This chapter focuses on how governance arrangements surrounding the design, delivery and monitoring of national development strategies can support the effective and efficient pursuit of sustainable prosperity over the medium- and long-term; It presents how such practices and mechanisms are developed in the Middle East and North Africa. It then provides recommendations for governments to ensure that long-term sustainable growth objectives are consistently at the heart of their action and develop and implement a coherent approach to ultimately achieve greater prosperity.
Governing for Sustainable Prosperity in the Middle East and North Africa
OECD Public Governance Reviews
Abstract
Governments face a number of increasingly prevalent and multifaceted global challenges. As outlined in Chapter 1 of this Report, among the most pressing are climate change, an accelerating but uneven digital transformation, poverty reduction, inequalities and the impact of the evolving conflicts in the Middle East on global value chains, on access to essential public services, and on access to essential goods, food and energy (OECD, 2022[1]).
These contextual factors affecting the MENA region are exacerbating pre-existing political, environmental and security challenges. To address these challenges and build a sustainable and prosperous future, governments in the region have adopted long-term development strategies, many of them called “visions”, that are often aligned with the global roadmap provided by the 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Objectives (SDGs).
Hence, many governments in the region are consolidating capacities to simultaneously address multidimensional, interdependent, and intergenerational challenges and achieve SDGs within their long-term visions.
The state of SDG implementation across MENA countries and territories provides an opportunity to assess and compare the progress of the different governments in modernising their approaches to public governance to pursue the SDGs successfully. It offers a good indication of their governance capacities to pursue specific development priorities effectively.
Overcoming these complex challenges requires effective, accountable and transparent institutions with the capacity to design, co-ordinate, implement and evaluate the performance of policy responses, reflective of robust citizen and stakeholder engagement, in an agile and effective manner.
This chapter focuses on how framework governance arrangements and tools to design, deliver and evaluate the performance of national strategies can support the effective and efficient pursuit of sustainable prosperity over the mid and long-term. Tools include visioning, planning, co-ordination, communication and the generation and use of performance information.
Recent economic shocks and evolving conflicts in the Middle East have underlined the difficulties governments face in pursuing development objectives, as it requires making trade-offs between managing immediate needs and long-run societal challenges whilst delivering results for citizens. This is reflected in the progress against the SDGs, which provides a good indicator of how governments handle such long-term challenges.
The MENA region shows mixed results in pursuing the SDGs but demonstrates real, if slow, progress in meeting some targets
Countries and territories in the MENA region have made some important advances in their progress towards SDGs (Sachs, Lafortune and Fuller, 2024[2]). Algeria, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have achieved at least one SDG. More specifically, No Poverty (SDG 1) has reportedly been achieved by Algeria, Jordan, Lebanon, Tunisia and the UAE. The UAE and Algeria are reported to have achieved Reduced Inequalities (SDG 10). Additionally, several MENA governments are also reportedly on track to achieve Responsible Consumption and Production (SDG 12) and Partnerships for the Goals (SDG 17), while there are moderate increases in performance across other SDGs.
Despite these efforts, the MENA region continues to face significant challenges across SDGs. As shown in Figure 2.1, only Tunisia, Morocco, the UAE and Algeria are achieving 70% or more of SDG objectives (Sachs, Lafortune and Fuller, 2024[2]).
Across the region, achieving Gender Equality (SDG 5) and Zero Hunger (SDG 2) remain the greatest challenges, and progress towards Decent Work and Economic Growth (SDG 8) continues to be insufficient. In terms of climate change impact, the least developed economies in the region carry the heaviest burden. Although they show better results in Climate Action (SDG 13) compared to higher-income economies, it is mainly due to lower levels of economic activity and consumption. Moreover, these economies score poorly on the indicator related to the number of people affected by climate disasters, highlighting the need for support in addressing climate vulnerabilities.
While some countries and territories in the region have made progress in the transition towards low-carbon societies through increased use of renewable energy and the establishment of dedicated institutional structures, much remains to be done to achieve Affordable and Clean Energy (SDG 7), although most governments are showing moderate progress. For the majority of countries and territories, score on SDG 7 remained low in the latest index and the indicators show an overall stagnation in renewable energy adoption. Water stress is another significant environmental challenge in the region: most countries and territories have received a poor score on Clean and Water Sanitation (SDG 6) in the latest index, and so far, none have managed to achieve it despite progress made. Another shared challenge in the region is the Sustainability of Cities and Communities (SDG 11), where achievements so far remain modest. One of the main factors contributing to this poor performance is air quality, for which none of the countries or territories show a positive trend in their indicator despite its major health impacts. In fact, the region underperforms in the indicator related to deaths caused by air pollution (Sachs, Lafortune and Fuller, 2024[2]).
Overcoming the challenges to achieving the SDGs goes beyond specific obstacles. These challenges are multidimensional, interdependent, and intergenerational, with profound implications for societies, economies and the environment over the long-term. As such, these challenges not only affect the implementation of the SDGs but more largely the achievement of long-term development objectives. In the case of the MENA region, the complexity of the situation is compounded by ever-increasing socio-political, economic, environmental and security turmoil, which has a significant impact on the region's population and socio-economic development.
2024 Sustainable Development Report 2024 (0-100%)
Note: The 2024 SDG Index Scores comprises 110 indicators covering the 17 SDGs, each of which have an assigned score (0–100); “MENA” indicates a simple average of the scores shown in the chart. Data for all countries and territories are from 2024, except for Libya (2023).
Source: Author’s work based on (Sachs, Lafortune and Fuller, 2024[2]; Sustainable Development Solutions Network, 2024[3]).
Governance as assessed by SDG 16 is a main enabler to deliver on the SDGs and long-term objectives
Delivering on the long-term challenges presented above in a context of emerging and evolving threats and priorities requires agile, responsive and resilient public governance that enables governments to design and implement responses quickly, effectively and sustainably. In this regard, the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions as promoted by SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) is a key enabler to implement such responses.
Indicators reveal a particularly challenging picture when assessing the effectiveness of governance in pursuing sustainability, as all countries and territories in the region for which information is available1 show a worsening record or stagnation in progressing towards SDG 16 (Sachs, Lafortune and Fuller, 2024[2]). Furthermore, as covered in greater detail in Chapters 1 and 4, the MENA region has consistently lagged behind most of the world in terms of government effectiveness, notwithstanding significant variations. Indeed, some Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) governments perform close to the OECD average (World Bank, 2024[4]). These challenges in effective governance are in turn reflected in citizens’ dissatisfaction with their government’s performance, which according to the Arab Barometer stood at over 60% across the MENA countries and territories surveyed in 2022 (Arab Barometer, 2022[5]).
Today, “traditional” machinery of government is not always adequately equipped and organised to identify, address and adapt to such complex, cross-cutting challenges in a highly volatile and uncertain environment. Considering that such issues as climate change or digital transformation are increasingly multifaceted and cross-boundary, the way government bodies are usually designed and structured to focus on sectoral issues, and the existing distinction between domestic policy issues and foreign affairs, can hamper government action (OECD, 2022[6]). This is especially the case when it comes to climate change, for instance, that require concerted efforts at all levels of government and in all policy areas, not just environmental affairs. It calls for a transformation of government institutions, along with greater co-ordination and alignment between them and across levels of government.
Several OECD instruments, including the OECD Recommendation on Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development (OECD, 2019[7]) and the OECD Policy Framework on Sound Public Governance (OECD, 2020[8]), highlight the need to adopt a whole-of-government approach to design and implement coherent and effective policy responses. Establishing a strategy that encompasses the main orientations for the development of the country and that is supported not only at the highest political level but also broadly across society are essential drivers in that regard.
Setting national strategies as a means of guiding sustainable development
The capacity to pursue long-term objectives towards sustainable development is generally guided by a national strategy, often called “vision”, that presents the end-state of where governments and their citizens see their country at the end of the multi-year planning cycle (OECD, 2019[7]); (OECD, 2020[8]). These strategies tend to address the question of what sustainable development will look like for the country once the planning horizon is reached.
In OECD Member countries, these strategies aim to define desired sustainable development outcomes for the country using a pluri-annual planning horizon as the guidepost (usually a decade or more), and are used to frame scenarios and actions, which together can guide governments in their efforts to improve coherence across sectors (OECD, 2019[7]). These strategies are also often developed in co-operation with citizens and other key stakeholders, including non-state actors. Involving all stakeholders aims to foster an inclusive approach, stressing the universality of the 2030 Agenda with objectives going beyond the present governmental term (OECD, n.d.[9]). A representative example of this approach is the drafting process of Slovenian Development Strategy 2030, that also included a preliminary process to design the Vision of Slovenia (Box 2.1).
In 2015, the Slovenian government launched the drafting process of the “Vision of Slovenia” as a key step in the drafting of the larger Slovenian Development Strategy 2030.
To develop the Vision, the government formed the “Horizontal Interdepartmental Group” to start the drafting process. This group was tasked with co-ordinating the elaboration of development documents, preparing the analytical basis and collaborating in the selection of strategic priority areas. In addition, the “Group for the Future”, composed of 14 experts from various fields, was established to advise on the drafting process and select participants for a three-day workshop, where the initial components of the Slovenian Vision were elaborated in November 2015.
During 2016, several interactive events were organised. Participants discussed their desired future, reviewed the first draft of the Vision, identified possible gaps in the text and proposed improvements. In total, 27 events were held with the participation of more than 600 people. The formulation of the Vision and the identification of strategic areas and priority objectives also included a public survey on the quality of life in Slovenia, in which more than 1,000 inhabitants participated. A government conference and a workshop with senior ministry officials was held to discuss the content and drafting process of the Vision and Strategy. Meetings were also held at ministerial level to draw parallels between the priorities highlighted by the population and the work areas of the ministries. The Vision of Slovenia was presented to the public in February 2017.
Alongside the drafting of the Vision, the drafting of the Slovenian Development Strategy 2030 began during the summer of 2016. The process included several rounds of meetings and reviews with a large range of professionals and government officials to determine priorities and key performance indicators. The contributions of the departments and participants served as an important basis for the further development of the Strategy. A public consultation on the draft Slovenian Development Strategy 2030 was organised in October-November 2017. During this time, the government received several contributions from various organisations and interested parties. In addition to the public consultation, several discussions were held with interested stakeholders who wanted a more detailed presentation of the Strategy and a discussion of the draft document. After the public consultation, the draft Slovenian Development Strategy 2030 and a report on the consultation were drawn up. After a final round of inter-departmental harmonisation, the draft Strategy was discussed by the Slovenian government at its 159th regular session on 7 December 2017.
Source: (Government of Slovenia, 2017[10]).
Similarly to OECD Members, MENA governments have started developing multi-annual strategies to guide policymaking over the long-term, balance short term needs and longer-term challenges, and ensure that national development priorities are addressed. They are referred as “visions” in a large number of MENA countries and territories.
