Chapter 4. Partnerships for coherence
Drawing on external contributions from the Multi-stakeholder Partnership for Enhancing Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development (PCSD), which is facilitated by the OECD, this chapter highlights challenges, opportunities and experiences in putting policy coherence for sustainable development into practice. The chapter highlights the need for a more networked approach to assessing PCSD, presenting tools and analytical approaches developed by the members of the PCSD Partnership to ensure a more joined-up, transformational and coherent approach to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Emphasising the need to equip public servants and governments, stakeholders from civil society and the private sector with the skills and tools needed to enhance PCSD, the chapter introduces tools for improving human and institutional capacity to implement the SDGs in a coherent manner at all levels of government. Finally, it outlines the value of following a PCSD approach in implementing the SDGs through two specific case studies.
The opinions expressed and arguments employed in this chapter are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect official views of the OECD or of the governments of its member countries.
Introduction
Solving the immense challenges to sustainable development and achieving the SDGs requires a strong global partnership, epitomised by SDG17 on “strengthen[ing] the means of implementation and revitaliz[ing] the global partnership for sustainable development” (Agenda 2030, (UN, 2015[1])). To meet the demand for increased global collaboration, the OECD affirmed its commitment to partner with governments, international organisations, the private sector and civil society around the world to contribute to the 2030 Agenda by encouraging better and more coherent policies that can help deliver the SDGs (OECD, 2016[2]). As part of this endeavour, the OECD supported the launch of the Multi-stakeholder Partnership for Enhancing Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development (henceforth the PCSD Partnership). The PCSD Partnership is one of over 4000 partnerships registered on the United Nations’ online platform Partnerships for the SDGs.
The PCSD Partnership (www.oecd.org/gov/pcsd/thepcsdpartnership.htm) – established in May 2016 – brings together governments, international organisations, civil society, think-tanks, the private sector and other stakeholders from all regions of the world committed and working to enhance policy coherence for sustainable development as a key means of SDG implementation. Since its inception, the PCSD Partnership has developed into a global platform for knowledge exchange on PCSD; produced many innovative tools to enhance PCSD at national, regional and local level; and encouraged co-operation, collaboration and communication between the key actors in fostering coherent SDG implementation and analysis.
It is in the spirit of partnership needed to deliver on the 2030 Agenda, and on SDG target 17.14 on enhancing policy coherence for sustainable development in particular, that the OECD invited its partners to contribute to the 2019 edition of “Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development: Empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality”. Drawing on inputs from the PCSD Partnership, this chapter presents our partners’ experiences, as well as challenges and opportunities in putting policy coherence for sustainable development into practice.
The chapter highlights the need for a paradigm shift in policy making to meet the challenges of implementing the 2030 Agenda in a coherent manner. First, it illustrates why policy communities need to break out of working and thinking in policy and institutional silos and shift to a networked approach that includes a broader range of stakeholders in delivering on the 2030 Agenda than under previous development agendas. Second, it highlights different ways and tools to enhance, assess and monitor PCSD efforts, providing examples of available tools for a more integrated approach to SDG implementation. Third, it emphasises the importance of improving human and institutional capacity to develop more coherent and sustainable policies. In a fourth section, this chapter outlines our partners’ experience in supporting governments in strategically enhancing PCSD at national and regional level. And in a fifth and final section, the chapter highlights the importance of a PCSD approach in implementing the SDGs, providing two case studies on how policy coherence is essential in fighting illicit financial flows (SDG target 16.4) and recognising the contribution of the cultural and creative industries for sustainable development (SDG target 4.7).
Beyond “research as usual”: A networked approach to assessing Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development
Karin Fernando, Niels Keijzer, James Mackie, Andrea Ordóñez, Martin Ronceray, Fabien Tondel
This contribution highlights an initiative of a consortium of think tanks from Europe and the Global South that work together to promote policy coherence and developing analytical and methodological approaches to analyse, advocate, monitor and evaluate policy coherence in the context of the 2030 Agenda. It emphasises that the implementation of the 2030 Agenda requires a new, networked approach to assessing PCSD, and tools that help decision-makers think and break out of the traditional policy silos, examples of which are presented throughout this chapter.
The European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM) (2019[3]) is a “think and do tank” whose main goal is to link policy and practice in European development and international co-operation. It aims at identifying best practices and tools for policy-makers and researchers in the context of PCD-PCSD. Southern Voice (2019[4]) is a network of 49 thinks tanks from Africa, Asia and Latin America, launched in 2012, to serve as an open platform to contribute to the global discourse pertaining to the formation of the post 2015 agenda (known as the ‘2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’). The German Development Institute/Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (GDI/DIE) (2019[5]) is one of the leading research institutions and think tanks for global development and international development policy worldwide. It advises governments and international organisations, develops policy concepts and conducts research on SDG and PCSD implementation.
New global development agenda, new policy management challenges…
By adopting the 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals, in September 2015, the international community acknowledged that continuing “business as usual” would put global sustainable development prospects in jeopardy. As a result, the new agenda not only includes a host of new thematic goals and targets, being broader both in terms of scope and actors concerned, but also calls for transformative change in how policy decisions are made, implemented and evaluated. Among other implications, this agenda requires different policy communities to become more aware of how their actions influence those of others, and to seek more joined-up decision-making so as to collectively advance global sustainable development.
Promoting policy coherence has come of age with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The idea that public policies in different sectors should not undermine each other, but rather work in synergy as much as possible in the pursuit of a complex set of sustainable development objectives, has become common sense. For the first time this is explicitly recognised at the multilateral level as a vital element of the toolbox for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Goal 17, target 14, thus stresses the importance of ‘policy coherence for sustainable development’ (PCSD) as a principal means of implementation.
Although the notion of policy coherence seems straightforward and its pursuit intuitively desirable, it has been difficult to put it into practice, let alone achieve measurable results. Policymakers and public administrations often operate in “silos” with little incentive for inter-sectoral coordination, and with cognitive, organisational and political barriers separating them. If at the same time governments have to mitigate spill-over effects of their policies on least developed countries and vulnerable populations (policy coherence for development, PCD) and ensure their consistency with “planetary boundaries” (to prevent further loss of biodiversity, desertification, climate change and disruption of natural cycles), the challenge is even more daunting.
Discussions on furthering the 2030 Agenda frequently acknowledge the need to go beyond ‘business as usual’ in terms of established approaches to formulating, implementing and evaluating policies. The changes required include greater attention to inclusiveness, long-term considerations as well as embracing multi-stakeholder approaches. We argue that, in order to best support and inform a transformative agenda, researchers equally need to adapt their approaches and go beyond ‘research as usual’. Against this backdrop, a consortium of think tanks from Europe and the Global South have joined forces to better understand why and how policymakers in different countries are promoting mutually supportive policies to pursue sustainable development objectives. The consortium consists of the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM), Southern Voice, and the Deutsche Institut für Entwicklungspolitk / German Development Institute (DIE).
