordination between national, regional and local levels of government as part of their national strategies for SDG implementation.
In Germany and Mexico, the respective federal governments support efforts of regional governments and municipalities to integrate the SDGs into their policies and actions, and to develop their own sustainable development strategies (OECD, 2018[2]). To ensure alignment of efforts at all government levels, Luxembourg has taken stock of local SDG-relevant initiatives (see Box 2.7). In Canada, the Government has worked closely with provinces, territories and municipalities to develop the national strategy on the 2030 Agenda, and has signed agreements with them on topics where they hold jurisdiction, such as early learning and child care (SDG 5), green infrastructure (SDG 6), the labour markets (SDG 9), and transportation (SDG 11) (UNDESA, 2019[18]). In Greece, a network of SDG focal points from each region has been established under the coordination of Greek Regions (ENPE). This network monitors policies, programmes and infrastructure towards the achievement of the SDGs (General Secretariat of the Government, 2018[17]).
Box 2.7. Luxembourg – Taking inventory of local initiative to foster vertical coherence
In Luxembourg, many parliamentarians exchange regularly with the country’s mayors. Local concerns can be raised in parliament, and mutual exchange of knowledge between the local and national level is a common occurrence. Furthermore, local communities have an opportunity to influence legislation via regular consultation processes. To foster vertical coherence, the Government has taken inventory of SDG-related local initiatives to ensure that priorities and policies are well aligned. It has provided a reference guide for local communities based on ISO 37120:2018 on ‘Sustainable cities and communities: Indicators for city services and quality of life’ and the Reporting Standards of the Global Reporting Initiative.
Sources: Grand-Duché de Luxembourg (2018[26]), “Luxembourg 2030 - 3rd National Plan for Sustainable Development”, 15th Meeting of National Focal Points for Policy Coherence, Draft; OECD (2018[2]), Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2018: Towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264301061-en.
Stakeholder engagement
The 2030 Agenda emphasises that “all countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan” (UNGA, 2015[5]). Major barriers to policy coherence are strongly rooted in differing perceptions of the challenges and priorities for transitioning towards sustainable development. Coherent implementation of the SDGs requires mechanisms for dialogue and engagement whereby governments and key stakeholders can come together to identify common challenges, set priorities, contribute to the development of laws and regulations, align policies and actions, and mobilise resources for sustainable development.
Enabling effective stakeholder engagement implies that all stakeholders should have fair and equitable access to the decision-making process in order to balance policy debates and avoid capture of public policies by narrow interest groups. In Latvia, the government identified concrete steps to foster PCSD through stakeholder engagement from the first draft proposal to the final decision by the Government cabinet (Government of Latvia, 2018[27]). Ireland has established a national SDG Stakeholder Forum, which is convened and chaired by the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment to discuss national implementation and reporting processes. While dialogue with stakeholders is considered important, the Irish Government wants to go further in developing a partnership approach to implementing the SDGs (Government of Ireland, 2018[12]).
Finland regularly engages with stakeholders through its National Commission on Sustainable Development, which is chaired by the Prime Minister and comprised of ministers, government officials, as well as representatives from business, academia, civil society, labour unions and municipal governments. The Commission launched the Society’s Commitment to Sustainable Development, which provides a platform for engaging governmental institutions, businesses, CSOs and citizens to commit on concrete actions for achieving the SDGs (OECD, 2018[2]). A good emerging practice is to establish multi-stakeholder mechanisms dedicated to address specific PCSD issues (Box 2.8).
Box 2.8. Norway – Establishing a Policy Coherence Forum for broad stakeholder participation
The Norwegian Policy Coherence Forum develops recommendations for enhancing policy coherence and plays a central role in preparing the annual report on Policy Coherence to Parliament. The Forum is comprised of representatives from civil society, academia, the private sector and trade- and employers’ unions and chaired by the State Secretary for international cooperation at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in cooperation with the Ministry of Finance and other line ministries. The Norwegian Forum for Development and Environment, a second important forum for national dialogue on SDG implementation that brings together more than 50 civil society organisations, provides analytical and strategical input on sustainable development in the form of reports and road maps.