Since the 2000s, national visions in the MENA region have started to incorporate the narratives, objectives and policy instruments of sustainable development, prioritising not only economic but also social and environmental dimensions of development. By the mid-2010s, most MENA countries and territories2 had at least in part incorporated aspects of sustainable development in their national visions such as poverty reduction or gender equality, issues that were hitherto underrepresented in such documents (Göll, Uhl and Zwiers, 2019[11]). The adoption of the United Nations (UN) 2030 Agenda in 2015 reinforced this dynamic towards long-term visions while considering sustainable development considerations and goals.
These long-term national visions are often aligned in their timeline with the UN Agenda 2030. Some national strategic visions are formulated to closely mirror the pillars and strategic objectives of the SDG framework, including Egypt’s Vision 2030 or Oman’s Vision 2040. Recently, there is moreover a tendency to move beyond 2030 towards visions and strategies for 2050 and even further, as it is the case in the UAE for instance. As outlined in Box 2.2, the strategies’ main pillars vary from country to country, mirroring the heterogeneous political priorities and stages of economic development in the region. In most economies of the region, they are nevertheless oriented towards economic development, with a strong focus on infrastructure development (ESCWA, n.d.[12]). Most national visions also increasingly include a focus on a number of multidimensional challenges that are key to sustainable and inclusive development, including women’s empowerment or the green transition (ESCWA, n.d.[12]).
Several countries in the MENA region have launched whole-of-government strategies which leverage governance reforms to support the development of their societies and economies.
Egypt Vision 2030. Sustainable Development Strategy
This is Egypt’s first such strategy. It guides ongoing reform efforts to match the 17 SDGs, as well as the African Agenda 2063. In particular, it covers economic, social and environmental dimensions of SDGs and outlines strategic targets and sub-targets to achieve the goals, key performance indicators as well as expected challenges.
Morocco New Development Model 2035
Adopted in 2021 under the King’s leadership, the new Development Model is “designed by Moroccans, with Moroccans and for Moroccans”, having benefitted from insights and ideas discussed in a commission made up of citizens with different and complementary backgrounds. The Model embodies a new way of looking at development, one that is more participative, involving all stakeholders. Through the Model, the Kingdom commits to achieving several targets by 2035, making progress in terms of economy, human capital, inclusion, durability as well as governance and administration.
Oman’s Vision 2040
Oman Vision 2040 is the national reference for economic and social planning for the period of 2021-2040, and the source of national sector strategies and five-year development plans. The Vision is organised around four pillars: an environment with sustainable components; Responsible State agencies; a competitive economy; and a society of creative individuals.
Qatar National Vision 2030
Dating back to 2008, it is structured around four pillars covering “economic development” (ensuring efficient management of the national economy, taking a responsible approach towards natural resource management and working to develop a knowledge-based economy); “social development” (encouraging the adoption of Islamic philosophy and humanitarian and family values, as well as sport and physical activity); “human development” (improving education and health care, and increasing cultural awareness and employment opportunities) and “environmental development” (advancing the technological frontier, conducting environmental awareness campaigns and promoting sustainable urban growth).
UAE Centennial 2071, Principles of the 50 and We the UAE 2031
The UAE have developed a number of strategic visions, principles and plans over different timeframes to guide their long-term development.
The Centennial Plan 2071 is a long-term, full-vision plan that covers the period 2021-2071. It forms a clear map for the long-term government work. The UAE Centennial 2071 is based on four pillars: Future-focused government; Excellent education; diversified knowledge economy; and a happy and cohesive society. This long-term vision is complemented by the “Principles of the 50”, that are 10 principles acting as guidelines for all institutions in the UAE in the next 50 years to implement the economic, political and developmental roadmap.
Additionally, the UAE also develop medium-term strategies for 10-year period to translate their long-term objectives into concrete actions and policies. The current strategy “We the UAE 2031” is based on four pillars that cover all sectors including the society, economy, diplomacy and ecosystem. It sets specific targets and indicators to achieve its objectives and contribute to the long-term development of the country as set in the 2071 Centennial and the Principles of the 50.
Saudi Vision 2030
Launched in 2016, it promotes several Realisation Programmes underpinning three main strategic objectives. These pivot around an “ambitious Nation” (through enhanced government effectiveness and enabled society responsibility); a “thriving economy” (to be achieved through economic diversification and growth as well as more employment); and a “vibrant society” (based on Islamic and national identity and enjoying a fulfilling and healthy life).
Sources: (Qatar's Government Communications Office, n.d.[13]; Egypt's Presidency of Government, n.d.[14]; U.AE, n.d.[15]; Commission Spéciale sur le Modèle de Développement, 2021[16]; U.AE, n.d.[17]; Oman Vision 2040's Implementation Follow-up Unit, n.d.[18]; Government of the United Arab Emirates, n.d.[19]; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, n.d.[20]).
As in OECD Member countries, in the MENA region visions tend to contextualise development objectives in light of evolving challenges and develop tailored responses. For example, in Egypt, the Ministry of Planning and Economic Development (MPED) updated its Vision 2030 to strengthen the link between investments and socio-economic programmes for sustainable development, address pressing challenges hindering socio-economic growth (i.e. water scarcity, climate change, high population growth), as well as respond to the effects of the COVID-19 crisis (OECD, n.d.[21]) This change also aimed to ensure a better and more rigorous alignment of the national goals with the SDGs.
Moreover, many MENA governments have undertaken consultation processes to involve stakeholders in the strategy development process in order to make sure that the national long-term visions reflect the needs and priorities of all segments of the population and society. In Morocco, the New Development Model 2035 was developed following a co-construction approach. During this process, a number of consultation spaces were open to gather the concerns and proposals of citizens and institutional stakeholders (Commission Spéciale sur le Modèle de Développement, 2021[16]). Oman’s government conducted dialogues during the elaboration of Oman’s Vision 2040 (Government of Oman, n.d.[22]). Vision committees included representatives of the government, the Council of Oman, the private sector, civil society organisations (CSOs) and citizens (including experts, scholars and specialists), with emphasis on inclusivity and the attendance of groups representing women, youth, persons with disabilities and students from all levels to ensure that the population was represented in its diversity (Government of Oman, n.d.[22]). In Egypt, a series of consultations with external stakeholders was also organised to identify priorities for the updated Vision 2030 (OECD, n.d.[21]).
Strong political and policy leadership is key to lead the design of long-term strategies and champion their pursuit
In both OECD and MENA countries and territories, the political level is invariably mandated to lead the development of the long-term strategy and to ensure their pursuit. This entails identifying key policy issues, establishing what needs to be addressed first, creating solutions to critical challenges, allocating resources and adjusting policies according to observed outcomes and impacts. Political ownership at higher levels of government as a prerequisite to design and pursue whole-of-government strategic policy objectives coherently is emphasised in the OECD Recommendation on Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development (2019[7]) and in the OECD Policy Framework on Sound Public Governance (2020[8]).
As mentioned above, implementing a whole-of-government strategy needs strong political commitment, steering and coordination at the highest level to avoid a fragmentation of political initiatives and to ensure sufficient political buy-in and visibility across all key government institutions and stakeholders.
The institutional settings for steering the implementation of strategic priorities can take several forms
Implementing long-term strategies requires first strong institutions to steer strategic planning at the whole-of-government level, that is the shift from political commitments and visions on the one hand to the actual results-based operationalisation of government action on the other. Strategic planning is covered in more detail later in the chapter.
The centre of government has an increasing role in strategic planning in OECD Member countries
As explained in Box 2.3, due to their central position at the heart of governments where they hold a strong convening power and can sometimes bring a more horizontal perspective, centres of government (CoGs) are uniquely placed to lead governmental action on cross-cutting challenges and whole-of-government visions. In the past decade, their strategic positioning, combined with the growing complexity of today’s policy challenges, has led them to play an increasingly strategic and forward-looking role in OECD Member countries.
The OECD defines the centre of government (CoG) as “the body or group of bodies that provide direct support and advice to Heads of Government and the Council of Ministers, or Cabinet”. A key institution of the executive branch, it is mandated to ensure elected politicians make decisions informed by coherent evidence and expert analysis, and facilitates co-ordination across government siloes.
However, the CoG concept does not denote any specific organisational structure: the composition of the CoG can vary depending on the constitutional order, the political system, contextual and historical factors and the Head of Government’s preferences. The CoG has therefore a great variety of names across countries, such as General Secretariat, Cabinet Office, Chancellery, Office/Ministry of the Presidency, Council of Ministers Office, etc. No two countries are identical in their approach to their CoG’s institutional and decision-making arrangements.
Generally, the role of the centre of government has expanded from purely procedural and agenda-setting functions to playing a more strategic leadership role of supporting the Head of Government and Cabinet.
Source: (OECD, 2020[23]).
Strategic planning is considered as a key responsibility of the CoG for more than half of OECD Member countries surveyed, where they are tasked to maintain the balance between long-term objectives and day-to-day business through the operationalisation of the Government Programme (OECD, 2018[24]). Strategic planning units located in the CoG usually perform a wide range of activities including steering and ensuring the implementation of the government priorities and programmes, aligning national and sectoral strategies, co-ordinating the strategic work of line Ministries and leading foresight activities, among others.
CoGs can have an oversight, steering and monitoring function to ensure delivering on strategic priorities (Figure 2.2) (OECD, 2024[25]). In 58% of countries surveyed, CoGs oversee the identification of government priorities. The process requires them to define priorities based on criteria, arbitrate between initiatives submitted by line ministries, and ensure that the government's electoral mandate is translated and implemented through the government's programme and sectoral policies. CoGs also often operationalise the government's vision or programme into an action plan or roadmap for implementation by line ministries, and they can mandate line ministries to develop long-term plans.
Furthermore, in some OECD Member countries, CoGs have issued various guidelines with standards and good practices for policy development to support line ministries’ work (OECD, 2024[25]). Some countries have also set up new central delivery units composed of a small group of highly skilled people responsible for preparing delivery plans to oversee and support progress towards a select number of top priorities. However, such a steering role can only be fully played if CoGs have put in place effective working relations and robust co-ordination processes with line ministries, especially with key ministries involved in strategic planning such as ministries in charge of planification or budget.
Centre of government’s role in priority setting and strategic planning in OECD Member countries
Note: n=26. Respondents to the OECD survey were asked: “For each of the below activities regarding setting the vision, priorities and strategic planning, please indicate who has the primary responsibility”.
Source: (OECD, 2024[25]); (OECD, 2023[26]).
Nevertheless, it is important to note that institutional settings for strategic planning vary across countries. Across the OECD, many Member countries have established specific institutional arrangements for whole-of-government strategic planning within the CoG (in most cases) or shared between the CoG and another institution - where CoGs tend to play a more collaborative or supportive role (Austria, Czechia, Estonia, Lithuania, Japan, Mexico, Norway) or within a Ministry (e.g. Ministry of Development in Türkiye). Line ministries and notably the Ministries of Economy, the Ministries of Planning and the Ministries of Finance, sometimes combined into a single ministry, can play an essential role in strategic planning to ensure alignment between national strategies and budget (OECD, 2018[24]).