…and new challenges for research
As a preparatory step, this initiative began with an identification of problems and the elaboration of a research methodology through a workshop in Maastricht, the Netherlands, in September 2018, which convened researchers from several think tanks. Participants pooled their knowledge, examined policy-making experiences and drew up conceptual as well as methodological orientations for further research. They also explored potential case studies to take this research project forward. Discussions during the workshop on the state of play converged towards a number of observations and lessons learned.
The notion of PCSD is considerably more complex to conceptualise than that of PCD. Whereas PCD is unidirectional—policies of developed countries should not undermine, or should promote, the attainment of development objectives in developing countries, PCSD is multidirectional and puts more emphasis on interlinkages between socio-economic objectives and environmental sustainability. PCSD is intended to enable a deep transformation of economic and social systems, to put countries and the world on an environmentally sustainable path while not leaving anyone behind (economic inequalities have generally decreased between countries, but they have increased within countries).
Yet, while on the one hand PCSD entails a more holistic, or integrated, approach to policy-making, to simultaneously pursue economic, social and environmental goals, and to deal with growing interlinkages among countries and sectors, on the other hand a lack of focus would probably hinder progress. Experiences with PCD also suggest that beyond temporary political commitments, PCSD will require sustained efforts, including in-depth analyses and robust institutional mechanisms.
These challenges call for further clarification of the concept of PCSD as well as the development of practical tools for analysing policy coherence, reconciling diverging policy processes, and monitoring and assessing PCSD. Concept and tools should help various actors in translating the principle of PCSD into better management of policies across areas, at different stages of processes, and through changing circumstances –including in response to shocks.
Experiences with PCD, as well as current debates on thorny issues such as, for example, fossil fuel subsidies and taxes, in both North and South, indicate that addressing the “politics” of policy incoherencies ought to be an essential element of the PCSD approach. That will require better taking into account and drawing implications from the interests and incentives of various domestic and international actors that may oppose reforms intended to achieve greater policy coherence in specific sectors.
Quadrants of policy coherence
As a starting point, the consortium’s researchers at the Maastricht workshop discussed the conceptual groundwork of the project. They agreed on understanding PCSD as suggested by Southern Voice’s Debapriya Bhattacharya: “the perusal of policies and actions involving different stakeholders (government and non-governmental actors, agencies and institutions) at various levels (local, national, regional and global) to achieve development objectives by domain (area, sector, goal and target) and minimise conflicts affecting the utilisation of synergies generated in the process.”
This definition notably integrates the agency of governments and other actors (‘actions’) in socio-economic processes and governance systems. For instance, many business actors purport to integrate the SDGs in their corporate identity and business models, and engage in international multi-stakeholder initiatives. The definition also recognises the dynamic nature of policy processes, in which actors respond adaptively to the effects of policies and the actions of others. Over time, actors accrue information and deal with contradictions among different policies, government measures and private actors’ actions.
Furthermore, it was proposed to more clearly distinguish different dimensions of policy coherence, beyond domestic policy coherence and North-to-South PCD, which can be seen as particular cases of a broader notion of policy coherence. From the perspective of any given country, four quadrants of policy coherence can be distinguished (Figure 4.1).
The bottom-right and top-right Quadrants are of particular interest because little research has been conducted on issues pertaining to these policy coherence ‘channels’. The International-National Quadrant, for example, refers to the actions taken by a government to adapt to international dynamic scenarios through its own policies, acknowledging the agency of governments to adapt to international conditions. The case of PCD, in the top-left Quadrant, relating to the traditional notion of international development, remains relevant given prevailing economic and political asymmetries in the world. However, in this conceptual framework, the National-International Quadrant also encompasses South-South policy interlinkages, and not just the traditional linkages of North-South PCD.
A consortium of think tanks from Europe and the Global South working together
While PCD was a mainly OECD-promoted approach to development-oriented policy-making, a much broader range of actors are engaging in the promotion of PCSD, particularly stakeholders in the South. At the same time, the 2030 Agenda makes it imperative to ‘leave no one behind’, which calls for more disaggregated assessments of PCSD. With these considerations in mind, the Maastricht workshop gave researchers from the North and the South, from different backgrounds, shared varied experiences with promoting policy coherence as well as methodological approaches to either analyse, advocate, monitor or evaluate policy coherence in the context of the 2030 Agenda.
Source: Authors’ elaboration.
On that basis, the network established at the workshop is now pursuing research to collect evidence about drivers of policy coherence and implementation arrangements in different contexts, as these could provide indications of realistic reforms, measures and ways to engage in policy dialogues that would be favourable to sustainable development, with particular attention paid to trade-offs concerning vulnerable populations. The aim is to deliver insights to policymakers as well as non-state actors at different levels, including in country-level debates and international fora such as the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development.
The researchers are first engaging in a review of evidence on PCSD in both North and South, and an analysis of contextual dynamics as regards the management of policy coherence. This analysis will serve to elaborate an analytical framework and accompanying hypotheses that will then be followed by case studies focusing on specific countries and thematic areas. The network partners consider a joint and iterative approach to be crucial to advance knowledge on PCSD and contribute to a transformational approach.
Tools for a more networked, transformational and coherent approach in implementing the SDGs
While countries have recognised that policy coherence for sustainable development is essential for SDG implementation and ensuring a more networked and transformational approach to policy making, many governments struggle to put PCSD into practice. Our partners from the PCSD Partnership have developed a number of analytical and technical tools to foster more coherent policies for sustainable development. The following section highlights three tools that have been developed to enhance PCSD, including a model for cross-impact and network analysis to better understand the systemic effects from progressing on the various SDGs; an integrated model for assessing probable performance in SDG implementation by 2030; and an index ranking countries on the conceivable impacts of their policies on sustainable development beyond their borders.
Conducting a cross-impact- and network analysis to better understand the systemic effects from progressing on the various SDGs
Nina Weitz, Stockholm Environment Institute
In this contribution, the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) (2019[6]) presents a semi-quantitative method that helps government and stakeholders better understand the interlinkages between SDG targets across the 2030 Agenda. It informs decision-makers on trade-offs from progressing on the various targets, synergistic action that best support achievement of the SDGs and supports more robust and effective priority-setting and collaborative arrangements.
SEI is an international non-profit research organisation that has worked with environment and development issues from local to global policy levels for a quarter of a century. SEI works to shift policy and practice towards sustainability. Its semi-quantative method analyses expert input on target interactions to better understand the direct, indirect and systemic effects from progressing on the various SDGs.
The Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) has developed a semi-quantitative method that systematically captures expert knowledge on target interactions and analyzes these inputs with cross-impact- and network analysis to better understand the direct, indirect and systemic effects from progressing on the various SDGs. The objective is to support decision and policy makers with a stake in SDG implementation to gain a systemic overview of what progress on all the goals mean in terms of trade-offs and synergies, and provide guidance on where to focus action and how to organise implementation in ways that best support goal achievement (Weitz et al., 2017[7]).
