Session 3:10 – SDG Towards Coherence From PCD to PCSD James Mackie PhD Head of Learning & Quality Support, ECDPM Visiting Professor, IRD Dept, College of Europe University of Amsterdam, 29 June 2016 Critical perspectives on governance by SDGs Conference

Policy coherence in the 2030 Agenda PCSD – what is involved? PCD – an effective tool PCD as a concept The European experience Lessons to be learnt From PCD to PCSD Conclusions Outline Page 2ECDPM

The SDG as a transformative agenda i.Leave no-one behind ii.Universality – applies to us all iii.Multi-stakeholder approach iv.Inter-connected agenda – 3 pillars of Sus.Dev. v.Integrated action  policy coherence Coherence in multiple dimensions Between policy sectors Between geographies: here and there Between levels: global – national – local Between actors: public & private sectors, CSOs Over time: for now & for future generations Huge challenge for policy makers Policy coherence in the 2030 Agenda ECDPMPage 3

SDG 17, target 14: PCSD - but no details What do we understand by this concept? Assume it covers all of the above, but … Policy coherence is key challenge to focus on While keeping all other dimensions in mind How do we make it work? We are used to working in silos Inevitable – cannot all do everything 2030 Agenda – calls on us to transcend silos Precedents do exist: Whole-of/joined-up government, ‘One-UN’ initiative, mainstreaming / cross-cutting issues, nexus approach … EU/OECD DAC have used concept of PCD PCSD – what is involved? ECDPMPage 4

EU has 25 years of experience with PCD Since 1992 Maastricht Treaty PCD understood as: Policies in other sectors with an external impact should not undermine, but ideally support development cooperation policy Sweden’s Policy on Global Development First basic step – ‘do no harm’ Ideally also – seek synergies Ultimately will have to – negotiate trade-offs Remember: Promoting PCD is an never ending task Political will is crucial PCD as a concept ECDPMPage 5

1992 – Maastricht Treaty 1990s – very little discussion in Council Yet much NGO lobbying 2000s – more widespread recognition Across EU institutions and in Member States 2002 – OECD Ministerial statement on PCD PCD chapter in each DAC Peer Review starts 2005 – EU Council agrees 12 priority areas 2007 – EU PCD Reports every 2 years start 2009 – Council identifies 5 PCD challenges Food security, climate change, trade & finance, migration, and security & development 2010 – Lisbon Treaty – legal obligation PCD – The EU experience ECDPMPage 6

Mechanisms that have worked Clear policy statements to set common path Focusing efforts on key challenges Consultation mechanisms – bridging silos PCD focal points – ‘champions’ Reporting: transparency & debate Ex-ante impact assessments Role of multiple actors Political leaders, officials, parliaments, CSOs, knowledge institutions – each have a key role Major challenges Maintaining political will over time Measuring progress & showing results PCD – Lessons to be learnt ECDPMPage 7

PCD simple concept relative to PCSD PCD – uni-directional PCSD – multi-directional Much more complex and daunting task Some suggest PCD is subsumed by PCSD But then: where to start policy making? Perhaps more realistic to expect silos to continue – work with them not against them Focus on how to build bridges & synergies Recognise value of ‘sector champions’ Is interaction between them the key? Does PCSD = PCSocialD+PCEnvD+PCEconD ? From PCD to PCSD ECDPMPage 8

European practice on PCD useful Should learn lessons we can Some PCD mechanisms relevant for PCSD Political will and leadership crucial Promoting coherence is never finished So prioritise and focus action on most useful Different actors have important roles to play Knowledge is vital Studies, evidence, assessments, reporting, transparency & public debate Yet don’t get too bogged down in measuring PCSD as a amalgam of multiple coherence efforts – we still need PCD + PC… + PC…+… PC ‘sector champions’ have a continuing role Conclusions ECDPMPage 9

Thank you Page 10