Institutional settings for strategic planning differ across MENA countries and territories
Strategic planning to steer the implementation of whole-of-government visions has increasingly become part of the functions led by CoG institutions in a majority of MENA countries and territories, whether under the mandate of a Prime Minister’s Office or a Ministry of Cabinet Affairs, as depicted in Figure 2.3. This is the case for instance in Morocco where the Head of Government Services are also developing a role of delivery unit to steer specific key priorities (Box 2.4).
In other MENA governments, a specific line ministry is responsible for strategic planning with the support of CoG institutions. As such, the planning function is usually played by the Ministry of Economy or Finance, as illustrated by the MPED in Egypt, or by ministries of aid and international cooperation (e.g. Jordan’s Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation) given the importance of development assistance in setting the planning agenda. It can also be led by a dedicated ministry for planning or sustainable development, as in Iraq with the Ministry of Planning.
Sources: Author’s work based on the data indicating the government institutions responsible for their planning, co-ordination, and implementation, sourced from (OECD, 2023[27]; Government of Lebanon, 2018[28]; Government of Syria, 2020[29]; UAE National Committee on Sustainable Develpment Goals, 2022[30]; Republic of Iraq, 2021[31]; Republic of Iraq, n.d.[32]; State of Kuwait, 2019[33]; Government of Oman, n.d.[22]; Sultanate of Oman, Supreme Council for Planning, 2019[34]); (Prime Minister's Office of the Palestinian Authority, n.d.[35]; State of Qatar, 2018[36]; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 2018[37]; Gouvernment of Algeria, 2019[38]; Ministry of Planning and Economic Development of Egypt, 2021[39]; République Tunisienne, 2021[40]; Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation of Jordan, 2022[41]).
In Morocco, the Head of Government Services (SCG) were established in 2012 to better support the Head of Government, particularly in the co-ordination of public policies and in the achievement of the 5-year governmental programme objectives. The creation of the SCG also aimed to improve decision-making in particular at the Council of Government, for which the SCG have been proposing items on the agenda and reviewing the consistency of the proposals with the government programme during the preparation process of the meeting. The SCG have also enabled greater agility at the centre of government to respond to national issues and immediate or long-term challenges for Morocco.
The role of the SCG was further reinforced in the framework of the implementation of the Government Programme 2021-2026. They have a leading role in steering the implementation of government priorities in co-ordination with line ministries; they support decision-making by the Head of Government; they ensure the co-ordination and alignment of strategies and policies, providing expertise both on legal and substance matters; they also contribute extensively to the preparation of the annual budget law by establishing the strategic framework driving the budget distribution that is then validated by the Head of Government before discussions with the Ministry of Economy and Finances.
Moreover, the SCG team is in charge of monitoring the implementation of the strategic priorities and of ensuring that new laws and strategies are in line both with the Government Programme and the long-term New Development Model. In addition to these functions, the SCG has been developing a role of delivery unit to steer more specifically some key priorities and accompany line ministries in the development and implementation of those priorities in connection with their sectoral strategies.
Source: (OECD, 2023[27]).
Improving co-ordination mechanisms to support the implementation of strategic priorities
Co-ordination contributes to a more effective implementation of whole-of-government strategies. It can strengthen coherence and alignment across sector strategies especially when diverse actors and institutions are involved, better information sharing across policy areas and administrative silos, more integrated monitoring frameworks, and more informed and evidence-based decision-making.
Strengthening institutions in charge of coordination for whole-of-government strategies
The role of the institutions in strategic planning in steering the implementation of whole-of-government strategies is enhanced by their responsibilities for whole-of-government policy co-ordination. In OECD Member countries, whole-of-government policy co-ordination has been predominantly a responsibility of the CoG, sometimes shared with another institution (OECD, 2018[24]).
Similarly, in many MENA countries and territories, institutions mandated with strategic planning, whether they be CoG institutions or key line ministries, also tend to be responsible for co-ordinating the implementation of the economies’ whole-of-government strategies.
In many cases, MENA governments have also set up distinct dedicated bodies or units to co-ordinate or monitor the implementation of their whole-of-government strategies, sometimes alongside existing institutions mandated to lead strategic planning. For instance, in Egypt, the government has established sustainable development units and focal points within different ministries to ensure whole-of-government coherence between the national vision and sectoral policy plans. They also provide the necessary data for the monitoring and evaluation of these plans to the MPED, that coordinates strategic planning activities. However, implementation in practice remains incomplete and the exchange of information between focal points in line ministries and the MPED is functional solely on a bilateral and ad hoc basis (OECD, n.d.[21]).
Where it is not the case yet, MENA governments could reinforce the role and capacities at the centre in setting priorities, planning, steering and monitoring the implementation of whole-of-government strategies. This is for instance the case in Estonia, where the Government Office Strategy Unit is in charge of co-ordinating work on a number of strategic plans, including the whole-of-government strategy and the SDGs strategy, and facilitating coherence between them (Box 2.5).
Moreover, MENA governments could also build on existing (or establish when needed) ministerial or inter-ministerial working groups. These working groups would gather relevant actors (line ministries, CoG institutions, etc.) under the leadership of the CoG or of the line ministry in charge of strategic planning during the preparation of strategies, policies and laws to review the proposals and ensure their coherence with national visions, priorities and objectives. Depending on the national context, these bodies could also be responsible for monitoring the implementation of SDGs (OECD, 2020[42]).
The Government Office Strategy Unit in Estonia co-ordinates work on sustainable development and fosters information sharing among bodies such as the inter-ministerial working group gathering representatives from all ministries and Statistics Estonia working on an ad hoc basis, and the Estonian Sustainable Development Commission, a non-governmental stakeholder organisation. As the Government Office Strategy Unit is co-ordinating not only the implementation of Agenda 2030 but also other strategies (Estonia 2020, Estonia’s EU policy), it is able to ensure coherence in various horizontal planning documents.
Finally, vertical co-ordination capacity could also be reinforced in the MENA region. Studies show that in most countries and territories of the region, co-ordination with local governments remains too limited, which hampers the effective implementation of whole-of-government strategies at the local level. Sub-national authorities themselves often lack human and financial resources required to engage effectively with the national government in strategic planning efforts for sustainable development, whether in contributing regional data and evidence to national strategy-setting, pursuit and evaluation, or engaging systematically with local stakeholders and citizens to ensure that whole-of-government strategies properly reflects specific local circumstances, strengths and needs (OECD, 2020[45]; OECD, n.d.[21]). This could be addressed for instance through the development of specific action plans on long-term development challenges at the sub-national level, tailored to the needs and priorities of each territory and, where feasible and appropriate, with municipal/local authorities (OECD, n.d.[21]).
Fostering co-ordination mechanisms to address cross-cutting challenges
In addition to the co-ordination functions for the whole-of-government strategies, OECD Member and partner countries have also established co-ordination mechanisms – under the leadership of the CoG or other institutions - such as inter-ministerial committees, focal points, networks, or thematic working groups to deliver on cross-cutting topics, including gender equality, youth affairs, digitalisation or climate change (OECD, 2020[8]). Such co-ordination mechanisms encourage synergies between government actors and allow to articulate the integration of strategic priorities and the implementation of sectoral policies and services. They also serve as a tool to facilitate and mainstream the integration of cross-cutting issues within the structure and functioning of public institutions.
Addressing climate change
For example, a number of MENA governments have established ministerial portfolios in charge of climate change as well as whole-of-government co-ordination structures to ensure the effective implementation of climate and environmental objectives in all policy areas. In the UAE, the Council on Climate Change and the Environment, an inter-ministerial, inter-Emirate governance body, is in charge of overseeing the national Climate Change Plan, which is aligned with the long-term national agenda UAE Vision 2021. The Ministry of Climate Change and Environment assumes the role of the secretariat and is responsible for monitoring the progress of the plan (LSE Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, 2022[46]).
Another existing setting, implemented by a number of OECD Member countries, places the climate portfolio directly under the authority of the Prime Minister - or equivalent - supported by dedicated units created within the CoG. Box 2.6 describes the cases of Australia, France, Spain and the United States, where the unit at the forefront of the climate policy co-ordination efforts is in the centre.
Australia
The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) plays an important role in co-ordinating the development and delivery of the Government’s climate change and energy policy and engagement. PM&C works closely with the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) as well as other relevant departments, agencies, and scientific institutions to support Australian efforts to capture the opportunities of the net zero transformation and advance progress towards reaching net zero emissions by 2050.
France
In 2022, the President provided direction to the Prime Minister to lead inter-ministerial “ecological planning”, and the Secretariat General for Ecological Planning was established to support her in this endeavour. The responsibility covers all areas of ecological transition (climate change mitigation and adaptation, biodiversity, natural resources and health & environment) and involves co-ordinating the elaboration of policy, organising arbitrations, monitoring implementation including at the local level, and mobilising stakeholders.
Spain
Given Spain’s highly decentralised institutional set-up, Autonomous Communities (regional governments) are responsible for key competences related to the implementation of climate-related policies. Hence, a Commission for the Co-ordination of Climate Change Policies deals with the co-ordination and collaboration between the State and the Autonomous Communities. It includes groups of technical nature on inventories, mitigation, adaptation and emissions trading.
United States of America
The Climate Policy Office is the co-ordinator of the whole-of-government approach to tackling the climate crisis in the United States. The Office is located in the centre of government and is led by the Assistant to the President and National Climate Advisor. Among the functions of the Office are:
Co-ordinate the domestic policymaking process
Co-ordinate domestic climate-policy advice to the President
Ensure cohesiveness across policy decisions, programmes, and the President’s goals
Monitor the implementation of the President’s domestic climate-policy agenda
The Office engages with other institutions and agencies from the administration to support the delivery of climate-related goals.
Gender equality
MENA governments have established central gender institutions (CGIs) since the 1990s. CGIs are bodies tasked with promoting, co-ordinating and facilitating the gender equality policy at the central or federal level. CGIs are devoted to supporting women’s empowerment projects and mainstreaming gender into the government as a whole (ESCWA, 2020[52]). Across OECD Member countries, and in the MENA region, there is no standardised blueprint for institutional design, due the varied nature of governmental setups and specific contexts in each country or territory (OECD, 2022[53]). Several CGIs are fully dedicated to gender equality and the empowerment of women, for instance in Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority and the UAE. Others have broader or combined portfolios that include women’s affairs among other mandates that are traditionally considered as the domains and responsibilities of women, such as in Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia (ESCWA, 2020[52]).
In order to implement government-wide gender equality goals and support gender mainstreaming, several MENA governments have also established co-ordination structures involving various public institutions, which often have a direct relationship to CGIs. Tunisia has established the Council of Peers composed of representatives across the government and civil society organisations (with the Head of Government as chair and Minister for Women, Family, Children and the Elderly as the deputy chair) to work on a gender-based approach to planning, programming, evaluation and budgeting to eliminate all forms of discrimination (ESCWA, 2019[54]). Similarly, in the Palestinian Authority, a National Committee for Gender was established to co-ordinate the Cross-Sectoral Gender Strategy. The committee constitutes the main forum to discuss gender policy in the Palestinian Authority. It gathers all 22 ministries and is chaired by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs. Additionally, it includes dedicated working groups to deal with specific strategy programmes in which relevant institutions are selectively involved (OECD, 2024[55]).