Governments have to prioritise their actions for delivering on the 2030 Agenda because their resources are limited, at the same time as they seek to meet the ambition of treating the SDGs as an indivisible whole. Because targets interact in both positive and negative ways, the best way to achieve a set of prioritised targets or maximise progress across all SDGs, is not necessarily by focusing actions directly towards them, as they might restrict each other, or because progressing on other targets might promote several of them. The method – supported by a web-based tool that facilitates the scoring of target interactions – is suited to:
-
Capture existing expert knowledge in a systematic and transparent way.
-
Based on this knowledge, provide a better understanding of how the different SDG targets fit together by flagging up critical trade-offs and synergies.
-
With these insights, help identify actions that best lead to achievement of the SDGs, e.g. identify targets that support many other targets and targets that trigger positive ripple effects, or show where additional support is needed to progress on a target because it is constrained by other targets.
Ongoing pilot studies in Colombia and Sri Lanka suggest that the method is useful for gaining an overview of how SDG targets fit together, of the challenges and opportunities in implementation posed by target interactions, and how specific policy areas relate to the whole. For example, the results show the share of neutral, promoting and restricting interactions between the targets. Targets that give a lot of support might be given higher policy priority as they have the potential to contribute to positive change on many other targets. So might those that receive little support from other targets and will need an extra push. Targets that make it more difficult to progress in many other targets may merit attention in how they are implemented, to minimise negative impacts on other targets.
Beyond the analytical outputs, the pilot studies suggest that there is value in the cross-sectoral dialogues, which are facilitated to assess target interactions. Bringing together stakeholders with different perspectives and providing them with a common language about SDG interactions, enhances understanding of the perspective of others and helps to build consensus. This can help further down the line when formulating policy to mitigate trade-offs by having more aligned views and generating a stronger sense of ownership of decisions.
Applying the Integrated Sustainable Development Goal (iSDG) Model
Steve Arquitt, Millennium Institute
This contribution presents a tool developed by the Millennium Institute to assess the likely SDG performance of a country by 2030, including lessons learned from using the tool to enhance policy coherence for sustainable development on the ground.
The Millennium Institute (MI) (2019[8]) is a non-profit and non-governmental development research organisation. MI works collaboratively with governments and other stakeholders to develop system dynamic models that incorporate relations among the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of sustainable development in order to support comprehensive and integrated long term analyses of development challenges such as poverty reduction, climate change, and peace-building in post-conflict regions.
The Integrated Sustainable Development Goal (iSDG) modeling framework has been and is being applied at national scale in six Sub-Saharan African countries. The iSDG is also being applied at the regional scale for the Sahel, embracing ten countries. The applications emphasise the effective incorporation of the SDGs into developing national and regional plans. By simulating the performance of current national or regional plans, an assessment is made of the likely SDG performance at year 2030. Further rounds of simulations are then performed, with stakeholder participation, to discover combinations of investments to improve SDG performance and coherence (Collste, Pedercini and Cornell, 2017[9]), and to identify synergies for economic efficiency (Pedercini et al., 2018[10]). For both national and regional iSDG projects, an in-country modeling team is assembled and provided with extensive training in systems thinking, system dynamics modeling and iSDG modeling. Meetings are held to learn stakeholder perspectives and priorities, which then inform the customisation of the country or regional iSDG tool.
Lessons learned: We have learned that training is central to success in using the tool. A solid foundation in modeling principles and methods promotes ownership and allows users to actively participate in model use and development. This also increases the likelihood of sustainable use of the tool in future years. Institutionalisation is another prime factor in the effectiveness of the tool. Ideally, the tool is under the mandate of a cross-cutting institution, e.g., a central department of planning, and is used by a trained team of members of different ministries, academia, and civil society.
Geographical applicability: Incorporation of the SDGs into national or regional planning is an on-going challenge faced by all countries and regions. To date the iSDG tool has been implemented primarily in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, the tool is readily applicable to any geographic region and to countries or regions of any degree of economic development.
Key constraints: Knowledge in systems thinking and modeling is not common in any region, however it is critically important for effective long-term planning within a complex system such as the SDGs. For this reason, all iSDG projects involve intensive training in systems thinking and modeling.
Scope for improvement: The iSDG is continually improved through lessons learned during in-country projects. In particular, we are working to make the iSDG applicable at provincial or urban scale, in terms of both process between model and users, and in technical details of the iSDG tool.
Using the Commitment for Development Index as a tool for policy coherence
Caitlin McKee, Center for Global Development
The Center for Global Development (CGD) (2019[11]) has developed an index that proposes a ranking of countries according to their commitment and actions to fostering sustainable development abroad. The methodology of the index and CGD’s experience in using it is outlined below.
The Center for Global Development (CGD) is an independent think tank that works to reduce global poverty and inequality through rigorous research and active engagement with the policy community to make the world a more prosperous, just, and safe place for all. It has been particularly engaged in looking at transboundary impacts and stimulating discussion through comparative analyses of countries’ policy effort to promote sustainable development beyond their borders.
The Center for Global Development’s Commitment to Development Index (CDI) (2019[12]) ranks 27 of the world’s richest countries on their relative policy effort to promote development. In line with the 2030 Agenda, the CDI covers the three dimensions of economic, social, and environmental sustainability with quantitative indicators in seven areas: aid, finance, technology, environment, security, trade, and migration. The emphasis is on each country’s policies rather than outcomes and how these policies contribute to or hinder other countries’ development.
The specific indicators to track progress on the SDGs are mostly concerned with each country’s domestic performance to promote sustainable development within its own borders. The CDI complements SDG reporting because it is specifically focused on transboundary effects of policies formulated in the most advanced economies. The CDI is concerned with the sum of the impacts of a country's policies and penalises for policies that are bad for development. The overall question the CDI seeks to answer is how coherent are a country’s policies with promoting development beyond its borders?
The CDI is used as a conversation starter to promote discussions on how to improve policies’ positive impact on development. It is particularly useful for stimulating coordination among government ministries and between government and civil society actors. The 2018 CDI featured in over 180 media outlets in 18 countries in various languages. It was seen by an estimated 1.85 million readers online and shared more than 8,200 times on social media. Publishing rankings and receiving coverage in the media can be helpful for drawing attention to policymakers and for triggering civil society involvement.
The CDI is both a tool and a framework. As a framework, it can be used to inform broader thinking on development issues and policy coherence, and to advocate for a concerted development effort beyond aid. As a tool, it is widely used to brief politicians and other ministries in country, track performance against other countries, and identify areas for (politically feasible) progress. It has been used to highlight specific areas for improvement such as arms export data publication and acceptance of international students from poor countries. Some examples of tactics to engage across government include using the CDI as a reference point in annual reporting on policy coherence and cross-government coordination meetings on policy themes.
