Achieving SDG Results in Development Co-operation

2. Understanding and overcoming bottlenecks in SDG alignment

Adopting a global standard is always challenging, and this is the case as governments and development partners around the world attempt to integrate the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) framework into their policies and development programmes. Most have had to learn by doing as they conduct one of the most demanding transformations in two decades. We consider the SDG indicator framework, which was completed in its final form in 2020, to be a much better road map than anything adopted before for managing the global challenges of the current era.

Our research compares the experiences of seven countries – Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Kenya, Myanmar, Peru, Samoa and Uganda – and more than 65 development co-operation ministries and agencies. It has revealed various strategies to accelerate the integration of the SDG framework into international co‑operation practices.

Infographic 2.1. Why SDG adoption in development co-operation has been difficult

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on seven country case studies.

Delivering on the SDGs involves three key factors

Sustained political leadership is essential

Integrating the SDG framework into development co‑operation policies, budgets and monitoring systems requires sustained political leadership. Mainstreaming the SDGs adequately and comprehensively is a complicated task both technically and organisationally. It involves redefining objectives in line with the SDGs; establishing clear methodologies to achieve them; promoting cross-sector approaches with appropriate structures, systems, guidance and capacities; and strengthening monitoring systems. This transformation involves managing trade-offs with internal institutional dynamics, and requires a sound and coherent change management process. To overcome these obstacles over time, leadership must champion the transformation. Here are two positive examples:

All development partners in Bangladesh have followed the country’s leadership in SDG alignment globally. The country’s national plan and policies place the SDGs front and centre, driving line ministers and development partners to adopt them and guide policy and action with SDG results in focus.

The European Commission has made the SDGs a core focus of development co‑operation. Planning and monitoring of results are progressively focusing on SDGs in partner country programmes.

Collective efforts facilitate SDG alignment at country level

Many development organisations have adopted development co-operation practices that emphasise their own performance. Such practices, which result from both internal needs and external pressures, may lead organisations to focus on short-term deliverables and become risk averse. They also discourage the type of joint investment, collaboration across partners and joint monitoring that are essential for achieving long‑lasting SDG results. This phenomenon is true in all countries, but particularly in conflict-affected or fragile situations. In contrast, organisations that follow SDG alignment strategies and prioritise country ownership, partnerships, transparency and collective accountability around development results tend to maximise synergies, data availability and the impact of SDG-oriented investments. Two contrasting examples:

In Kenya, many development partners working in the energy sector pooled their investments to accelerate electrification across the country. The government and its partners relied on joint monitoring practices by using similar SDG indicators. SDG data now show that electricity access in Kenya surged from 18% to 75% in barely seven years.

In Uganda, public institutions and several development partners are stepping up co-ordination, data pooling and support to improve the availability, credibility and frequency of SDG data on governance matters associated with SDG 16. For example, administrative capacity to register newborns or to monitor service delivery quality are growing hand-in-hand with joint investments in SDG 16 data.

Results-based management systems enable SDG alignment

Many development partners are in the process of strengthening their results-based management. This change needs to be sustained, as a robust system is an essential enabler for SDG alignment and carries many benefits for both the organisation and its partners. Development partners with a well-established system and robust methodologies tend to be better aligned with the SDGs, and in a position to promote cross-sector approaches. They are also decentralised enough to allow for more flexible, context-sensitive approaches and adaptive management systems. This helps them support countries in SDG mainstreaming, maximise the work with other partners, and tailor their own policies and processes to rapid change and a diversity of country contexts.

Infographic 2.2. Good donorship principles to maximise SDG adoption

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on a comparative analysis of 50 development partners and seven country case studies.

Practical steps can enhance SDG alignment at country level

Corporate requirements act as a powerful driver in the use of SDG targets and indicators at the country level. Corporate results frameworks that integrate the SDGs also tend to provide guidance, which helps staff understand how to use the SDG framework. Examples show that the corporate requirement to report on SDG contributions can also be a lever to manage for SDG impact at country level – supporting and using country-owned SDG data and thereby facilitating partner country alignment to the SDGs. In any case, it is crucial to ensure that information on SDG results is incorporated into decision making at all levels.

Switzerland’s International Co-operation Strategy 2021-24 includes objectives and a menu of standard indicators aligned to the SDGs. Guidance helps field staff to align results frameworks with the strategy and the SDGs while adjusting to each context.

Adaptive management can foster SDG adoption. Adaptive practices allow development programmes to remain flexible during implementation, while keeping the focus on longer term SDG outcomes. Adaptive management also promotes iterative approaches that are well suited to address the complexity inherent to the SDGs and the three dimensions of sustainable development. In partner countries, managers have the authority and flexibility to tailor the management approach depending on the local context and adapt to evolving situations. They adjust the speed of SDG uptake to each reality and provide support for SDG adoption where needed.

In Peru, development partners that rely on adaptive management approaches tend to use the SDG framework more strategically. This results from lesser emphasis on short-term attributable results and a greater focus on policy influence and capacity building.

Synchronising planning with government cycles helps to mainstream the SDGs into national processes and reviews. Most development partners attempt to match project objectives with government policies and strategies. Several partners go beyond this step and synchronise the life cycle of their country strategy with the partner country’s government planning cycle. Practices for planning and monitoring can therefore be rooted in national systems and cycles. In addition to fostering SDG uptake, such alignment allows for more synergies at the budgetary and sectoral level. These partners engage more often in collaborative approaches to design, implement and monitor programmes at country level. Country planning synchronisation not only promotes local ownership, it also allows development partners to follow country efforts to use the SDG framework more closely and identify data gaps.

In Uganda, development partners that synchronise their strategies with the government planning cycle are particularly oriented towards maximising the use of official statistics and government data to report on development results, which creates a virtuous circle for investing in SDG monitoring capacity.

Infographic 2.3. Evidence from seven country case studies

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on a comparative analysis of seven country case studies.