Youth affairs
A number of MENA governments have put in place an institutional co-ordinating body or committee on youth affairs and/or have established MoU to facilitate co-ordination with other ministries, as highlighted in Table 2.1. Some of them have moreover established bodies to engage and co-ordinate with other stakeholders involved on the topic. This is for instance the case in the UAE, where the Emirates Youth Council serves as an advisory body for the government and the Minister of State for Youth on national issues and engagement with governmental and non-governmental stakeholders. The model has been adopted and replicated in 13 ministries of the country, where young employees of the respective ministries co-ordinate with other ministries and different stakeholders on topics related to young people and supervise the organisation of relevant activities and programmes (OECD, 2022[56]).
Note: The table shows the entities responsible for the horizontal co-ordination of youth affairs and the main co-ordination mechanisms used in selected MENA countries and territories. Information for Mauritania refer to the steering committee elaborating the National Youth Strategy 2020-2024.
Source: (OECD, 2022[56]).
Other models that could be implemented include the establishment of youth focal points in line ministries to facilitate co-ordination with the national youth council, as it is the case for instance in Slovenia. In Flanders, Belgium, there is a contact point for youth in all agencies and departments (OECD, 2020[42]). These formal arrangements can be supplemented by dedicated networks and information-sharing tools, such as online platforms.
Effective inter-ministerial co-ordination remains nevertheless a key challenge in the MENA region
Despite the increase in number and topics covered by these inter-ministerial co-ordination bodies in the region, they often suffer from a structural governance challenge, including unclear or unarticulated mandates and a lack of legal framework or general principles, sometimes preventing their effective operationalisation (OECD, 2021[57]). Moreover, the tendency to multiply these bodies often leads to mandate overlaps or gaps vis-à-vis existing institutions.
The lack of clear mandate can result in infrequent ad hoc meetings, lack of precise deliverables for objectives and unclear assessments of competencies needed, as well as varied work practices and mechanisms across bodies that further hamper information sharing and the effective implementation of a whole-of-government vision, limiting the impact of their work and recommendations. In many cases, the themes of these commissions do not always correspond to the priorities of the government or to the long-term objectives of the country or territory.
Moreover, institutions in charge of mainstreaming such multidimensional issues often lack capacities and convening power. This is notably the case for institutions in charge of youth and women’s affairs (OECD, 2022[56]; OECD, 2022[53]). Taking the latter as an example, even though some gender institutions have access to power in their respective countries and territories, the capacities of CGIs remain limited, as they face several barriers in carrying out their mandates. In part, this is the result of limited resources and institutional capacities of CGIs, difficulties in generating buy-in for the gender equality agenda, as well as legislative, economic, and political obstacles (ESCWA, 2019[54]). Moreover, CGIs in the MENA region are almost systematically led and staffed by women, and in some cases, this may be the only ministerial-level positions held by women (ESCWA, 2020[52]). Regarding youth affairs, the high turnover of leadership positions in the ministries of youth is also seen as an important barrier, as it can make it more difficult to create trust and a culture of co-operation between different ministries over the long-term (OECD, 2022[56]).
MENA governments could thus further clarify and strengthen existing institutional arrangements and responsibilities to lead co-ordinated approaches to cross-sectoral issues. It is important to note the efforts undertaken by some countries, such as Morocco, to rationalise and increase the efficiency of existing inter-ministerial commissions, that could help them be further integrated into the decision-making processes and better deliver on government priorities (OECD, 2023[27]).
Today, many governments struggle with a disconnect between the high-level vision for development outlined in national long-term strategies and the day-to-day priorities and constraints of line ministries and public agencies. This is further amplified by new cross-cutting issues and crises that can hamper the government’s capacity to deliver on originally planned priorities.
The need for governments to deliver on cross-cutting policy challenges at the national and international level has revived interest in ensuring that the public governance system, including its planning function, support coherent decision-making and alignment on countries’ key priorities (Barasz et al., 2022[58]).
A number of governance tools, including stakeholder engagement, risk management, strategic foresight, strategic communication and information-sharing, and monitoring, evaluation and reporting systems can support this approach.
The potential of strategic planning to align and better deliver on countries’ priorities
In many countries, the number of strategies and plans identified across the government exceeds several hundred that are not always up to date, leading to an absence of consistency and continuity in the implementation of priorities and very often duplications of efforts. The multiplicity of players engaged in delivering on these strategies and plans also limits governments’ capacity to deliver effectively.
A coherent strategic planning framework makes it possible to focus, over the course of the planning time horizon, the limited resources of government on a few strategic policy priorities and objectives in order to have stronger and more realistic public commitments and policy interventions that are better designed, resourced and implemented (OECD, 2020[8]). Moreover, it is also key to align domestic policies and priorities with international commitments, such as the SDGs, or Nationally Determined Contributions defined in the framework of the Paris agreement on climate. Setting objectives and targets in a coherent and strategic way across planning documents also helps to ensure the relevance of existing documents in the face of cross-cutting challenges and make the necessary policy trade-offs to achieve high-level or long-term objectives for the countries’ development. Prioritisation is often one of the most challenging dimensions of strategic planning for governments and decision-makers, as it requires them to “downgrade” or postpone some worthwhile reforms or policy areas.
Prioritisation, alignment and coherent sequencing across all levels can also have a strong impact on the action and perception of governments’ action by citizens, especially when dealing with issues that impact their lives in the long-term, as it helps clarify how efforts on specific policies contribute more broadly to other stated ambitions. For instance, governments’ climate and environmental strategic objectives could be used to guide choices made on infrastructure systems and public expenditures in a number of areas, notably industry, agriculture and beyond (OECD, 2022[1]).
As part of their strategic planning efforts, some OECD Member countries highlight the value of setting a limited number of key priorities to encourage cross-sectoral co-operation and move beyond a siloed organisation. This approach has been implemented since 2015 in Finland to prepare the Government Programme, as presented in Box 2.7 below. Some OECD Member countries have decided to translate SDGs into national milestone indicators, allowing governments to better integrate SDGs in strategic planning (OECD, 2019[59]). This is for instance the case in Finland, where SDGs are incorporated into long-term strategies in a number of key policy areas - such as development, foreign and security policy, but also taxation, finance, trade, migration, and agriculture – and in key legal documents, policies, as well as monitoring, reporting and evaluation mechanisms (OECD, 2019[59]).
Prior to 2015, Finland’s strategic planning was marked by a tradition of coalition governments, and the siloed organisation of its administration. As the number of parties involved in coalitions grew, attempts to capture all of their objectives in government programmes led to the creation of vast unwieldy documents with hundreds of goals. By 2011 for instance, the government was attempting to track approximatively 900-line items.
In 2015, the government of Finland attempted to deviate from this trend, moving beyond siloed priorities with its new strategic government programme “Finland Vision 2025”. This system was built around 26 strategic objectives in five policy areas, complemented by a set of structural reforms. The government allocated 1 billion euro to ensure the effective implementation of those key projects. Representatives of the Government Strategy Secretariat, set up in the Prime Minister’s Office in 2015, participated in the work of the five Groups of Ministers dealing with these priority areas. The Strategic Government Programme was accompanied by an annual implementation plan. Government Strategy sessions were held fortnightly – four-hour evening sessions – with an agenda designed by the Strategy Secretariat together with the Prime Minister’s political cabinet. The changes introduced in 2015 appear to have made a difference in delivering on policy goals. For instance, the government realised its target of raising the employment rate from about 65% to 72%.
Building on this successful initiative, discussions on the importance of interlinkages increased in Finland. The 2019-2023 Government programme was developed based on phenomenon-based strategic objectives, which support a cross-sectoral approach and aim at addressing interlinkages in an effective manner. The programme is organised around seven strategic “themes” each managed by an inter-ministerial group composed of ministries which have a substantial link to the theme. The government is further focused on four “priority goals”: balanced finances; employment rate at 75%, carbon neutrality by 2035, and decreasing inequality. These strategic themes and priority goals are further specified with around 64 subgoals with 70 indicators.
Source: (OECD, 2018[24]) and information provided by the government of Finland.
In the MENA region, a number of governments started developing planning frameworks that aim to better align the objectives of their strategies and plans encompassing different time horizons, sectoral focuses or levels of government with long-term objectives set in visions.
For instance, the Palestinian Authority developed and circulated the “Strategic planning guidelines for the strategic planning cycle 2024-2029” to ensure coherence and support line ministries and agencies in applying the new “Strategic planning approach for 2024-2029”. These guidelines include, among others, instructions for setting strategic objectives, results and actions, which require line ministries and agencies to link them with the Government Programme’s priorities set by the Prime Minister’s Office in line with SDGs. For each objective, line ministries and agencies are requested to outline the expected results and to identify performance indicators, related baselines and interim and final targets. Each indicator is to be clearly linked with the Government Programme’s and SDGs’ indicators (OECD, 2024[55]).
Governments also focused efforts on developing monitoring mechanisms to better track the contribution of sectoral strategies towards meeting objectives for the country or territory’s development as stated in the vision. This will be detailed later in the chapter.
Despite these steps, as in other countries, MENA governments still face practical difficulties in ensuring policy coherence and a meaningful whole-of-government approach (OECD, n.d.[21]). In many cases, there is no clear institutionalised common framework effectively organising the relationship between different strategies and ensuring their co-ordinated and coherent implementation. Sector-based strategies and plans tend to be developed within a narrower institutional environment, which limits possible linkages and synergies across policy areas. There is also limited harmonisation in terms of timelines, objectives, indicators and reporting activities. This is often due to the existing time lag between the conception of a long-term vision and the governmental programme, which creates governance and strategic alignment challenges. Capacities and tools could therefore be further strengthened for greater coherence and more effective delivery on horizontal, multidimensional challenges.
MENA governments could further develop or strengthen and institutionalise a range of frameworks, tools and mechanisms (written procedures, manuals, etc.) enabling better strategic alignment between different policy instruments and policy priorities and objectives set across different timelines, starting from the design phase and throughout the rest of the policy and strategy development cycle.
To support governments in implementing their public administration reforms sequentially and with a whole-of-government perspective, SIGMA (a joint initiative of the OECD and the EU) developed the Principles of Public Administration (OECD SIGMA, 2023[60]) and assessment methodology (OECD SIGMA, 2019[61]) that, together with a Strategy Toolkit (OECD SIGMA, n.d.[62]), were used to provide an objective assessment and tailored recommendations in Jordan and Morocco (OECD SIGMA, 2019[63]; OECD SIGMA, n.d.[64]).
The Principles of Public Administration
The Principles are a comprehensive framework of standards expressing values and behaviours that citizens and businesses can expect from a modern public administration. While there is no single model for the organisation and functioning of public administration, the Principles can be used, together with the accompanying monitoring framework, as a guide for reforms of the public administration and a tool for assessing progress. The Principles build on existing EU acquis, OECD standards and best practices, other international standards, as well as good practices of the EU and OECD Member countries.