After publishing annually since 2003, the CDI is undergoing a review process to take into account new evidence, data sources, and methodological improvements in the face of new global challenges and shifts in the involvement and approaches of development partners. Notably, emerging economies have become increasingly active in development co-operation efforts. To take into account their growing global influence, a revised CDI will aim to expand country coverage to include many of the G20 countries, which will open opportunities for increased engagement and dialog with those countries and offer more examples to learn from in achieving PCSD. Comparing countries reporting of SDG 17.14 with results of the CDI could be a useful way to learn about how mechanisms in place to promote PCSD yield better policies for development.
Tools for improving human and institutional capacity to implement the SDGs
To implement the 2030 Agenda successfully, effectively and coherently, governments need to break out of policy and institutional silos and create ownership across all of government and all of society (OECD, 2018[13]). One of the main challenges facing governments in enhancing PCSD is the lack of administrative and institutional capacity. Reporting, monitoring and assessing progress on PCSD and SDG implementation requires government officials, ministries and agencies to communicate, co-operate and collaborate closely both between themselves as well as with non-governmental actors. Such collaboration necessitates transparent, open and proactive institutions and personnel trained in working and thinking outside of traditional policy and institutional silos for the common goal of achieving the SDGs by 2030.
Improving human and institutional capacity on policy coherence for sustainable development is essential for governments to be able to reach their aspirations by fostering joint action across all of government as well as between government, the private sector and civil society in SDG implementation. Engaging a broader scope of policy communities can help identify critical policy interlinkages, manage potential trade-offs and promote synergies, but requires appropriate institutional mechanisms and staff training.
To increase capacities to identify, understand and manage interactions and interconnections among SDGs, our partners have developed innovative tools that are presented in the following section, including an international online course on PCSD, targeted capacity building missions on integrated planning for climate and SDG priorities, as well as voluntary peer education and local engagement.
Facilitating catalytic learning on PCSD through an international online course
Paramita Dutta and Simona Constanzo Sow, United Nations System Staff College
In 2018, UNSSC developed an international online course on Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development, contributing to the achievement of SDG target 4.7 on “ensur[ing] that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development” (2030 Agenda, (UN, 2015[1])). This article describes UNSSC’s methodology and experience in developing and delivering the online course.
The United Nations System Staff College (UNSSC) (2019[14]) is the primary provider of interagency training and learning for staff of the United Nations system. UNSSC’s Knowledge Centre for Sustainable Development (2019[15]), based in Bonn (Germany), specialises among others in facilitating catalytic learning designed to build the competencies and skills of UN staff, civil servants and other stakeholders, enabling them to implement the 2030 Agenda at the national level.
The UN System Staff College delivers an engaging five weeks’ online course designed to equip participants with a sound understanding of the vision and principles underlying the 2030 Agenda and to explain why policy coherence is important for achieving sustainable development. The course emphasises what coherent policy-making entails, and presents specific tools, mechanisms and approaches that can be employed to foster policy coherence in different country contexts.
The facilitated online course, delivered in the third quarter of 2018 for the first time, is specifically tailored to the needs of professionals interested in developing skills to advance their career through deepening their knowledge on PCSD. The course combines self-paced study modules with applied learning components such as case studies, interactive exercises and collaborative group work. It explores approaches to cross-organisational and cross-sectoral policy coherence on the national, regional and international levels. Participants benefit from live moderated webinars, which feature valuable inputs from renowned subject matter experts, and allow real-time dialogue with high-level speakers. Webinar recordings are also made available to ensure that participants have a flexible and seamless learning experience.
The 2018 edition of the course was attended by around 70 participants consisting of development practitioners from the UN System, governments, non-governmental organisations, the private sector, civil society and academia. In the course evaluation conducted by UNSSC, participants have provided positive feedback about the knowledge they have acquired through the course. In terms of specific actions that participants plan to take as a result of the learnings from the course, a participant has indicated in the evaluation survey that she intends to use her learnings to brief the UNDAF Outcome Groups in charge of joint programming formulation in their country. Another participant intends to propose a capacity building activity at the local government level in his city to start a conversation about PCSD with the leadership in the city government (governor and head of cabinets). A participant from Aruba explained how PCSD can enhance the development of the national strategic plan-“In Aruba we are at this moment in the process of preparing the national strategic plan using the SDGs and trough a participatory process with stakeholders in the public, private sector, NGO's CSOs, citizens and our international partners such as the UNDP. So this course gave me additional knowledge especially on the part of the much needed policy coherence efforts that we need for the NSP and the partnerships needed.”
The first edition of the course managed to reach out to policy experts at local, regional and international level. The multiplier effect that the course participants create has a considerable scope to penetrate the concept of policy coherence for sustainable development to all levels of the governance process. The UNSSC remains committed to finding measures that would ensure maximum outreach and capacity development in the area of policy coherence for sustainable development. In the longer term, UNSSC is looking into ways to offer the course free.
Building capacity for integrated planning in setting climate and SDG priorities
Mathilde Bouyé, World Resources Institute
To achieve a shift to more sustainable policies and decision-making processes, The World Resources Institute has helped improve the human and institutional capacity of numerous governments through support in analysing impacts, integrated planning and capacity building. Its experience promoting PCSD is outlined below.
The World Resources Institute (WRI) is a global research organisation that turns big ideas into action at the nexus of environment, economic opportunity and human well-being. WRI engages with governments, companies, and civil society to build transformative solutions to urgent sustainable development challenges. WRI measures success in the form of new policies, products, and practices that shift the ways governments work, companies operate, and people act.
The World Resources Institute’s project on Climate-SDG synergies provides policy makers with knowledge, data, good practices and recommendations to advance the Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in joint and coherent manner. In 2018, WRI released with GIZ a report that draws on country experiences to highlight key elements to join up implementation of the two agendas and achieve greater policy coherence and effectiveness through more integrated approach to their institutional arrangements, policy, finance, monitoring and reporting frameworks. The next phase of this research project explores how countries can reconcile the imperative to scale up climate action and the imperative to leave no one behind in an equitable and just transition, which is central to the 2030 Agenda.
WRI has also supported members of the NDC Partnership to adopt integrated planning approach in setting their climate and SDG priorities, mainstreaming both agendas in development plans and monitoring this policy alignment.
-
WRI assisted the Kenya’s climate change department in carrying out an impact assessment of proposed climate actions for the National Climate Change Action Plan (2018-2022) on national priorities for the SDG implementation and the pledge to leave no one behind. WRI tailored ICAT guidance for sustainable development impact assessment to prioritise SDGs in order to produce an SDG impact assessment grid tool. This analysis developed with climate and SDG focal points from all relevant line ministries contributed to strengthen both vertical and horizontal coherence. It helped build understanding of potential synergies and trade-offs among sector climate actions and other sustainable development priorities and led to further mainstreaming gender equality and measures benefiting the least well off throughout the plan.
