Abstract
Despite its relatively short history, policy coherence for development (PCD) has become a major theme on the global development agenda, notably in connection with the post-2015 development agenda. There is an emerging literature on PCD, which, however, has not yet examined PCD as an element of transformative development, or changes in power relations and structures that sustain poverty and inequality. This introduction proposes a normative approach to PCD, informing the articles in this special issue. The approach calls for the examination of institutional and ideational power structures with the aim to contribute to PCD as an element of transformative development. The introduction is structured along the following themes: What is policy coherence, which policy coherence, and how to theorise policy coherence. Finally, a short history of PCD will be given.
Abstract
frMalgré sa courte histoire, la politique de cohérence pour le développement (en anglais: PCD) est maintenant un des ordres du jour le plus importants en développement globale, notamment parmi les discussions après 2015. Il y a un corps de littérature croissant sur la PCD, mais ni la PCD comme élément transformative du développement, ni les changements dans les relations et structures de pouvoir qui supportent la pauvreté et l’inégalité, n’ont pas encore étés étudiés. Cette introduction propose une approche normative à la PCD, sur laquelle sont basés les articles dans cette publication. Cette approche demande un examen des structures du pouvoir institutionnel et idéationnel, pour que la PCD puisse être un élément de développement transformatif. L’introduction comprenne: qu’est-ce que c’est la politique de cohérence, quelle politique de cohérence, et comment théoriser la politique de cohérence. Pour conclure, une brève histoire de la PCD est mentionnée.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
Coherence differs from consistence, which means the absence of internal contradictions (see also Hoebink, 1999, 2005, Carbone, 2008, and Stocchetti, 2016). In this context, consistence refers to internal coherence (of development policy), such as harmony between ‘words’ and ’deeds’. Policy coherence refers to the (external) coherence between various policies, such as development policy and other policies that are likely to have an impact on developing countries. The difference is also qualitative: governments’ words and deeds are either consistent or they are not, whereas coherence between policies is a matter of degree (Carbone, 2008).
Furthermore, ‘incoherence may be intended and even necessary to achieve acceptable outcomes’. However, ‘citizens need not tolerate unnecessary incoherence, i.e. decisions that are inefficient from a social welfare perspective’ (Picciotto, 2004b).
Accordingly, in 2001 the OECD still defined PCD as follows: ‘Policy coherence … involves the systematic promotion of mutually reinforcing policies across government departments and agencies creating synergies towards achieving the defined objective’ (OECD, 2005, p. 27). The OECD Strategy on Development (2012) calls for a wider approach to PCD for the post-2015 development agenda, as further elaborated in OECD (2014).
Picciotto (2004b, p. 12) argues that the concept of coherence ‘became current following a European Commission decision of May 1994 that reduced beef export subsidies that had been shown to hurt livestock farmers in the Sahel: “it is therefore necessary to take measures to end the serious incoherence that exists between the agricultural policy and the development policy of the Community” ’.
Hydén (1999, p. 58) suggests a further reason why PCD has emerged in Europe and not in the United States: the European tradition of democratic corporatism versus the American pluralist political system.
References
Barry, F., King, M. and Matthews, A. (2010) Policy coherence for development: Five challenges. Irish Studies in International Affairs 21: 207–223.
Carbone, M. (2008) Mission impossible: The European union and policy coherence for development. European Integration 30 (3): 323–342.
Carbone, M. and Keijzer, N. (2016) The European Union and Policy Coherence for Development: Reforms, Results, Resistance. This volume.
Cowen, M.P. and Shenton, R.W. (1996) Doctrines of Development. London and New York: Routledge.
Culp, J. and Plagemann, J. (2013) Hooray for Global Justice? Emerging Democracies in a Multipolar World, Hamburg: GIGA Working Papers No 242, December 2013.
Duffield, M. (2001) Global Governance and the New Wars. London and New York: Zed Books.
EU Coherence Programme (2007) Policy Coherence for Development, A Practical Guide. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Evert Vermeer Foundation.
Fforde, A. (2009) Coping with Facts. A Skeptic’s Guide to the Problem of Development. Sterling, VA: Kumarian Press.
Fischer, J. and Anderson, D.M. (2015) Authoritarianism and the securitization of development in Africa. International Affairs 91 (1): 131–151.