The latest edition (2023) covers 32 principles divided into six areas: 1) Strategy; 2) Policy Development and co-ordination; 3) Public service and human resource management; 4) Organisation, accountability and oversight; 5) Service delivery and digitalisation and; 6) Public financial management.
The 2023 Principles also extend the scope beyond central government to include regional and local levels of government, with the aim of fostering a coherent policy approach.
They constitute an instrument for dissemination of the OECD standards and best practices of good public governance and a tool for continuous improvement of public administration systems.
The Strategy Toolkit
The Strategy Toolkit provides practical insights and advice, as well as easy-to-use tools for the development, implementation, monitoring and overall management of public administration reform (PAR) and sector strategies. It covers problem analysis; the prioritisation of reform ambitions; the setting of objectives; the definition of indicators (with baselines and targets); action planning and costing; implementation monitoring, reporting and evaluation; and PAR management and learning.
To facilitate the alignment of existing policies and strategies with the national priorities and objectives, it is also important that governments conduct mapping exercises of their main national strategies, both sectoral and horizontal, to identify synergies with long-term visions and medium-term governmental programmes, but also the inconsistencies and potentially necessary adaptations.
OECD Member countries have adopted different approaches to establish a sound hierarchy of planning instruments and articulate them across different timeframes. For instance, Latvia embedded the hierarchy of strategic documents and results in its legal framework in order to increase policy coherence and coverage (Box 2.9).
The law came into force in 2009 and outlines the principles of development planning, types of planning documents, their hierarchy, relations, and responsibilities of institutions.
National planning documents are prepared for the long- (up to 25 years), medium- (up to seven years) and short-terms (up to three years), and their hierarchy is based on a chain of policy objectives and outcome indicators. This implies that short-term documents are derived from or consistent with higher-level documents. The system includes national, sectoral and cross-cutting planning documents and requires coherence with regional- and local-level planning documents. National and local authorities initiate development plans if the issue is within their scope or is required by higher authorities, laws or regulations.
According to the law, Latvia’s Sustainable Development Strategy 2030 defines long-term development priorities. The National Development Plan (NDP) is the main medium-term plan, including objectives, priorities, results and information on responsible authorities. It also programmes EU and other external funds and includes an annex with the necessary additional funding.
Moreover, the law requires that the Government’s Declaration and Action Plan (i.e. the government’s political guidance documents) be in line with development priorities or indicate the need to revise the planning document under consideration.
Finally, according to the law, the Cabinet of Ministers can determine levels, types and timeframes of planning documents, including suggesting changes in content and procedures, although it has never exercised this power.
Source: (Saiema, 2009[65]).
MENA governments could also develop specific processes to ensure that long-term priorities, including cross-cutting ones, are systematically taken into account in strategic planning and budgeting for national, sectoral and local strategies. In New Zealand for instance, the policy papers that are used to present proposals to the Cabinet must include sections on the proposal’s climate implications – when relevant – as well as on the impacts that the proposal could have on population groups, including indigenous groups, children, seniors, disabled people, women, people who are gender diverse, Pacific peoples, veterans, rural communities, and ethnic communities. If the impacts are expected to be significant, analysis of these impacts should be included as part of the general discussion on the proposal (Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2020[66]). In Austria, the country’s Strategy 2050 states that “legal projects at the federal and provincial level are to be subject to a mandatory climate review in order to prevent undesired adverse effects on the climate” (OECD, 2022[1]).
Promoting a more systematic use of governance tools to support strategic planning
Strengthening the use of governance instruments and tools to support strategic planning, such as stakeholder engagement, risk management, strategic foresight, strategic communication and monitoring and evaluation frameworks, is key to aligning governments’ policies and practices with their long-term development objectives. By systematically bringing attention to issues that will affect the country’s long-term development, mainstreaming the use of these tools and instruments can enhance the resilience of countries to respond to future crises. It can also improve the responsiveness and fairness of policy delivery and outcomes by shedding light on shared and group-specific concerns. Their systematic use also shows governments’ commitment to take action and engage citizens on issues that shape the future of their country and the world, which is key to fostering trust and ensuring buy-in.
MENA governments could build on existing experiences to more systematically engage stakeholders over the course of the strategic planning process
Recent experiences in OECD Member countries show that when the strategic planning process is more open and inclusive, and features stakeholder engagement and citizen-driven approaches through information, consultation and co-creation mechanisms, strategic planning can enhance the legitimacy of policymaking and increase the sustainability of policies (OECD, 2020[8]; OECD, 2022[67]). This is notably highlighted in the OECD Recommendation on Open Government (2017[68]) and it is particularly important in the current context, where governments are increasingly asked to justify how policies and programmes contribute to the greater good of current but also future generations.
Beyond building consensus, the mobilisation of diverse stakeholders is also key to evidence-based strategic planning. Actors such as external partners, agencies, independent institutions, academia, and CSOs can provide evidence and expertise that governments may lack. External partners and institutions can, for instance, prepare anticipatory studies on long-term issues, conduct evaluations of existing strategies, run analyses on strategic priorities or develop new concepts that can contribute to the strategic planning work led by governments (OECD, 2022[67]). The inclusion of diverse perspectives during the planning process can also improve the quality of problem analysis, generate new ideas and eventually support the successful implementation of the plan. Accordingly, governments increasingly involve citizens through deliberative processes to address long-term challenges, turning to Citizens’ Assemblies, Juries, Panels and other representative deliberative processes to tackle complex policy problems such as climate change (OECD, 2020[69]). Similarly, engaging stakeholders from across the public administration can be very beneficial given their knowledge about their respective sectoral areas (OECD, 2022[67]).
Building on recent stakeholder engagement initiatives taken by some MENA governments to inform public policies and services, policymakers could further strengthen the use of such practices to better include the diversity of perspectives existing in the society in decision- and policymaking. Public authorities from the region could also have a close look at deliberative initiatives that are increasingly taking place in OECD Member countries and allow citizens to channel their demands in a constructive way within an institutionalised space, which ultimately can facilitate dialogue with governments. Citizens’ assemblies in particular have been used by national and local governments to guide decision-making on climate policy (OECD, 2020[69]). The Irish Citizens’ Assembly was the first to consider climate at a national level in 2016, followed by the French Citizens’ Convention on the Climate (2019-2020), the Climate Assembly UK (2020), and the national citizens’ assembly on climate change in Spain (2021) (European Climate Foundation, 2021[70]).
Developing risk management frameworks could significantly improve long-term planning in the MENA region
When it comes to risk management, governments are responsible for managing resources while correctly identifying risks and the potential impact of internal and external shocks on the country in a way that optimises the country’s resilience. The OECD Recommendation on the Governance of Critical Risks (2014[71]) recognises the escalating damages resulting from extreme events. As a result, it underlines the importance of adopting a fundamental shift in risk governance towards a whole-of-society effort to better assess, prevent, respond to, recover, learn from and become resilient to systemic disruptive shocks.
It is thus crucial to develop informed risk management frameworks with anticipation capacities and governance tools, such as regular risk assessments or crisis management protocols, to foresee and mitigate risks (OECD, 2022[72]). Scenario planning can also help countries and territories strengthen the resilience of their economy in the face of future natural hazards.
As highlighted in Chapter 1, MENA countries and territories have a high vulnerability to several risks, including food and water insecurity, climate change, rapid urbanisation and population growth, and challenges associated with health and digital transition (Belhaj and Soliman, 2021[73]). In a context of increasing awareness about these vulnerabilities, governments are seeking to develop more structured and effective risk management frameworks to better anticipate the effects of long-term challenges in their strategic planning.
Some countries such as Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia have developed national risk management plans and strategies, drawing from past disasters experience to promote disaster risks reduction and align with 2030 SDGs (Cabinet of Egypt, 2017[74]; Royaume du Maroc, n.d.[75]; République Tunisienne, 2021[76]). Algeria is in the process of developing its own national strategy (Union Européenne, 2019[77]). Some governments also put in place a legal and regulatory framework regarding the risk management cycle. For instance, in Morocco, sector-based plans and programmes and single-risk strategies have been introduced, often with medium-term horizons (10-30 years), in critical areas such as flooding, drought, and forest fires (OECD, 2017[78]). The country has also taken actions to reinforce risk management at the local level and better align it with efforts undertaken at the national level.
However, operational and institutional risk management strategies at national and local levels remain only partially integrated and cohesive (OECD, 2017[78]). A study of climate vulnerabilities and risk management in the region found that while surveyed MENA countries and territories have an “acceptable” status of infrastructure and habitat-related measures, they have a “tolerable” status in the field of health and ecosystem measures, and an “inappropriate” status when it comes to water and food measures (Namdar, Karami and Keshavarz, 2021[79]). The study also highlights considerable differences between MENA countries and territories across these six indices. The highest level of vulnerability is found in Yemen and Djibouti, which also have the lowest levels of disaster preparedness, followed in order by Iraq, Syria, Oman and Morocco.
Governments could continue their efforts to develop comprehensive frameworks and holistic approaches to risk management. This needs to be accompanied by strengthened co-operation at the international and regional level to benefit from the exchange of best practices, particularly in the context of common challenges and hazards, in order to build national resilience. Strong political leadership is needed to ensure that national strategies are put in place and updated, and that risk awareness is promoted. MENA governments could also focus on developing a structured approach to the identification and resilience of critical infrastructure and the understanding of emerging critical risks.
Using strategic foresight and anticipatory innovation planning tools can help prepare for a better future
Strategic foresight, that is “a systematic approach to looking beyond current expectations and taking into account a variety of plausible future developments in order to identify implications for policies today” (OECD, 2019[80]), provides decision-makers with tools to prepare for the future in an informed way.
Strategic foresight uses a range of methodologies to identify implications for policies developed today, including horizon scanning for emerging changes, analysing weak or distant signals and emerging megatrends and developing multiple scenarios to consider a variety of plausible future developments (OECD, 2019[80]). Foresight approach and insights are often integrated into the strategic planning process to inform and anticipate future trends and priorities. Implementing such methods requires tools, information resources, as well as institutional structures and organisational capacities enabling public servants and organisations to embed these new ways of experimenting for possible futures into their day-to-day work.
MENA governments could develop the use of strategic foresight to inform decision- and policymaking, building on practices emerging across the world. Several OECD Member countries have been developing strategic foresight over the past few years. This is for instance the case in Finland, where the government developed a National Foresight Network to promote the use of future perspectives and foresight data in the country’s decision-making process at various governance levels (Box 2.10).
Under the co-ordination of the Prime Minister’s Office and Sitra (the Finnish Innovation Fund), Finland’s National Foresight Network acts as a forum for discussion and co-ordination among the country’s strategic foresight players. By bringing together ministries, government agencies, regional councils, private sector actors, academia and NGOs, the Network promotes the use of future perspectives and foresight data in the country’s decision-making process at various governance levels. It is an open network holding monthly Foresight Fridays meetings that involve participants in trainings, presentations and networking events.