-
In Uganda, WRI has supported the National Planning Authority and the Climate Change Department to take into account alignment with the NDC and the SDGs in the assessment of the compliance of annual budget goals and expenditures with the national development plan. WRI also assists the government in aligning the performance and result framework of the national development plan 2018-22 with the indicator frameworks of the NDC, the SDG and green growth strategy.
-
In Mali, WRI helps the government provide sector ministries and local authorities with guidance to jointly embed climate and sustainable development goals into their policies and projects through an integrated planning approach. WRI also designs and road-tests a “toolbox” to align local socioeconomic and cultural development plan (called “PDESC” in French) with NDC climate actions and priority SDGs. This toolbox has four components, including a background note on Mali’s national and local-level of climate and sustainable development agendas; a list of locally-relevant SDG and climate targets that highlights their linkages; a guide to use a sustainable development analysis grid, which is tailored to Mali’s priorities; and “challenges-solutions” sheets that share good sustainable development practices of Malian local authorities to address common challenges.
Fostering a whole-of-society approach through voluntary peer education
Buğra Avcı, Habitat Association
In this contribution, Habitat Association outlines its experience in fostering local engagement and leveraging its voluntary peer education model in enhancing PCSD at the local and national level.
The main objective of Habitat Association (2019[16]), a civil society organisation based in Turkey, is to contribute to sustainable development by developing projects that support capacity improvement and enable disadvantaged groups, especially young people, gain access to decision making processes. Habitat is engaged in a wide range of activities relevant for sustainable development, organising national capacity building summits, training trainers, and preparing policy proposals on more inclusive decision-making processes.
As a tool for integrating sustainable development and the SDGs into national and local implementation strategies; Habitat Association has developed an approach based on voluntary peer education to contribute to the achievement of diverse SDGs at local and national level.
The voluntary peer education model comprises the following steps:
-
Announcement of the trainings of trainers and facilitators.
-
Collecting the applications of trainers/facilitators for trainings.
-
Assessment of the applications.
-
Realising the training of trainers and facilitators (4 – 7 days).
-
Local implementations – local trainings held by volunteer trainers.
-
Coordination meetings / National summits for policy coherence and capacity development.
To intregrate the SDGs into local and national levels through a bottom-up and whole-of-society approach; it is important to meet with the needs, wants and requirements of the local level. To facilitate local engagement, it is essential to interact with representatives, citizens and stakeholders at the local level. Through voluntary peer education at the local level the volunteers feel more comfortable and motivated and mobilise their local networks to contribute to the achievement of the SDGs. The local best practices are collected, implemented and shared by the volunteers, including at country level through national summits for policy coherence. Furthermore, giving initiative to the volunteers and supporting them is increasing the motivation of them to contribute the SDGs with their local implementations. Providing the volunteers with targeted training and capacity development is increasing the quality and sustainability of their projects and interventions
Experience shows, that it is important to find specific motivation for potential volunteers. In Turkey, joining a social environment, networking and personal development are attracting the attention of the volunteers. Volunteers are motivated for their volunteering period because the volunteering enables them to develop on a personal and professional level. If these elements of motivation are found by other organisations in different countries the model can be implemented easily to foster local engagement, policy coherence and more effective SDG implementation.
Building multi-sectoral partnerships facilitates the development of an inclusive approach and increases the sustainability of the effects of the projects. The model can help in enhancing collaboration between volunteers through sharing best practices and foster stronger co-operation between non-governmental organisations at local, regional and national level.
Some of the projects are hampered by a limitation of available financial resources, and the absence of an organised organisational memory that enables civil society organisations to get the necessary support and contribution. Ensuring functioning communication between the public sector, private sector and non-governmental organisations has been shown to be one of the most important elements of successful local implementation. This is particularly useful where organisations have long-term partnerships and good relations with the project owner and other key stakeholders, in order to facilitate the exchange of knowledge and experiences and the expansion of partnerships to new members and major organisations and foster a common understanding of SDG implementation.
Tools for supporting governments in enhancing PCSD at national and regional level
More and more governments begin to recognise that putting PCSD into practice is a formidable challenge that requires a new approach to policy making, as well as inter-institutional, cross-sectoral and cross-actor co-operation. This idea has been at the heart of the PCSD Partnership, and the exchange of knowledge and experiences in implementing PCSD has enabled cross-fertilisation of ideas and approaches. Governments at all levels have benefitted from the active engagement of academia, civil society and other relevant stakeholders in promoting PCSD and developing tools to enhance policy coherence for sustainable development. The following sections will highlight our partners’ efforts in supporting governments at national and regional level in implementing PCSD, highlighting related opportunities and challenges both for governments as well as civil society.
Spain – Enhancing PCSD at the regional level: The case of Catalonia
Javier Perez, Centro de Investigación y Estudios sobre Coherencia y Desarrollo
This contribution describes the Centro de Investigación y Estudios sobre Coherencia y Desarollo’s experience in supporting the regional Government of Catalonia (the Generalitat) in Spain and their experience in advising them on the development of its first-ever PCSD action plan, concretely in the elaboration of an introductory PC(S)D Guide for Public Officers and the capacity building with all their Departments.
The Centro de Investigación y Estudios sobre Coherencia y Desarrollo (CIECODE) (2019[17]) is a Spanish development think-tank based in Madrid and specialised in the analysis of public policies' impact on development from the perspective of Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development. For the last six years, CIECODE has been developing PCSD related research and advocacy and promoted PCSD at regional, national and international level, working closely to the Spanish Administration.
The experience accumulated by public administrations around the world during the last decades shows that one of the main obstacles when implementing the Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development (PCSD) principle is the lack of understanding of the concept itself and of its implications, not only by public officials but also by national parliaments and citizens in general.
The regional Government of Catalonia committed to PCSD and aware of this obstacle, decided to draw up an action plan to raise awareness and improve the understanding of the PCSD principle among all its Departments and the public officials in charge of designing, planning and evaluating the impact of public policies in particular.
To achieve this, the Directorate General of Development Cooperation from the Generalitat and the Catalan Agency for Development Cooperation contracted CIECODE to design, coordinate and execute a series of training sessions throughout 2018. This collaboration resulted in the elaboration of an introductory guide to PCSD adapted to the Catalonian context and the celebration of three workshops with the participation of officials from all the Generalitat’s departments.
The guide, titled “Introducing Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development to the Generalitat of Catalonia”, was launched during the training sessions at the end of 2018. The document starts with a theoretical introduction to the concept of PCSD, including references to the legal and political framework and establishes a practical approach to PCSD implementation, with concrete examples of the diverse possibilities to include the PCSD framework in specific policy areas. It focuses the political priorities of the Generalitat including the private sector, energy and climate, migration and education.