Source: Government of Norway (2016[28]), One Year Closer. Norway’s Progress towards the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Ministry of Finance, Oslo.
Policy effects
In adopting the 2030 Agenda, UN Members affirmed that they were “setting out together on the path towards sustainable development, devoting [themselves] collectively to the pursuit of global development” (UNGA, 2015[5]). With increasing global interconnectedness, governments will have to step up efforts and develop mechanisms to anticipate and address the unavoidable impacts of their policies on the sustainable development prospects and well-being of people in other countries. In this context it is essential to pay attention to potential negative impacts on developing countries, in particular countries most in need, such as least developed countries (LDCs), low- income countries (LICs), small island developing states (SIDS), land-locked developing countries (LLDCs) and fragile and conflict-affected states. Most countries covered in this chapter use policy impact assessment tools (RIA, SIA, EIA) as well as regular evaluation procedures to analyse and identify potential policy effects. Foresight tools can also be useful since challenges differ within and between countries.
Several OECD countries are improving impact assessment processes and guidelines to align policies with the SDGs and consider more systematically the coherence between actions at domestic and international levels in SDG implementation (Box 2.9). The Netherlands, for example, has aligned its Integral Assessment Framework to the SDGs, to consider the potential effects on developing countries early in the process of formulating new policy and legislation (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, 2018[29]). Luxembourg is currently exploring the option of establishing such as mechanism (Grand-Duché de Luxembourg, 2018[26]). In Denmark, the Government has decided that a new analysis of impact on the SDGs shall accompany any piece of legislation put to parliament whenever such an impact is deemed to be relevant and considerable. Consequences for global development and developing countries may be included in the impact analysis when these can be estimated without major difficulties and are deemed to be relevant and considerable. The requirement for this impact analysis will enter into force with the legislative year 2019/2020. The Government already assesses new legislative proposals in terms of their economic, environmental and gender equality consequences domestically.
Box 2.9. Germany – Developing an online tool to check linkages of draft policies across all SDGs
All proposals for new laws and regulations are subject to a Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA). The SIA is based on indicators, targets and management rules that include intergenerational and transboundary dimensions. Since March 2018, laws and regulations can be checked against the SIA through an online tool: www.enap.bund.de. The tool allows policy makers to evaluate the impact of a regulatory proposal on each of the 17 SDGs and their translation into national targets. In a last step, it asks participants to check whether the proposal complies with 12 management rules on intergenerational justice, viability of decisions, broad stakeholder engagement, efficient use of natural resources, consumer and health protection, cross-sectoral policy integration, energy efficiency, evidence-based policy-making, research and education, debt reduction, poverty, and transboundary impacts. The SDG assessment can be included in – or used as an inspiration for – the rationale of the regulatory proposal.
Source: OECD (2018[2]), Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2018: Towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264301061-en.
Monitoring, reporting and evaluation
Decision-making based on reliable and appropriate scientific data is a critical element of enhancing policy coherence for sustainable development. Coherent implementation of the SDGs requires mechanisms to monitor progress, report to governing bodies and the public, and provide feedback so that actions and sectoral policies can be adjusted in light of potential negative or unintended effects.
Regular reporting to the parliament and the wider public about progress on PCSD is essential to assessing how policies are performing, but it is also critically important to policy-makers in refining or re-prioritising policy instruments and objectives. A good institutional practice is to establish a specific action plan for policy coherence and publish regular progress reports (Box 2.10).
Box 2.10. Netherlands - Annual Report on Policy Coherence for Development
The annual report on policy coherence for development monitors progress in five themes set out in the revised PCD Action Plan presented to the Parliament in 2018. These themes are considered the ones that determine the capacity of developing countries to achieve the SDGs and on which the Netherlands has influence. These themes, which put the emphasis on the means to implement the SDGs, are: development-friendly trade agreements, a development-friendly investment regime, tackling tax avoidance/evasion, combating climate change, and making trade and production more sustainable.
Source: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands (2018[29]), Letter to the President of the House of
Representatives on the Annual Report on Policy Coherence for Development (PCD), https://www.government.nl/documents/parliamentary-documents/2017/11/14/letter-to-the-president-of-the-house-of-representatives-on-the-annual-report-on-policy-coherence-for-development-pcd (accessed on 3 June 2019).