In the lead-up to parliamentary elections, it produced future scenarios envisioning Finland up to 2025 and focusing on digitisation, the needs of an ageing population and labour market reform. The scenarios were made available online and successfully brought discussions about the future into the electoral debate.
Source: (OECD, 2022[81]).
A number of OECD Member governments have in addition launched “anticipatory innovation governance” (AIG), defined as a “broad-based capacity to actively explore possibilities, experiment, and continuously learn as part of a broader governance system” (Observatory of Public Sector Innovation, 2022[82]). Compared to traditional policymaking that tends to attempt to predict potential outcomes and develop approaches to address them, anticipatory innovation strives to develop a governance system aiming to anticipate and innovate in practice in order to introduce long-term perspectives and future-oriented decision-making (Observatory of Public Sector Innovation, 2022[82]).
Investing in public communication resources can support MENA governments in raising awareness and ensuring buy-in for their long-term strategies
An institutionalised and co-ordinated whole-of-government public communication, that is the communication within and across public sector organisations (OECD, 2021[83]), is central to ensure optimal flows of data and information to support government action. It presents diverse advantages, including optimisation of resources, message coherence, and amplified audience reach (OECD, 2020[23]). It also helps facilitate the implementation of whole-of-government approaches to achieve long-term objectives by raising public officials’ awareness across the government on the importance of strategic priorities and to create alignment with, and buy-in for, such efforts (OECD, 2021[83]).
In recent years, governments in the MENA region have taken important steps to establish a more strategic public communication with the gradual institutionalisation of structures, processes and mandates within the administration. In fact, public communication has become an established function led by CoG institutions with a dedicated structure, team or individual in 75% of surveyed MENA countries and territories (OECD, 2021[83]). Networks convening public communicators from line ministries have also been created in several countries, such as in Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco and Tunisia, to enhance co-ordination, share good practices and align government messaging.
While progress has been achieved, evidence suggests further efforts are needed to support the operationalisation of a whole-of-government vision and promote proactive rather than reactive communication across government. Notably, the use of whole-of-government strategies is not an established practice in the region but is gradually being recognised as a priority for various CoGs (OECD, 2021[83]). For example, the government of Tunisia developed a communication plan for internal use (OECD, 2019[84]; OECD, 2021[85]). More recently, the Head of Government Services in Morocco have introduced a planification communication grid (OECD, 2023[27]). Strategies or plans used on an ad hoc basis at the level of line ministries are often informal, face implementation difficulties and lack an overarching whole-of-government vision. In fact, producing government-wide communication strategies and plans was selected as part of the top 3 challenges by CoGs in the MENA region, in particular due to insufficient human resources, dedicated budgets and co-ordination (OECD, 2021[83]). Some countries, such as Jordan and Morocco, have developed manuals with directives on processes and procedures to enhance the institutionalisation of this function and show its value to secure more resources. They are presented in Box 2.11.
Public Communication Guide in Morocco
In 2019, the Ministry of Economy, Finances and Administrative Reform, with the support of the OECD, developed guidelines for communicators to move from one-way communications to a more strategic, two-way effort. This document provides public communicators with an understanding of how to use this function to strengthen open government principles and contribute to policymaking and service design and delivery. It includes concrete guidance on how to conduct professional and strategic communications and covers good practices from OECD Member and partner countries as well as from Morocco. The Guide expands on core competencies and themes ranging from planning, budgeting, evaluation to crisis communication.
The Guide was shared for comments with the national network of public communicators, established with the help of the OECD, and launched in February 2021.
Public Communication Directive in Jordan
At the centre of government level in Jordan, public communication is steered by the Minister of Government Communications (previously Minister of State for Media Affairs (MoSMA)) within the Prime Minister’s Office. In 2019, the institution led an ambitious re-organisation of this function to align structures, procedures, and reporting lines across the administration. In pursuit of the priorities outlined in its 2019-20 National plan, MoSMA issued an official directive for the administrative reform of media units within line ministries. The directive also defines the basic tasks and roles of these units in order to work on strengthening the role of media actors to support the government in communicating its messages and explaining its policies to the public. To accompany this process, it also developed a manual with practical steps and requirements for media units to align their organisation and functioning. Additionally, the government has established a network of public communicators, known as the Shabakat Al Natiqeen fil Wuzaraat wa‘al Muasasaat al Hukumiya Al Urduniya, translated literally as “Network of Spokespersons in the Ministries and Institutions of the Government of Jordan.” Through this network, the government seeks to reinforce the capacities of spokespeople in key ministries, departments, and agencies as well as to co-ordinate messaging across ministries, departments, and agencies.
Moreover, there is room to further professionalise core public communication capabilities. The highly specialised nature of this function and the speed of change that public communication faces place a renewed importance on technical upskilling. The effects of the COVID-19 crisis have further accentuated the need to equip public communicators with the right tools and competencies to capture citizens’ attention in a highly saturated media ecosystem, as well as to establish a regular two-way dialogue with the public (OECD, 2021[83]). Efforts have been deployed in some MENA countries and territories, such as in Morocco, to build capacities and target recruitments to strengthen communication teams’ capacities in CoG and ministerial departments, including the recruitment of former journalists and digital designers or developers (OECD, 2023[27]). Nevertheless, upskilling communication teams remains a challenge governments in the MENA region need to prepare for, in particular to even capabilities across line ministries on technical issues, such as using audience insights, evaluating public communication and managing crisis communication.
MENA governments could reinforce monitoring and evaluation systems to strengthen strategic planning responses
The establishment of rigorous and institutionalised monitoring and evaluation systems is critical to ensure government action effectively achieves operational and strategic objectives, especially when they are long-term and involve numerous and diverse actors (OECD, 2022[87]).
Although they are distinct practices, monitoring and evaluation are complementary. They should be planned and implemented following a coherent approach to strengthen strategic planning and policy implementation by improving links between public interventions and their results. A sound monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system generates evidence on what has worked, why, and for whom. Fed back into the decision-making and planning processes, this evidence can help improve the design of future public policies and programmes and revise the course of existing ones. Furthermore, sound M&E can help identify challenges to policy implementation and ways to address them, based on lessons learned (OECD, 2021[88]).
Monitoring requirements can take the forms of regular reporting, frequent inter-ministerial meetings to measure the achievements of targets against set goals, as well as performance management mechanisms (D. Brown, 2021[89]). Given its capacities and role in planning, steering and co-ordinating public policies, many OECD Member countries consider that monitoring the delivery of key strategic priorities is a prerogative of the CoG. It can facilitate the identification of actions to address potential lack of progress, support decision-making and improve strategic planning (OECD, 2015[90]). Performance monitoring, using detailed and timely data on the implementation of public policies, can be a crucial tool to help governments adapt their planning, decision-making and implementation processes to better respond to complex challenges (OECD, 2020[8]).
In the same way, evaluation systems provide critical tools to support the real-time sharing of lessons from policy responses. Moreover, evaluation also gives an opportunity to share information with citizens and stakeholders on whether public funds have achieved their intended objectives and are producing the expected results (OECD, 2022[91]).
In the MENA region, governments have first focused their efforts on developing monitoring mechanisms to better track the contribution of sectoral strategies towards meeting long-term objectives and SDGs included in national strategic visions. Although this may differ across MENA governments, the structure in charge of monitoring the implementation of the long-term vision is usually also in charge of monitoring the implementation of SDGs (OECD, n.d.[21]). Some countries and territories, such as Egypt, have separate institutions in charge of monitoring the diverse strategies and plans. Additionally, Morocco and the Palestinian Authority are developing frameworks to improve monitoring of progress on long-term development objectives across strategies and plans. These diverse approaches, that are at different stages of advancement, are detailed in Box 2.12.
Egypt
The Ministry of Planning and Economic Development (MPED) in Egypt is responsible for steering the strategic planning process to translate Egypt Vision 2030 into annual plans at the central and local level. MPED also reviews their implementation and monitors their performance by co-ordinating with ministries leading key programmes and reviewing data shared at the outcome level. In particular, the annual investment plan approved by Cabinet outlines concrete sustainable development objectives, policies, programmes and activities along the dimensions of the Egypt Vision 2030 with its respective indicators and foreseen effects in its various sectors and levels of government. While efforts to monitor the performance of these programmes has been gradually established, challenges persist in the differing quality of the contributions submitted by each ministry to inform the annual investment plan as well as the capabilities to implement the approved programmes therein. (OECD, n.d.[21]). In addition, the National Committee for Monitoring the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals was established by executive decree to act as a high-level institutional body responsible for monitoring the implementation of the SDGs. The primary mandate of the committee is to work collaboratively to ensure that Egypt achieves the 2030 Agenda. While it is currently composed of representatives from 17 ministries and state entities, this Committee meets only on an ad hoc basis and its role in technical implementation and performance management could be enhanced. Egypt also started to establish a performance management framework, focusing on the assessment of outcomes of key strategies and the achievement of the SDGs with the Integrated System for Investment Plan Preparation and Monitoring (ISIPPM) and the National System for Monitoring and Evaluation (ADAA). Although these systems are thorough, there is an opportunity to embed KPIs to measure the outcomes and impact of SDGs and sectoral programmes, which is a common challenge that persists across various OECD Member countries and partner countries and territories.
Morocco
In Morocco, the New Development Model (NDM) is the country’s long-term strategic plan developed under the aegis of H.E King Mohammed VI. Along with the Government Programme, which defines priorities for a five-year governmental mandate, these documents were developed by different institutional actors, making alignment between these different strategic plans essential considering their complementary objectives. The Head of Government Services are focusing on building a general coherence between both strategic documents, ensuring that the implementation of the government programme supports the fulfilment of the objectives of the NDM. They are currently in the process of developing more broadly a strategic monitoring framework to analyse systematically the contribution of each strategy and law to the objectives set in the two strategic documents. The NDM foresees the creation of a monitoring mechanism reporting to the King, which has not been implemented yet.
Palestinian Authority
The Palestinian Authority has developed an integrated general Strategic Results Framework to monitor progress towards achieving long-term development objectives laid out in the National Development Plan and in the new Government Programme that substituted it. Line ministries are asked to develop monitoring and reporting indicators aligned with the framework for sectoral strategies in order to build more coherence and ensure strategic alignment. However, it appears that while the framework allows for measuring outputs of different reform measures, it does not provide the progress toward expected improvements yet, making it difficult to assess the alignment with the National Development Plan’s and the Government Programme’s priorities.
Governments continue to face common challenges in effectively assessing this progress, including the lack of a clear link to high-level, outcomes-based performance indicators and to the SDGs in the M&E systems. MENA governments could thus develop more comprehensive M&E systems and structures to measure the progress and outcomes of key national, territorial, and sectoral strategies as part of advancing on long-term objectives. This could include developing a limited set of key performance indicators with intermediate targets to monitor and evaluate horizontal and sectoral strategies and policies with different time horizons, and ensure that they contribute to common objectives on the long-term.