The three training sessions were carried out in a workshop format in three consecutive days at the end of November 2018. Almost 90 civil servants from 13 different Departments of the Generalitat participated; divided into three thematic groups (Migration, Green Growth and Private Sector) according to the areas that are most relevant to their work. The feedback after the sessions was very positive, with 90% of the participants considering that the topics covered were relevant to their work and could be applied in their day-to-day tasks, as well as the general sustainable development objectives of the Generalitat.
The training sessions coincided with the elaboration process of the new Catalonian Master Plan for Cooperation (2019-2022). The debates and reflections elicited by the sessions are contributing to the inclusion of the PCSD principle in the Master Plan and to the inclusion of concrete compromises (related to the areas of responsible public procurement and of responsible internationalisation of companies). In addition, the training sessions have spurred the different Departments to identify critical areas where the PCSD principle can be implemented.
Finally, the collaboration between the Generalitat and CIECODE revealed the opportunity of bringing together and reinforcing the processes of promoting the PCSD approach and the 2030 Agenda; the need to establish a road map with specific PCSD actions and deadlines; and the necessity of continued training and shared spaces for reflection on PCSD for public servants.
Ecuador – Promoting greater policy coherence in SDG implementation
Daniel Vicente, Center for Public Policy Development, ESPOL Polytechnic University
This contribution describes how the work of the Center for Public Development of the ESPOL Policytechnic University has contributed to greater policy coherence in SDG implementation in Ecuador.
The Center for Public Diplomacy of the ESPOL Polytechnic University (2019[18])/Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral (ESPOL) is a non-partisan institutional organism of the ESPOL working on technical and academic issues in the development of public policies. Its programmes, rooted in academic rigor and ethical integrity and other core values of ESPOL, strengthen and guarantee its commitment to social involvement and professional excellence. The Center seeks to be a leader and a reference in the consultancy for the development of public policies that contribute to the sustainable development of Ecuador and the wider region.
The Center for Public Diplomacy has become the leading actor promoting PCSD in Ecuador and has been able to disseminate Ecuador’s PCSD efforts to the international community. Promotion within our borders has focused on building capacity and knowledge about PCSD and fostering policy dialogue on PCSD with key stakeholders.
Increasing capacity and knowledge about PCSD includes active engagement with UNSSC’s PCSD online course and enhanced familiarity with international tools for PCSD. As a result, current efforts aim at exploring the possibility for offering a similar course through our university’s long-life learning programs targeting local policy makers.
Through policy dialogue with key stakeholders, strategic communication and active engagement in different arenas and events, our Center has been able to emphasise the critical importance of PCSD in theory and practice of public policy making and planning. This includes specific meetings with authorities and planners from the Ministry of Environment, National Secretary for Science & Innovation and Central Bank as well as with regional actors such as the Interamerican Institute for Cooperation in Agriculture (IICA). Similar dialogues have been conducted with fellow members of the Ecuadorian academic sector, civil society and the private sector. International dissemination efforts include:
-
A draft report on tracking PCSD efforts in Ecuador.
-
A case study of the PCSD in environmental and biodiversity policy.
-
Positioning the progress achieved on PCSD in Ecuador’s bioeconomy policy in international fora such as the Science & Policy Forum of the UN Biodiversity Convention that took place in Egypt last year.
-
The Center’s Participation in the UN Office of Sustainable Development Transition Forum that took place in Korea, to emphasise the importance of increasing multilateral efforts to ensure PCSD in the upcoming SDG Summit.
-
An Op-ed article on PCSD on “The 2030 Agenda and the emerging bioeconomy: making room for policy coherence at the crossroads” (Ortega Pacheco, 2019[19]).
Our efforts could be easily taken up and replicated in other Latin-American countries. In fact, comparative studies could be conducted to identify lessons learned and best practices in particular considering similarities in planning frameworks and policy development culture throughout the region.
A critical breakthrough for our efforts has been the possibility to join the PCSD partnership. Enhanced participation of non-OECD countries could provide additional opportunities and insights into putting PCSD into practice.
Key constraints remain the access to resources to focalise and the allocation of time and personnel to focus solely on PCSD research and promotion. To tackle this challenge, we are aiming to fundraise in the short term in order to develop an event to promote PCSD among national and local authorities with the participation of international speakers.
Slovenia – Strengthening PCSD in Slovenia
Albin Keuc and Adriana Aralica, SLOGA Platform
This contribution highlights the efforts and approaches of SLOGA, a platform of non-governmental organisations, to promote PCSD in Slovenia. It recognises that there are both challenges and opportunities for putting PCSD into practice.
SLOGA (2019[20]) is a platform of non-governmental organisations (NGO), which work in the field of international development co-operation, global education and humanitarian aid. The aim of the platform is to connect and strengthen the partnerships among Slovenian NGOs, which are active and/or are raising awareness of Slovenian and European public about uneven distribution of global wealth and subsequent significance of global solidarity and interdependence. SLOGA has been particularly engaged in enhancing policy coherence in Slovenia with a view to foster lasting “empowerment, inclusiveness and equality”.
In December 2018, the Government of Slovenia adopted the Strategy on International Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Assistance of the Republic of Slovenia until the year 2030, based on the 2017 Resolution on the International Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid of the Republic of Slovenia. Both documents outline Policy Coherence for (Sustainable) Development (PC(S)D) among key guiding principles of Slovenian development co-operation. The Strategy foresees that by 2021 at the latest, line ministries will draft in co-operation with the national coordinator for International Development Cooperation (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs), best practices in Slovenia in a selected field, and draft recommendations to the Government. PCD focal points have been established within all ministries, with the responsibility to monitor the development of internal policies from the perspective of potential impacts on partner countries, and draw attention to the incoherence of different policies within the field of international development co-operation policy. Focal points will report annually on their findings.
In addition, civil society efforts for strengthening PCSD have resulted in strengthened multi-stakeholder co-operation. Within the “InterCap” project, with SLOGA member GLOBAL Institute as project partner, and SLOGA as an associate partner from Slovenia, a national informal PCD network has been established. The PCD network, with collaborating partners coming from various sectors, convenes twice a year. The founding meeting of the network was held in June 2018. The aim of the network is to address and promote PC(S)D in a broad scope of stakeholders and sectors, and to function as a consultative body.
PCD focal points, established within ministries, will contribute to the promotion of PCSD at government level, while at the same time supporting the establishment of a monitoring mechanism.
SLOGA is preparing, in close co-operation with the PCD network, a so-called PC(S)D incubator. Based on a multi-stakeholder approach, the incubator sets up focus groups, organises workshops and trainings on thematic issues such as ODA effectiveness, the use of climate funds for development and the efficient use of national resources, corresponding with SGS 1, 12 and 13. All of SLOGAs activities seek to connect actors and strengthen their capacities for PC(S)D, as a lack of capacity and knowledge on PC(S)D remains a major challenge in Slovenia for coherent SDG implementation.
Finland – The Quest for Real PCSD Indicators
Jussi Kanner, Fingo
In this contribution, Fingo outlines the challenges related to finding indicators for assessing progress in SDG and PCSD implementation.