Forster, J. and Stokke, O. (eds.) (1999) Coherence of policies towards developing countries: Approaching the problematique. In: Policy Coherence in Development Co-Operation. London: Frank Cass, pp. 1–57.
Hoebink, P. (1999) Coherence and development policy: The case of the European Union. In: J. Foster and O. Stokke (eds.) Policy Coherence in Development Co-Operation. London: Frank Cass, pp. 323–345.
Hoebink, P. (ed.) (2005) Evaluating Maastricht’s triple C: The ‘C’ of coherence. In: The Treaty of Maastricht and Europe’s Development Co-operation. (Studies in European Development Co-operation Evaluation No 1). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Aksant Academic Publishing, pp. 183–218.
Hoebink, P. (2008) A tale of two countries: Perspectives from the South on the coherence of EU policies. In: P. Hoebink, S. Slootweg and L. Smith (eds.) Tales of Development: People, Power and Space. Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum, pp. 187–204.
Hydén, Göran (1999) The shifting grounds of policy coherence in development co-operation. In: J. Forster and O. Stokke (eds.) Policy Coherence in Development Co-Operation. London: Frank Cass, pp. 58–77.
King, M. (2016) Broadening the Global Development Framework Post 2015: Embracing Policy Coherence and Global Public Goods. This volume.
Lavenex, S. and Kunz, R. (2009) The migration-development Nexus in EU external relations. European Integration 30 (3): 439–457.
Li, X. and Carey, R. (2014) The BRICS and the international development system: Challenge and convergence?, Brighton, University of Sussex, IDS Policy Briefing 55.
Maganda, C. and Koff, H. (2016) The EU and The Human Right to Water: Normative Coherence as the Key to Transformative Development. This volume.
Matthews, A. (2009) The European union’s common agricultural policy and developing countries: The struggle for coherence. In: M. Carbone (ed.) Policy Coherence and EU Development Policy. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 59–77.
Morissey, O. (1999) Aid and trade policy (In)coherence. In: J. Foster and O. Stokke (eds.) Policy Coherence in Development Co-Operation. London: Frank Cass, pp. 373–388.
Nyberg-Sørensen, N. (2016) Coherence and Contradiction in the Migration-Development Debate. This volume.
OECD (2005) Policy Coherence for Development: Promoting Institutional Good Practice. The Development Dimension. Paris, France: OECD.
OECD (2012) The OECD Strategy on Development. Paris, France: OECD.
OECD (2014) Better Policies for Development 2014. Policy Coherence and Illicit Financial Flows. Paris, France: OECD.
Orbie, J. and Versluys, H. (2009) The European union’s international development policy: Leading and benevololent? In: J. Orbie (ed.) Europe’s Global Role. External Policies of the European Union. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, pp. 67–90.
Picciotto, R. (2004a) Aid and conflict: The policy coherence challenge. Conflict, Security & Development 4 (3): 543–562.
Picciotto, R. (2004b) Policy Coherence and Development Evaluation: Concepts, Issues and Possible Approaches. Institutional Approaches to Policy Coherence for Development. Paris: OECD Policy Workshop, 18–19 May 2004, Room Document 2.
Santos-Paulino, A. (2010) Enhancing Development through Policy Coherence. Policy Brief 5/2010. Helsinki, Finland: UNU-WIDER.
Sen, A. (1981) Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation. Oxford: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press.
Stocchetti, M. (2016) A Perfect Post-2015 Partner? Analyzing the EU’s Development and Trade Agendas for Global Development Partnership. This volume.
Thede, N. (2013) Policy coherence for development and securitisation: Competing paradigms or stabilising North – South hierarchies? Third World Quarterly 34 (5): 784–799.
Vershaeve, J., Delputte, S. and Orbie, J. (2016) The Rise of Policy Coherence for Development: A Multi-Causal Approach. This volume.
Wendt, A. (1999) Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgements
The proposal for this special issue derives from a working group that was organised for the 2nd Nordic Conference for Development Research that was held in Helsinki, Finland in November 2013. The Conference working group was sponsored by the Consortium for Comparative Research on Regional Integration and Social Cohesion’s (RISC) working group on ‘Development, Equity and Policy Coherence’, which also provided the network for the realisation of this special issue.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Siitonen, L. Theorising Politics Behind Policy Coherence for Development (PCD). Eur J Dev Res 28, 1–12 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1057/ejdr.2015.76
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ejdr.2015.76