Several OECD Member countries have implemented tools in this regard, such as Scotland and the United Kingdom (Box 2.13). These instruments can also be part of a broader government efforts to steer and focus government work on a limited number of priorities using a delivery unit approach, as presented later in the chapter.
Fully exploiting the potential of the digital tools and platforms that MENA governments use to monitor more effectively the achievement of long-term objectives – by using them for instance to promote and co-ordinate a more transparent and evidence-driven strategic planning process across the policy cycle – could advance and strengthen the coherent implementation of the reforms.
The National Performance Framework of Scotland
The National Performance Framework of Scotland sets National Outcomes that reflect the values and aspirations of the people of Scotland, which are aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and help track progress in reducing inequality. These outcomes include:
“We have a globally competitive, entrepreneurial, inclusive and sustainable economy”, in regard to the Scottish economy.
“We are healthy and active”, in regard to health.
“We respect, protect and fulfil human rights and live free from discrimination”, in regard to human rights.
Each National Outcome has a set of 81 outcome-level indicators updated on a regular basis to inform the government on how their administration is performing concerning the framework. A dashboard where citizens can access data on these indicators is available on the Scottish Government Equality Evidence Finder website.
The United Kingdom’s Outcome Delivery Plans
In an effort to improve planning and spending, the British government recently instituted regulations around strategy reporting, with the aim of better defining how planning and performance information is central to not only ensuring funding, but to demonstrating the long-term sustainable value of any money spent.
The new framework, known as Outcome Delivery Plans, or ODPs, was devised following the government’s yearlong Spending Review (SR) of its own internal programmes and initiatives. What resulted from the SR was a recognition that in order to better track spending and outcomes, it is critical to evaluate progress along the way.
The structure of the ODPs is meant to be informative both for the team itself as well as external actors.
At the highest level, the ODP requires a list of Priority Outcomes, each with their own set of metrics: Each UK government department has agreed priority outcomes which capture the government’s long-term policy objectives, from maximising employment and improving skills to achieving net zero by 2050. In areas where closer working relationships between departments would achieve better results, outcomes are agreed on a cross-cutting basis between departments.
The next level includes a number of sub-objectives that can be linked to each Priority Outcome and should indicate the key levers of change.
Finally, the last level includes a list of major activities, projects and programmes that can be connected to each sub-objective.
Outcome Delivery Plans are revised annually. They are linked to the Spending Review and the Budget processes, as part of the planning and performance framework, so that a department can show how it will use its resources (the funding set in its departmental settlement and any adjustments to spending plans made at fiscal events, such as the Budget) to work towards priority outcome delivery.
The development of data collection frameworks can support more informed and responsive policy development, monitoring and evaluation in the MENA region
Strengthening the collection and use of data is also crucial to inform the design and implementation of long-term visions and plans. Policymakers must have access to quality data in a timely manner and in a format that enables decision-makers to take the appropriate decisions for policy development and M&E. Data disaggregated by age, sex, geographical location, disability and other characteristics, as well as information and actionable advice from technical suppliers (such as strategic planning agencies, national statistics agencies and policy advisory bodies) can help take into account the reality of the issues at stake and the differentiated impact decisions and policies can have on different sections of the population (OECD, 2022[93]).
This way, decision-makers can adapt if data show that the results are not achieved properly through current policies. It is therefore important to generate substantive evidence databases as well as mechanisms to ensure that information from a variety of sources – data, evaluation, insights from stakeholders, civil society and citizens – is made accessible to inform policy design and development. It also includes ensuring that tools, methods and data for policy are accessible to policy professionals and effectively used by them in their day-to-day work, as highlighted in the OECD Recommendation on Enhancing Access to and Sharing of Data (2021[94]). Such efforts represent a key area of opportunity for MENA countries and territories, who suffer from limited quantity and quality of data in monitoring the implementation of national visions and strategies.
To further foster coherence in approaches to long-term development and ensure that cross-cutting issues remain central to their actions in rapidly evolving environments, governments could envisage pursuing their efforts in the following areas:
Strengthening the governance framework to steer and achieve the SDGs and national visions
Clarifying institutional structures and responsibilities of key entities involved in steering the national vision to facilitate the efficient identification and management of priorities, as well as the articulation, implementation and monitoring of strategic issues towards achieving long-term outcomes.
Clarifying the governance and mandates of co-ordination mechanisms across the government and reinforcing vertical co-ordination to ensure consistent and effective approaches and policies to deliver on long-term goals.
Strengthening the use of stakeholder engagement and citizen participation practices during strategic planning to better embed the diversity of perspectives.
Developing strategic tools and instruments to address long-term, complex priorities
Developing, strengthening and institutionalising a range of frameworks, tools and mechanisms as a driver to foster among others more effective strategic alignment between various policy instruments and long-term priorities and objectives, including strategic guidelines, mapping exercises and strategic foresight.
Establishing comprehensive frameworks and holistic approaches to risk management to address the complexities of multidimensional challenges, especially crises affecting long-term outcomes.
Developing more comprehensive monitoring and evaluation systems to measure the progress and outcomes of key strategies and proactively adjust plans and activities as part of advancing long-term sustainable growth objectives.
Institutionalising strategic public communication by producing government-wide communication strategies and plans with an over-arching whole-of-government vision.
References
[5] Arab Barometer (2022), Arab Barometer Wave VII, https://www.arabbarometer.org/surveys/arab-barometer-wave-vii/.
[58] Barasz, J. et al. (2022), Soutenabilités ! Orchestrer et planifier l’action publique, France Stratégie, Paris.
[73] Belhaj, F. and A. Soliman (2021), MENA Has a Food Security Problem, But There Are Ways to Address It, Wolrd Bank, https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/opinion/2021/09/24/mena-has-a-food-security-problem-but-there-are-ways-to-address-it (accessed on 2 December 2022).
[74] Cabinet of Egypt (2017), National Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction 2030 - Summary for Dissemination, Information and Decision Support Center - Crisis Management and DRR Secto.
[16] Commission Spéciale sur le Modèle de Développement (2021), Le Nouveau Modèle de Développement - Rapport général, Royaume du Maroc, https://www.csmd.ma/documents/Rapport_General.pdf.
[89] D. Brown, E. (2021), Tools at the Centre of Government: Research and Practitioners’ Insights, https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2021-09/Tools%20at%20the%20centre%20of%20government%20-%20Practitioners%27%20Insight%202021.pdf.
[66] Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (2020), Cabinet policy paper template, Government of New Zealand, https://dpmc.govt.nz/publications/cabinet-policy-paper-template (accessed on 4 November 2022).
[14] Egypt’s Presidency of Government (n.d.), Egypt 2030, https://www.presidency.eg/en/%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1/%D8%B1%D8%A4%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1-2030/ (accessed on 2024).
[52] ESCWA (2020), Situational Anlaysis of Women and Girls in the MENA and Arab States Region - A Decade Review 2010-2020, https://www.unescwa.org/sites/default/files/event/materials/Regional%20SitAn%20Women%20and%20Girls%20MENA%20-%20English.pdf.
[54] ESCWA (2019), Cultivating Resilient Institutions in the Arab Region - National Women’s Machineries in Challenging Times, ESCWA, https://archive.unescwa.org/sites/www.unescwa.org/files/publications/files/cultivating-resilient-institutions-national-women-machineries-english_1.pdf.
[12] ESCWA (n.d.), Arab National Development Planning Portal, https://andp.unescwa.org/ (accessed on 3 November 2022).
[70] European Climate Foundation (2021), The growing traction of climate citizens assemblies, https://europeanclimate.org/stories/the-growing-traction-of-climate-citizens-assemblies/ (accessed on 13 January 2023).
[49] France Stratégie (2022), Soutenabilités! Orchestrer et planifier l’action publique, https://www.strategie.gouv.fr/sites/strategie.gouv.fr/files/atoms/files/fs-2022-rapportsoutenabilites-.
[11] Göll, E., A. Uhl and J. Zwiers (2019), “Sustainable Development in the MENA Region”, Middle East and North Africa Regional Architecture: Mapping Geopolitical Shifts, regional Order and Domestic Transformations, No. 20, MENARA.
[38] Gouvernment of Algeria (2019), Algérie - Rapport National Volontaire 2019, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/23441MAE_rapport_2019_complet.pdf.
[28] Government of Lebanon (2018), Lebanon Voluntary National Review on Sustainable Development Goals, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/19624LebanonVNR2018.pdf.
[22] Government of Oman (n.d.), Oman Vision 2040, https://www.oman2040.om/oman2040?lang=en.
[10] Government of Slovenia (2017), Slovenian Development Strategy 2030, https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MKRR/Strategija-razvoja-Slovenije-2030/Slovenian-Development-Strategy-2030.pdf.
[29] Government of Syria (2020), The National Development Program for Post-War Syria, Syria Strategic Plan 2030, http://andp.unescwa.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/Syria_2020.pdf.
[19] Government of the United Arab Emirates (n.d.), We the UAE 2031, https://wetheuae.ae/ (accessed on 2024).
[48] Government of the United States of America (2023), Climate Policy Office, https://www.whitehouse.gov/cpo/ (accessed on 9 August 2023).
[44] Government Office of Estonia (2024), Official website, Tasks and Structures of the Government Office, https://www.riigikantselei.ee/asutus-uudised-ja-kontakt/organisatsioon/ulesanded-ja-struktuur#strateegiaburoo.
[37] Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (2018), Towards Saudi Arabia’s sustainable tomorrow, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/20230SDGs_English_Report972018_FINAL.pdf.
[20] Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (n.d.), Saudi Vision 2030, https://www.vision2030.gov.sa/en (accessed on 2024).
[46] LSE Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment (2022), Climate Change Laws of the World, https://www.climate-laws.org/geographies/united-arab-emirates/policies/national-climate-change-plan-2050 (accessed on 24 October 2022).
[39] Ministry of Planning and Economic Development of Egypt (2021), Egypt’s 2021 Voluntary National Review, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/279512021_VNR_Report_Egypt.pdf.
[41] Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation of Jordan (2022), Jordan - Voluntary National Review 2022, https://hlpf.un.org/sites/default/files/vnrs/2022/VNR%202022%20Jordan%20Report.pdf.
[79] Namdar, R., E. Karami and M. Keshavarz (2021), “Climate Change and Vulnerability: The Case of MENA Countries”, International Journal of Geo-Information, https://doi.org/10.3390/.
[82] Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (2022), “Towards an anticipatory innovation governance model in Finland”, OECD, https://doi.org/10.1787/a31e7a9a-en.
[55] OECD (2024), OECD Public Governance Reviews: Palestinian Authority: Strengthening Public Administration for Better Outcomes, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7425e72f-en.
[25] OECD (2024), Steering from the Centre of Government in Times of Complexity: Compendium of Practices, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/69b1f129-en.
[27] OECD (2023), Examens de l’OCDE sur la gouvernance publique : Maroc: Pour une administration résiliente au service des citoyens, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1a0272c0-fr.