Finnish Development NGOs “Fingo” (2019[21]) is an NGO platform and an expert on global development. It represents 300 Finnish civil society organisations and strives to build a fairer world for all. Fingo and its member organisations work to make life better – for everyone. Fingo has been particularly engaged in ensuring political commitment to sustainable development and supporting the assessment of progress in SDG and PCSD implementation through the development of indicators.
Finding the right indicators to follow has been one of the most intriguing tasks in implementing the principle of policy coherence for sustainable development (PCSD). Political commitment and coordination mechanisms are crucial for making PCSD happen but ultimately it comes down to developing the evidence-base and indicators needed to measure whether policies are producing coherent outcomes. With a clever choice of indicators, the guiding principles of sustainable development and the 2030 Agenda – especially the integrated and interlinked nature of the world – can be captured to guide policy making. However, if we focus on indicators that simplify reality too much or focus too much on a single indicator such as the GDP, we risk missing the point of sustainable development.
In Finland, a multi-stakeholder expert group was established in 2016 to review existing sustainable development indicators. The objective of the group was to compile a compact set of indicators that would give decision makers a comprehensive overview of the current state and trend of sustainable development in Finland. As the number of indicators that could be selected was limited, the group was encouraged to find indicators that could highlight the interlinkages between the SDGs and the objectives of the national sustainable development strategy. Furthermore, another wish was to find indicators that could also cover Finland’s contribution to sustainable development globally, and one sub-section of the set was titled “global responsibility and coherence”.
The indicator set of 40 indicators can to some extent be used for assessing PCSD outcomes in Finland, and it can be considered to serve as a measure of progress alternative to GDP. Yet, as in many other countries, we have faced serious challenges in Finland in identifying robust indicators that would adequately cover the “elsewhere” dimension of PCSD, i.e. the impacts that Finnish domestic policies have outside of Finland. Some indicators with a clear link between domestic action and global effects were included – such as the carbon footprint of domestic consumption or the share of Finnish large and medium sized companies with human rights due diligence processes – but still they do not measure the actual impact. This finding also emerged from an independent evaluation on Finland’s sustainable development policy carried out in 2018-2019.
Despite the challenges, we are far from giving up the fight. The work will continue in 28-29 October 2019 when in the context of the Finnish EU Presidency, Fingo will organise an international conference with the working title “Beyond growth – indicators and politics for people, planet and prosperity”. The purpose is to develop recommendations for the EU on how take forward measures of wellbeing and sustainability to guide policy making. One of the conference themes will be the “elsewhere” dimension of PCSD, focusing especially on how to measure externalities in EU’s trade with the Global South.
The importance of PCSD in tackling specific challenges in SDG implementation
As shown throughout this chapter, PCSD has become a major systemic issue in implementing the SDGs in recent years. Governments recognise the need for developing more coherent policies, but struggle to do so. They are often constrained by limited administrative capacity, a persisting silo-approach to policy making, and the non-utilisation of available tools to enhance policy coherence for sustainable development.
The OECD and the PCSD Partnership have taken important steps in developing practical tools to enhance policy coherence for sustainable development through education, capacity building, academic and analytical approaches, modelling frameworks, local engagement and the exchange of knowledge and experience in implementing SDG target 17.14.
Enhancing PCSD requires a new culture of thinking and acting in a way that involves all parts and levels of government, all of society and all sectors in the shift to more sustainable policies. To highlight how using a PCSD-based approach can help in the implementation of the 17 SDGs and 169 SDG targets, the following section provides examples for two thematic areas in which following a more coherent approach could help foster sustainable development. First, one of our partners highlights the importance of PCSD in tackling illicit financial flows. And second, another partner provides an example of how taking a PCSD approach can help to recognise the contribution of the cultural and creative industries in SDG implementation and mobilise action by a broad range of policy communities.
Promoting policy coherence in the fight against illicit financial flows
Alex Erskine, Erskinomics
This contribution explores how promoting policy coherence in tackling illicit financial flows (SDG target 16.4) can help countries develop in a more sustainable manner.
Alex Erskine (and Erskinomics) is based in Sydney, Australia. He has been engaged in illicit financial flows projects with the Bank of Tanzania, Norway’s U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
In its focus on IFF, Erskinomics (2019[22]) seeks to promote ideas on policy coherence advanced by the PCSD team (OECD, 2016[23]). A process for assessing policy coherence can help countries consider changes in existing policy settings which otherwise doom efforts to reduce IFF, undermine domestic resource mobilisation and frustrate prospects for financing sustainable development (Erskine, 2018[24]).
A coherent approach to curbing IFF involves rigorously seeking policies that curb IFF and help countries develop. It means more international co-operation, more clear thinking and giving up on free-riding. This change in attitude can only come through strong political commitment at the highest level to drive rigorous analysis from an IFF perspective of the existing entrenched incoherencies in policy settings, at country level and internationally and take corrective actions. Perversely, many existing policy settings and approaches encourage, rather than discourage, IFF. Examples of common developing-country incoherence in policy settings that drive IFF include:
-
Choosing an uncompetitive exchange rate regime supported by hard controls over access to foreign currency, which create ‘black markets’, promoting corruption and capital flight.
-
Continuing waste in government spending, which undermines support for paying taxes.
-
Heavily taxing some activities but not others, undermining respect for tax laws and perpetuating the informal economy.
-
Rules making it harder to engage in international trade, e.g. onerous clearance processes or restraints on trade finance.
-
Setting in-country prices away from world market prices to protect industries or consumers, but which induces smuggling and corruption.
-
Limiting the tenor/security of property rights, leading firms and individuals to maximise short-term profits instead of investing for the longer-term and defending their rights.
The classic example of incoherence in policy from an IFF perspective relates to exchange rate regimes. With the IMF absent from the issue, many seem to think that exchange rate flexibility and easing in exchange controls has increased IFF, flowing “at the push of a button”. Anti-IFF reports often call for tightening exchange controls or more effective enforcement. However, fixed exchange rates and tight capital controls are shown to be worse for development and for IFF, driving debt crises and leading to black markets for foreign currency that breed criminality and corruption in accessing foreign exchange at the official, overvalued, rate. By contrast, flexible exchange rate regimes help countries avoid overvaluation and the risk of running out of reserves. Anyone seeking foreign currency has to find a willing seller at the market rate and the central bank can stay uninvolved. Black markets fade away and the legal market works to reduce crime and corruption.
The international approach to currency manipulation is also incoherent. Taking an ill-formed mercantilist view, the international community frowns on countries deliberately weakening their currency. However, the exchange rate setting that does most to curb illicit outflows would be such a weak currency whereas an uncompetitively strong currency increases illicit financial outflows. Fortunately, for the quest to curb IFF, in practice unfair manipulation has been difficult to prove.
