Promoting Policy Coherence for Development

Mechanisms & Institutions

Outline

• Tools to promote PCD – general categories

• National level• European level• PCD-report: thematic areas EU• Succes factors – in general

Tools to promote PCD – in general

A. Policy statements

B. Administrative and institutional arrangements

C. Assessment and advisory capacity

A. Policy statements

• Austria: paragraph on PCD in the Development Cooperation Act (2003) (legal basis)

• Sweden: Policy for Global Development (2003) (legal basis for whole of government approach)

• Ireland: White paper on Irish Aid (2006) (mechanisms under construction)

B. Administrative and institutional arrangements

• Interministerial committees (14 Member States)

• Luxembourg: Policy Coherence Desk• Sweden: Policy Coherence Committee

C. Assessment and advisory capacity

• Scrutinize policy proposals on possible effects on developing countries

• Knowledge building among civil servants (both development and non-development)

• Focus on development

National level: examples from Sweden and the Netherlands

• NL: focus on thematic issues, Coherence Unit takes lead

• Sweden: expert committee outside Parliament consisting of academics, journalists, NGOs, parliamentarians report to Parliament

European Level

• Article 178: legal basis for PCD• Inter service consultations• Impact assessments• Inter service group on PCD• PCD unit in DEV

European Level

• COREPER – permanent representatives of Member States

• Secretariat to the Council• Council conclusions• Informal PCD network• PCD Rolling Work Programme• Biennial Report on PCD

EU – Thematic issues

Rolling Work Programme identified 12 policy areas:

• Trade, Agriculture, Fisheries• Security, Migration, Environment, Climate

change, Energy, Social dimension of globalisation,

• Research and Innovation, Information Society, Transport

Main conclusions PCD-report

1. The importance of PCD is now widely recognised, as reflected by the many PCD mechanisms put in place

2. In spite of these efforts, capacity is often lacking and awareness amongst non-development departments remains low

3. The overall perception is that PCD progresses better at EU level than at national level.

4. Conflicting political priorities or different interests within and between developing countries are the main obstacles to PCD

PCD-report

• September 2007• Positive step• Comments EU Coherence Programme

1. lack of political commitment: implementation is needed

2. method of evaluation

3. definition of coherence• On-line Consultation open

Key factors to success

• Political will – commitment• Implementation (GAERC)• Responsible minister at cabinet level • Leading role European Commission• Capacity/knowledge of PCD and impacts of

policies on developing countries• Outside pressure: NGOs, journalists,

Academia