Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development and the SDGs Towards implementing Agenda 2030 Anna Knoll Policy Officer, ECDPM The Hague, 21 January 2016

Agenda Transition from MDGs to SDGs and PCD to PCSD A new global development framework From PCD to PCSD in the post-2015 context Implementation of PC(S)D – Lessons learned and challenges III. What way forward with Agenda 2030? IV. Open Questions and Discussion (30 min) (45 min) ECDPM

I. Transition from MDGs to SDGs, from PCD to PCSD ECDPM

A) A new global Development Framework 8 Goals; 18 Targets; 48 indicators 17 Goals; 169 Targets; 300+ indicators ECDPM

What is different this time? Transformative Integrated: 3 Dimensions of Sustainability Universality ECDPM

A Universal framework ECDPM

Integrated Nature of the SDGs Source: David Le Blanc, 2015; UNDESA Working Paper 141 ECDPM

What is different this time? Transformative Universal Integrated: 3 Dimensions of Sustainability Explicit PCSD target: SDG Target 17.14 Enhance Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development ECDPM

B) PCD– a concept in evolution POST- 2015 2014 2012 2011 2010 2009 OECD Strategy on Development IV HLF (Busan) 2008 PCD Building Blocks 2007 Council Recommendation on Good Institutional Practices in Promoting PCD 2005 2008 Ministerial Declaration on PCD PCD Elements into SGI 2014 Towards a Broader Approach to PCD 2003 OECD-PCD Unit II HLF (Paris) Paris Declaration Commitment to Development Index (CDI) 2002 Monterrey Consensus 2002 OECD Action for a Shared Development Agenda PCD in DAC peer reviews 2000 - UN Millennium Declaration – MDG 8 1996 - DAC Strategy “Shaping the 21st Century” ECDPM

Two-fold implication: “do no harm” and beyond: What is PCD? EU “The EU seeks to minimise contradictions and to build synergies between policies other than development cooperation that have an impact on developing countries, for the benefit of overseas development” OECD “The pursuit of development objectives through the systematic promotion of mutually reinforcing policy actions on the part of both OECD and developing countries”. Two-fold implication: “do no harm” and beyond: Make sure all policies are development-friendly (do no harm) Ensure the proactive promotion of development objectives in other policies: exploit synergies > win-win ECDPM

Prevalent definitions: PCD ≠ … Diverging interpretations and use of the concept of PCD. PCD IS NOT (only): Coordination with other policies Harmonization with other donors Adjustment of development policy to other policies (it is PC for Development) Consistency among development policies, strategies and instruments ECDPM

PCD approach Source: OECD, 2015 ECDPM

Towards a universal notion: PCSD = an approach and policy tool to integrate the economic, social, environmental, and governance dimensions of sustainable development at all stages of domestic and international policy making. = a problem of all governments worldwide (not any longer a challenge for donors only). It aims to increase governments capacities to: Main Objectives Foster synergies across economic, social and environmental policy areas Identify trade-offs & reconcile domestic policy objectives with internationally agreed objectives Address the spillovers of domestic policies SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 1 2 3 Source: OECD (2014), Better Policies for Development 2014: Policy Coherence and Illicit Financial Flows ECDPM

PCSD: New way of looking at synergies/trade-offs in integrated ways? Let’s look at this understanding exemplified here in this graph. Whereas traditional PCD focuses on ensuring that all government departments take into account the impact of their decisions on developing countries and development cooperation policy objectives and poverty reduction; PCSD focuses on supporting coordinated involvement across the entire government machinery, and hence a more comprehensive and cross-sectoral implementation of the 2030 Agenda weaving in not only poverty reduction but environmental, climate, peace and security concerns. PCSD therefore also requires governments to take into account the effects of its domestic policymaking for poverty reduction and the environment both at home and abroad (and in the future) so that policies are mutually supportive to achieve the SDGs.” (Challenges Paper, 2016, p.5) PCSD very much tries to break-up the silo thinking and you can see that it aims to capture connections between different sectors much more rather than looking at effects of policies in one thematic policy sector on developing countries. We also see that the donor-recipient logic is not underpinning PCSD anymore. A more interconnected world economy means that policies in any country can influence sustainable development across the globe. Source: OECD, 2015 ECDPM

Example: Water, energy, food Source: SEI, 2014 ECDPM

Agenda 2030: Opportunities for PC(S)D SDGs Intrinsically integrated approach Finally brings 3 pillars of sustainable development together Responsibility of All (Universality) Some similar ideas in other areas than development cooperation Whole-of-government approaches Joined-up government One United Nations PCSD formally recognised and agreed as Means of Implementation ECDPM Page 16

Challenges of moving from PCD to PCSD Loss of focus? PCSD makes targets more diffuse – A theory of everything? Do we lose the unitary focus on PCD Universality – Who is to benefit from PCD action? Greater complexity Progress on PCD already tough Taking so much into account may make progress even more difficult Brings different worlds together Development – external relations - Economic & social & sustainability – internal affairs ECDPM Page 17