[47] OECD (2023), Steering responses to climate change from the centre of government, https://www.oecd.org/gov/steering-responses-to-climate-change-from-the-centre-of-government-b95c8396-en.htm.
[26] OECD (2023), Survey on strategic decision making at the centre of government.
[1] OECD (2022), Building Trust and Reinforcing Democracy: Preparing the Ground for Government Action, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/76972a4a-en.
[91] OECD (2022), “First lessons from government evaluations of COVID-19 responses: A synthesis”, Tackling Coronavirus (COVID-19): Contributing to a global effort, OECD, https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/view/?ref=1125_1125436-7j5hea8nk4&title=First-lessons-from-government-evaluations-of-COVID-19-responses (accessed on 2 December 2022).
[72] OECD (2022), Governing Green: Gearing up government to deliver on climate and other environmental challenges.
[6] OECD (2022), Initial Scoping Background Note on Stronger Open Democracies in a Globalised World: Embracing the Global Responsibilities of Governments and Building Resilience to Foreign Influence, OECD.
[93] OECD (2022), OECD Informal Expert Group on Strategic Decision-making at the Centre of Government - Sessions Notes, OECD.
[67] OECD (2022), “OECD Workshop on Strategic Priority Setting at the Centre – key issue paper & sessions notes”, OECD, Paris.
[87] OECD (2022), Recommendation of the Council on Public Policy Evaluation, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/Instrument%20s/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0478.
[53] OECD (2022), Report on the Implementation of the OECD Gender Recommendations, https://one.oecd.org/document/C/MIN(2022)7/en/pdf.
[81] OECD (2022), Tackling Policy Challenges Through Public Sector Innovation: A Strategic Portfolio Approach, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/052b06b7-en.
[56] OECD (2022), Youth at the Centre of Government Action: A Review of the Middle East and North Africa, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/bcc2dd08-en.
[85] OECD (2021), Citizens’ Voice in Jordan: The Role of Public Communication and Media for a More Open Government, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/da85277c-en.
[88] OECD (2021), Monitoring and Evaluating the Strategic Plan of Nuevo León 2015-2030: Using Evidence to Achieve Sustainable Development, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8ba79961-en.
[83] OECD (2021), OECD Report on Public Communication: The Global Context and the Way Forward, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/22f8031c-en.
[94] OECD (2021), Recommendation of the Council on Enhancing Access to and Sharing of Data, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0463.
[57] OECD (2021), Renforcer l’autonomie et la confiance des jeunes au Maroc, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/588c5c07-fr.
[23] OECD (2020), Building resilience to the Covid-19 pandemic-the role of centres of government, https://doi.org/10.1787/883d2961-en (accessed on 15 December 2020).
[45] OECD (2020), Engaging Citizens in Jordan’s Local Government Needs Assessment Process, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c3bddbcb-en.
[42] OECD (2020), Governance for Youth, Trust and Intergenerational Justice: Fit for All Generations?, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c3e5cb8a-en.
[69] OECD (2020), Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/339306da-en.
[8] OECD (2020), Policy Framework on Sound Public Governance: Baseline Features of Governments that Work Well, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c03e01b3-en.
[59] OECD (2019), Governance as an SDG Accelerator : Country Experiences and Tools, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/0666b085-en.
[7] OECD (2019), Recommendation of the Council on Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development., https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0381 (accessed on 18 July 2022).
[80] OECD (2019), “Strategic Foresight for Better Policies: Building Effective Governance in the Face of Uncertain Futures”, OECD.
[84] OECD (2019), Voix citoyenne en Tunisie: Le rôle de la communication et des médias pour un gouvernement plus ouvert, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264306622-fr.
[24] OECD (2018), Centre Stage 2 The organisation and functions of the centre of government in OECD countries, OECD, Paris.
[78] OECD (2017), OECD Review of Risk Management Policies Morocco, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264276482-en.
[68] OECD (2017), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438.
[90] OECD (2015), Delivering from the Centre: Strengthening the role of the centre of government in driving priority strategies, https://www.oecd.org/gov/cog-2015-delivering-priority-strategies.pdf.
[43] OECD (2015), OECD Public Governance Reviews: Estonia and Finland: Fostering Strategic Capacity across Governments and Digital Services across Borders, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264229334-en.
[71] OECD (2014), Recommendation of the Council on the Governance of Critical Risks, https://www.oecd.org/gov/risk/Critical-Risks-Recommendation.pdf.
[9] OECD (n.d.), OECD Knowledge Platform on Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development, https://www.oecd.org/governance/pcsd/toolkit/ (accessed on 20 September 2022).
[21] OECD (n.d.), Public Governance Reviews: Egypt, OECD Publishing, Paris, forthcoming.
[86] OECD and Ministry of Economy, Finances and Administrative Reform of Morocco (n.d.), Guide de la Communication Publique.
[60] OECD SIGMA (2023), The Principles of Public Administration, OECD, https://www.sigmaweb.org/publications/Principles-of-Public-Administration-2023.pdf.
[61] OECD SIGMA (2019), Methodological Framework for the Principles of Public Administration, https://www.sigmaweb.org/publications/Methodological-Framework-for-the-Principles-of-Public-Administration-May-2019.pdf.
[63] OECD SIGMA (2019), Principes d’administration publique - Prestation des services adminsitratifs Maroc, https://www.sigmaweb.org/publications/Prestation-services-administratifs-Maroc-Juin-2019.pdf.
[64] OECD SIGMA (n.d.), Jordan and SIGMA, https://www.sigmaweb.org/countries/jordan-sigma.htm.
[62] OECD SIGMA (n.d.), Strategy Toolkit, https://www.sigmaweb.org/publications/strategy-toolkit.htm.
[18] Oman Vision 2040’s Implementation Follow-up Unit (n.d.), Pillars and Priorities, https://www.oman2040.om/pillars?lang=en (accessed on 2024).
[51] PM&C (2023), Climate change, energy, environment and adaptation, https://www.pmc.gov.au/domestic-policy/climate-change-energy-environment-and-adaptation.
[35] Prime Minister’s Office of the Palestinian Authority (n.d.), Public Policies 2021-2023, https://andp.unescwa.org/sites/default/files/2021-06/National%20Development%20Plan%202021-2023_English.pdf.
[13] Qatar’s Government Communications Office (n.d.), Qatar National Vision 2030, https://www.gco.gov.qa/en/about-qatar/national-vision2030/ (accessed on 2024).
[31] Republic of Iraq (2021), The Second National Voluntary Review - Report on the Achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/285062021_VNR_Report_Iraq_English.pdf.
[32] Republic of Iraq (n.d.), Iraq Vision 2030, https://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/sites/default/files/ressources/iraq_vision_2030_en.pdf.
[40] République Tunisienne (2021), Rapport National Volontaire sur la mise en oeuvre des Objectifs de Développement Durable en Tunisie, https://tunisia.un.org/sites/default/files/2021-09/VNR_Report_Tunisia%202021.pdf.
[76] République Tunisienne (2021), Stratégie nationale de réduction des risques de catastrophe à l’horizon 2030 et plan d‘action, Ministère de l’Environnement, http://www.environnement.gov.tn/images/fichiers/strategie_nationale_de_reduction_Finalise.pdf (accessed on 2 December 2022).
[75] Royaume du Maroc (n.d.), Portail national du programme de gestion intégrée des risques de catastrophes naturelles et de la résilience, https://www.gestionrisques.ma/programme-gestion-risques/vers-strategie-nationale.aspx (accessed on 2 December 2022).
[95] Saab, N. and A. Saduk (2016), Sustainable Development in a Changing Arab Climate. How Can Arab Countries Achieve Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, Arab Forum for Environment and Development, Beirut, http://www.idaea.csic.es/sites/default/files/Sustainable-development-in-a-changing-arab-climate-AFED.pdf (accessed on 3 November 2022).
[2] Sachs, J., G. Lafortune and G. Fuller (2024), The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future, Sustainable Development Report 2024, Paris: SDSN, Dublin: Dublin University Press, https://doi.org/10.25546/108572.
[65] Saiema (2009), Development Planning System Law, https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/175748-development-planning-system-law.
[92] Scottish Government (n.d.), National Performance Framework, https://nationalperformance.gov.scot/.
[33] State of Kuwait (2019), Kuwait Voluntary National Review 2019, https://www.undp.org/kuwait/publications/kuwait-voluntary-national-review-2019.
[36] State of Qatar (2018), Qatar 2nd National Voluntary Review on the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Agenda, 2030, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/191742nd_National_Voluntary_Review_EN_Draft_11_landscape.pdf.
[34] Sultanate of Oman, Supreme Council for Planning (2019), First Voluntary National Review of The Sultanate of Oman 2019, https://andp.unescwa.org/sites/default/files/2020-10/First%20Voluntary%20National%20Review%20of%20The%20Sultanate%20of%20Oman%202019.pdf.
[3] Sustainable Development Solutions Network (2024), The Arab Region SDG Index and Dashboards 2023/2024, https://www.arabsdgindex.com/static/downloads/files/S02_2023_SDG_index_and_Dashboard.pdf.
[50] The White House (2023), National Climate Task Force, https://www.whitehouse.gov/climate/ (accessed on 25 April 2023).
[17] U.AE (n.d.), UAE Centennial 2071, https://u.ae/en/about-the-uae/strategies-initiatives-and-awards/strategies-plans-and-visions/innovation-and-future-shaping/uae-centennial-2071 (accessed on 2024).
[15] U.AE (n.d.), UAE Future, https://u.ae/en/more/uae-future/2021-2030 (accessed on 2024).
[30] UAE National Committee on Sustainable Develpment Goals (2022), UAE and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development - Voluntary National Review 2022, http://hlpf.un.org/sites/default/files/vnrs/2022/VNR%202022%20UAE%20Report.pdf.
[77] Union Européenne (2019), Revue par les pairs Algérie, https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2020-03/peer_review_-_report_algeria_fr_final.pdf (accessed on 2 December 2022).
[4] World Bank (2024), Worldwide Governance Indicators, https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/worldwide-governance-indicators.
← 1. In the 2024 SDG Index Report, information is available for: Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, the UAE and Yemen (Sachs, Lafortune and Fuller, 2024[2]).
← 2. Examples of pre-SDGs national or sectoral strategic visions that include some sustainable development aspects include: Qatar’s National Vision 2030 (2009) and National Development Strategy 2011–2016; The United Arab Emirates’ National Agenda Vision 21; Jordan’s National Resilience Plan 2014–16 (2014) and Jordan 2025 Vision; Bahrain’s Vision 2030 (2007); Development Strategy of the New Tunisia (2012) and National Sustainable Development Strategy 2016–2020 (2014); Iraq’s National Development Plan 2010-2014 (2010); Algeria’s National Strategy for the Fight Against Poverty (2005–2015) and Five-Year Plan (2010–2014); Sudan’s Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (2012); Djibouti’s Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (2009); and Morocco’s National Sustainable Development Strategy (2015) (Saab and Saduk, 2016[95]).