Most OECD countries are aligning their monitoring and reporting systems with the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs, and expanding their monitoring and reporting systems to consider the international or transboundary dimensions of sustainable development. These monitoring and reporting systems could be used more proactively to track progress on PCSD. In Finland, the SDG Implementation Plan of the Government requires reporting on SDG implementation to give explicit consideration to groups outside Finland’s borders at risk of falling behind in development (OECD, 2018[2]). In Sweden, the PCSD team at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs produces a biennial report to Parliament that evaluates the government’s efforts on fostering policy coherence and provides recommendations for improvements (OECD, 2018[2]). Switzerland has refined its indicator system to align better with the 2030 Agenda and capture the country’s transboundary impacts (Box 2.11). Similarly, the SDGs have been incorporated to the 2019 annual report on broad prosperity in the Netherlands published by Statistics Netherlands in cooperation with planning agencies at the request of the Cabinet. This report assesses prosperity and quality of life based on three dimensions: wellbeing here and now (current prosperity in the Netherlands); wellbeing later (how Dutch policy choices today affect the future population of the Netherlands); and wellbeing elsewhere (how Dutch policy choices affect wellbeing elsewhere).
Box 2.11. Switzerland – Using the MONET indicator system to monitor SDG implementation
Since 2003, Switzerland relies on the MONET indicator system to assess its progress on the promotion of sustainable development. The Federal Statistical Office measures 73 indicators to monitor economic, social and environmental developments. Half of the MONET indicators now track advancements in the implementation of the 2016–2019 Sustainable Development Strategy. In 2018, MONET was expanded to monitor the achievement of the 17 goals of the 2030 Agenda using 85 indicators, relying on an inventory of national and international activities. The indicators include data on the use and distribution of environmental, economic and social resources in other countries by Switzerland such as the material footprint of imports, the greenhouse gas footprint, remittances by migrants, direct investments in developing countries, and living up to commitments made in multilateral treaties. All information is publicly available on the website of the Federal Statistical Office.
Source: OECD (2018[2]), Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2018: Towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264301061-en.
Concluding remarks
The set of institutional mechanisms presented in this chapter represent common and basic tools for enhancing PCSD in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. The examples highlighted in this chapter show that there is no one-size-fits-all approach for enhancing policy coherence for sustainable development: each country must determine its own institutional mechanisms and sequencing of actions according to its legal, administrative and political context. Nevertheless, the examples also highlight that the eight PCSD building blocks are broad enablers that can be applied to different countries despite their different administrative cultures and political contexts.
The 30 OECD countries covered in this chapter have well-established institutional mechanisms that can support coherent implementation of the SDGs at every stage of the policy-making process. In many cases, the alignment of existing institutional mechanisms with the principles and nature of the 2030 Agenda needs to be strengthened. These existing structures and institutional mechanisms could be used more proactively for policy coherence purposes during SDG implementation. Chapter 3 of this publication explores ways to use process indicators to track progress on the institutional dimension of PCSD.
References
[19] Deputy Prime Minister’s Office for Investments and Informatization (2018), Voluntary National Review of the Slovak Republic on the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Deputy Prime Minister’s Office for Investments and Informatization of the Slovak Republic, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/20131Agenda2030_VNR_Slovakia.pdf (accessed on 23 April 2019).
[17] General Secretariat of the Government (2018), Hellenic Republic. Voluntary National Review on the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Office of Coordination, Institutional, International and European Affairs, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/19378Greece_VNR_Greece_2018_pdf_FINAL_140618.pdf (accessed on 23 April 2019).
[9] Government of Canada (2018), Voluntary National Review. Canada’s Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Global Affairs Canada, Ottawa, http://www.international.gc.ca (accessed on 6 February 2019).
[10] Government of Chile (2017), Informe Nacional Voluntario. Chile: Agenda 2030. Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible, Consejo Nacional para la Implementación de la Agenda 2030 y el Desarrollo Sostenible, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/15776Chile.pdf (accessed on 29 March 2018).