PC(S) and the changing role for aid PCD I. Scenario: Specialization International Finance Poverty Reduction/ Development Objectives in poorest/ fragile countries Aid Migration Security Trade II. Scenario: Integration PCSD Global Cooperation For Sustainable Development Migration Security Aid Poverty Reduction Trade Climate SDGs International Finance Production Consumption ECDPM

II. PC(S)D Implementation to support SDG achievement ECDPM

How to strengthen PCSD? ECDPM

How do we know we made PCSD progress? What indicator for PCSD in the SDG global review? Is this sufficiently meaningful for PCSD? Number of countries that have ratified and implemented relevant international instruments under the IMO and the ILO Maritime Convention, and adopted carbon pricing mechanisms. But this seems hardly meaningful, and also has been criticised with other suggestions focusing more on assessing whether countries have put in place the right mechanisms for coordination and integration of different sustainable dimensions in policy-making. ECDPM

PCSD as red-thread for SDG implementation Setting country-specific objectives for PCSD based on SDGs and targets Setting and prioritizing objectives Coordinating policy and its implementation Monitoring, analysis and reporting Identifying policy interactions, synergies, potential policy effects ‘elsewhere’ and for long-term Strengthening existing PC(S)D institutional mechanisms ECDPM

Challenge: Measuring PC(S)D progress ECDPM

Quality of existing PCD Indicators Difference between mix and match approach: Outcome Indicators Policy Outputs Indicators Policy Inputs Indicators Policy Stance Indicators ECDPM

Country Studies on policy impact – Food Security Some European countries felt that more evidence on impact of policies needed – suggestion for impact analysis to examine effects on development outcomes in individual developing countries ECDPM with OECD-DAC developed draft methodology for identifying/assessing impacts of OECD policies on food security in individual developing countries Methodology currently tested in Tanzania and Burkina Faso with support from Finland/Switzerland

Challenge: Progress on PCD building blocks – yes? But fairer policies…..? ECDPM

Bottlenecks for PCD in the EU Member States Little public attention Underdeveloped structures for knowledge-input Lack of political pressure Setting and prioritising objectives Coordinating policy and its implementation Monitoring, analysis and reporting Few resources allocated Lack of research on impact of (in)coherencies Many policies … Higher risk of incoherent policies Diverging interests Knowledge gaps Differing levels of awareness Difficult conversations between generalists vs. specialists ECDPM

PCSD is a Political Economy Challenge PCD Lessons learned – Not a technical exercise PCD highly political= policies driven by national interests that are at times hard to reconcile with development Who has power? Is there adequate, accountability, information and evidence? Identify political momentum on the basis of solid political economy analysis in limited number of areas where concrete progress is feasible (taxation, illicit capital flows, food security…?) ECDPM

Case Study: Policy Coherence in Practice in UK- Solutions to achieve AML objectives while safeguarding remittances to Somalia

III. Implementation of Agenda 2030 – The Way forward ECDPM

Follow up and Review of SDGs – Institutional framework Principles: Country-led (ownership) Inclusive (multi-stakeholder) Transparent Building on existing mechanisms ECDPM

Development of SDG Indicators – Process Global Indicator framework currently being developed by IAEG-SDG (Inter-agency expert group) UN Statistical Commission will consider the group’s proposal in March 2016 National Implementation: Additional and complementary indicators will be developed at country/regional level adapted to context ECDPM

National Implementation Identification of priority areas without ‘cherry picking’? Not all SDG targets are clear How to set baseline and benchmarks? How to define appropriate actions and policies to support progress towards targets and assess progress?  PCSD an important tool here ECDPM

Example Goal 16: Country-level Perspective Implementation: Domestic Development Outcomes Responsibilities for assisting other countries Responsibilities for supporting progress towards global common goods PCSD ECDPM

How ready are OECD countries? Many studies, indices now produced (e.g. Index of Bertelsmann Foundation Individual Studies on EU MS, e.g. SEI for Sweden, DIE for “Länder-Ebene” in Germany, etc.) Source: Kroll, 2015. ECDPM

Coherence in implementation of Agenda 2030 EU Country Partner countries European Institutions EU Regional Level Government Ministries National Level Ministries at federal level Federal States Sub-national level Local Local authorities Local Level ECDPM

Role of CSOs in post-2015 implementation / strengthening PCSD CSOs/Knowledge community can play critical role in providing analysis but approach could be more political Level of awareness on PCD/PCSD has grown quite spectacularly Increased peer pressure (OECD, EU, NGOs, policy research institutes,..) exchange of experiences, best practices, institutional arrangements beyond aid agencies,… More PCD measurement and assessment systems (CDI), institutional arrangements and actors involved but risk of overly technocratic approaches Clear role in SDG implementation Agenda Priorities - Setting benchmarks (avoiding “cherry-picking”) Identifying indicators that fit the context Reporting on progress Contribute to building multi-stakeholder partnerships ECDPM

IV. Questions and Discussion ECDPM

Anna Knoll – ak@ecdpm.org Thank you Anna Knoll – ak@ecdpm.org www.ecdpm.org www.slideshare.net/ecdpm