Recognising the contribution of the cultural and creative industries for sustainable development
Michela Cocchi, Lady Lawyer Foundation
In this contribution, the Lady Lawyers Foundation describes its approach to help deliver on SDG target 4.7 through promoting the ‘appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development’, and highlighting the importance of human rights and gender equality for sustainable development in the fashion, art, music and entertainment sector.
The Lady Lawyer Foundation (LFF) (2019[25]) is a non-governmental organisation that focuses on engaging cultural and creative industries in delivering on the Sustainable Development Goals, in particular the fashion, art, music and entertainment (F.A.M.E.) sector.
Under the umbrella of the initiatives and actions of the Lady Lawyer Village Plan, the outcomes of the on-going Law for Creativity (L4C) research and War and Fashion road map have led to the Pinking Guide. The guide aims to provide the cultural and creative industries in the F.A.M.E. (Fashion, Art, Music, Entertainment) arena, in particular the Fashion sector, with a model on how to align strategies with the UN 2030 Agenda, and to manage and measure the sector’s contribution to achieving the SDGs.
The Pinking Guide analyses policy interactions in the sector according to five steps: 1) prioritising; 2) embedding; 3) acting; 4) learning; and 5) reporting. Focusing on the concepts of Heritage, Culture and Landscape, Pinking is organised into three sections that highlight policy interlinkages across various goals and are consistent with the clusters of goals reviewed annually at the High Level Political Forum:
-
SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 5 (Gender Equality, SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) and SDG 14 (Life Below Water), as discussed at the HLPF 2017 on “Eradicating poverty and promoting prosperity in a changing world” (2017[26]).
-
SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and SDG 15 (Life on Land), as reviewed by the HLPF 2018 on the “Transformation towards sustainable and resilient societies” (2018[27]).
-
SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), as under review by the HLPF 2019 on “Empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality” (2019[28]).
During the development and implementation process, the initiative met various challenges: the perimeter of the F.A.M.E. sector; the apparent ambiguity between traditional economic indicators and elements essential to creativity; the ‘business-(in)tangibles-(non)financials-(non)measurable-gratuitousness dialogue’; the need to overcome the indexes commonly used; and the ‘preaching and practicing’ test.
Ten projects, one in each for the ten L4C territories – Italy, the European Union, the United States of America, Japan, South America, Eurasia, Asia, the Middle East, the Far East, and Africa, are now following the Guide assessing feasibility in practice. The projects are making use of Lady Lawyer Fashion Archive, the Collection – assembling pieces from six continents, witnessing the evolution of the last fifty years of Fashion – aimed to emphasise the vital role the Fashion sector can play in delivering on the 2030 Agenda.
For the upcoming 2019-2020 period, the Pinking Guide plan is to unlock potential for co-operation through multi-stakeholder partnerships and taking an increasingly multi-faceted.
References
[18] CDPP (2019), Centro de Desarrollo de Políticas Públicas, http://test.cdpp.espol.edu.ec/en (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[12] Center for Global Development (2019), Commitment to Development Index, https://www.cgdev.org/commitment-development-index-2018 (accessed on 2 June 2019).
[11] Center for Global Development (2019), Ideas to Action: Independent Research for Global Prosperity, https://www.cgdev.org/ (accessed on 2 June 2019).
[17] CIECODE (2019), Think and Do Tank, https://www.ciecode.es/ (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[9] Collste, D., M. Pedercini and S. Cornell (2017), “Policy coherence to achieve the SDGs: Using integrated simulation models to assess effective policies”, Sustainability Science, Vol. 12/6, pp. 921–931, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0457-x.
[5] DIE/GDI (2019), The German Development Institute/Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), https://www.die-gdi.de/en/ (accessed on 2 June 2019).
[24] Erskine, A. (2018), Illicit Financial Flows: Making Sense of Confusion, https://erskinomics.com/2018/10/12/3-part-series-on-illicit-financial-flows-making-sense-of-confusion/ (accessed on 17 May 2019).
[22] Erskinomics (2019), Economic Analysis and Advice, https://erskinomics.com/ (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[3] European Centre for Development Policy Management (2019), ECDPM Home: The European Centre for Development Policy Management, https://ecdpm.org/ (accessed on 2 June 2019).
[21] Fingo (2019), Finnish Development NGOs, https://www.fingo.fi/english (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[16] Habitat Association (2019), Habitat Association, https://habitatassociation.org/ (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[25] LLF (2019), Lady Lawyer Foundation Website, https://ladylawyervillagepostcards.wordpress.com/blog/ (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[8] Millennium Institute (2019), Millennium Institute: Planning for a Sustainable Future, https://www.millennium-institute.org/ (accessed on 2 June 2019).
[13] OECD (2018), Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2018: Towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264301061-en.
[2] OECD (2016), Better Policies for 2030 An OECD Action Plan on the Sustainable Development Goals, OECD, Paris, http://oe.cd/sdg.
[23] OECD (2016), Better Policies for Sustainable Development 2016: A New Framework for Policy Coherence, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264256996-en.
[19] Ortega Pacheco, D. (2019), The 2030 Agenda and the Emerging Bioeconomy: Making Room for Policy Coherence at the Crossroads, https://www.unssc.org/news-and-insights/blog/2030-agenda-and-emerging-bioeconomy-making-room-policy-coherence-crossroads/ (accessed on 17 May 2019).
[10] Pedercini, M. et al. (2018), “Towards achieving the SDGs in Ivory Coast – Simulating pathways to sustainable development”, Sustainable Development, Vol. 26/6, https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1721.
[20] SLOGA (2019), Platforma Sloga: Slovenian Global Action, http://www.sloga-platform.org/about-us/ (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[4] Southern Voice (2019), Southern Voice - Think Tank Network on Sustainable Development, http://southernvoice.org/ (accessed on 2 June 2019).
[6] Stockholm Environment Institute (2019), Our Work with Agenda 2030 and the SDGs, SEI, https://www.sei.org/sdgs-agenda-2030/ (accessed on 2 June 2019).
[28] UN (2019), High-Level Political Forum 2019: Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform, United Nations, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/hlpf/2019 (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[27] UN (2018), High-Level Political Forum 2018: Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform, United Nations, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/hlpf/2018 (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[26] UN (2017), High-Level Political Forum 2017: Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform, United Nations, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/hlpf/2017 (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[1] UN (2015), Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, United Nations, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf.
[15] UNSSC (2019), The UNSSC Knowledge Centre for Sustainable Development, https://www.unssc.org/featured-themes/unssc-knowledge-centre-sustainable-development/ (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[14] UNSSC (2019), United Nations System Staff College: Sharing Knowledge, Developing Leaders, https://www.unssc.org/ (accessed on 3 June 2019).
[7] Weitz, N. et al. (2017), “Towards systemic and contextual priority setting for implementing the 2030 Agenda”, Sustainability Science, Vol. 13/2, pp. 531–548, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0470-0.