[12] Government of Ireland (2018), Ireland: Voluntary National Review 2018 Report on the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda to the UN High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development, Government of Ireland, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/19382Ireland_Voluntary_National_Review_2018.pdf (accessed on 23 April 2019).
[27] Government of Latvia (2018), Latvia: Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals, Report to the UN High Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development 2018.
[28] Government of Norway (2016), One Year Closer. Norway’s Progress towards the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Ministry of Finance, Oslo.
[23] Government of Spain (2018), Spain’s Report for the 2018 Voluntary National Review: A National Blueprint.
[16] Government of the Czech Republic (2017), National Report on the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: Czech Republic, Office of the Government, of the Czech Republic Government Council for Sustainable Development National.
[26] Grand-Duché de Luxembourg (2018), “Luxembourg 2030 - 3rd National Plan for Sustainable Development”, 15th Meeting of National Focal Points for Policy Coherence, Draft.
[13] Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Hungary (2018), Voluntary National Review of Hungary on the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda: Transformation towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies 2018, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/20137Voluntary_National_Review_of_Hungary_v2.pdf (accessed on 23 April 2019).
[29] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands (2018), Letter to the President of the House of Representatives on the Annual Report on Policy Coherence for Development (PCD), Parliamentary Document, Government.nl, https://www.government.nl/documents/parliamentary-documents/2017/11/14/letter-to-the-president-of-the-house-of-representatives-on-the-annual-report-on-policy-coherence-for-development-pcd (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[15] Norges Bank Investment Management (2017), Government Pension Fund Global: Annual Report 2017.
[4] OECD (2019), Governance as an SDG Accelerator : Country Experiences and Tools, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/0666b085-en.
[11] OECD (2019), OECD Development Co-operation Peer Reviews: Greece 2019, OECD Development Co-operation Peer Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264311893-en.
[22] OECD (2019), OECD Development Co-operation Peer Reviews: Switzerland 2019, OECD Development Co-operation Peer Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264312340-en.
[21] OECD (2018), “OECD Global outlook survey on financing for sustainable development”, Unpublished, OECD, Paris.
[2] OECD (2018), Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2018: Towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264301061-en.
[8] OECD (2018), Report on Survey Findings: Applying the Eight Building Blocks of PCSD in the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda, PCSD Unit, OECD, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/pcsd/Report%20on%20PCSD%20Survey%20Findings.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2019).
[14] OECD (2018), Youth Stocktaking Report, OECD, Paris.
[1] OECD (2017), “Building blocks for coherent implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals”, in Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2017: Eradicating Poverty and Promoting Prosperity, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264272576-4-en.
[7] OECD (2016), Switzerland DAC Peer Review of Development Co-operation Mid-term Review, Development Co-operation Directorate, Bern, http://www.oecd.org/dac/peer-reviews/Mid-Term-Review-Switzerland-2016.pdf (accessed on 9 January 2019).
[25] OECD/UCLG (2016), Subnational Goverments around the World - Structure and Finance, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/regional/regional-policy/Subnational-Governments-Around-the-World-%20Part-I.pdf.
[20] PMO Finland (2018), “SDG implementation in Finland: Input on lessons learned and challenges ahead for the SDG Hub Case Study”, Unpublished.
[6] Presidencia de la República Mexico (2018), Mexico: Estrategia National para la Puesta en Marcha de la Agenda 2030, Mexico Agenda 2030, Mexico, https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/412433/Estrategia_Nacional_Implementacion_Agenda_2030.pdf (accessed on 9 January 2019).
[24] SDSN (2016), Getting Started with the SDGs in Cities - A Guide for Stakeholders, Sustainable Development Solutions Network, http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/9.1.8.-Cities-SDG-Guide.pdf.
[3] UN (n.d.), UN Voluntary National Reviews Database, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/vnrs/ (accessed on 8 January 2019).
[18] UNDESA (2019), Compendium of National Institutional Arrangements for Implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, United Nations, New York, http://workspace.unpan.org/sites/Internet/Documents/UNPAN99132.pdf (accessed on 27 March 2019).
[5] UNGA (2015), A/70/L.1: Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E.