Policy coherence for development
A better understanding of the linkages of the emerging global trends and their implications is critical for countries as they craft strategies for sustainable development.
[6] Under the principles of PCD, potential conflicts of objectives and interests between international co-operation and other sectoral policies of the various federal departments should be identified and resolved as far as possible.
For example, setting and prioritizing objectives should avoid unintended negative impacts on other sectors or the international norms and goals to which a country has committed".
[7] By and large, coherence is understood as “a function of how rules, policies, and arrangements across dimensions of global [national and sub-national] governance are coordinated”.
This suggests another assumption: that changing institutional rules, procedures, and structures can create 'win-win' opportunities to serve a common goal—a theme that dominates discussions about coherence.
Examples of PCD definitions clarifying this impact focus can be found in the 2005 European Consensus on Development and the 2008 outcome document of the UN MDG summit, both of which link to the MDGs.
[citation needed] The concept of policy coherence for development (PCD) first emerged in discussions among international aid donors in the early 1990s.
As the concept evolved, PCD has been understood to go beyond a 'do no harm' approach, also with a requirement to seek synergies between development co-operation and other policies as well as to correct existing incoherencies.
[7] In global goal-setting, the policy coherence goalpost has broadened from a predominant focus on North-South development cooperation framed around poverty alleviation to universal sustainable development “in ways that balance economic, social and environmental goals; consider domestic and international effects of policies; and support long-term sustainability”.
[7] The European Union has translated this idea into a legal commitment as most recently stated in the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009 and has highlighted the concept in political declarations and communications, including the position on the post-2015 agenda ‘A decent life for all’.
Both OECD and EU have put in place systems and tools define overall ambition and targets, facilitate decision-making and monitor progress, which include institutional mechanisms, monitoring tools, e.g. peer reviews, indicators and reporting, as well as policy tool-kits presented as practical measures to achieve progress.
The Commission argues that the EU remains the lead actor for PCD internationally, ahead of its main partners, with the highest levels of political and legal commitment.
[5] The government of the Netherlands believes in the mutually beneficial relationship between trade and development cooperation, and this lies at the core of its PCD approach.
Furthermore, the Dutch PCD approach acknowledged already since at least 2002 that developing countries are all different, and that policies should be adapted to specific localities, individuals or cultural groups.
Five years on, the US has achieved mixed progress in implementing these recommendations and the three PCD pillars"[11] The OECD argue that national security strategy cannot substitute for a policy coherence for development agenda.
An analysis of EU policy-making processes related to agriculture, fisheries, energy and trade shows that some tangible efforts have been made to strengthen policy coherence 'for food security'.
[15]Amid international reflection on the form and content of a post-2015 framework, among many other issues, PCD was highlighted as being a key component of the 'beyond-aid' debate.
