English abstract: The European Union (EU) is often understood as a normative power. However, based on a case study of European policy networks in Vietnam, this article shows that despite the EU’s commitment to norms and transformative development, norms are not a priority in the implementation of development policies. Rather, norm promotion is delegated to political and diplomatic representatives, whereas development and trade representatives are responsible for technical work. Consequently, policy networks created around these four sectors tend to operate separately from each other, undermining the spillover of norms from diplomatic and political networks to development and trade networks. As a result, this article shows that the structural–institutional separation of sectoral policy networks is one of the EU’s systemic characteristics that restrict normative policy coherence for development.Spanish abstract: La Unión Europea (UE) es considerada un poder normativo, comprometida con las normas y el desarrollo transformativo. En cambio, usando un caso de estudio de redes europeas políticas en Vietnam, este artículo demuestra que las normas no son prioridad en la implementación de políticas de desarrollo. Al contrario, la promoción de normas se delega a representantes políticos y diplomáticos, mientras que los representantes del desarrollo y comercio se hacen cargo del trabajo técnico. Consecuentemente las redes políticas de estos cuatro sectores tienden a aislarse, dificultando la transferencia de las normas de redes políticas y diplomáticas a redes de desarrollo y comercio. El resultado demuestra que la separación estructuro–institucional de las redes políticas sectoriales es una de las características sistémicas de la UE que restringen la coherencia normativa de políticas para el desarrollo.French abstract: L’Union européenne est souvent considérée comme une puissance normative. Cependant, sur la base d’une étude de cas de réseaux de politiques publiques au Vietnam, cet article montre que, malgré son engagement normatif et de développement réformateur, les normes ne sont pas une priorité dans la mise en oeuvre des politiques de développement. Au contraire, leur promotion est déléguée aux représentants politiques et diplomatiques, tandis que les représentants du développement et du commerce sont responsables des travaux techniques. Par conséquent, les réseaux politiques créés autour de ces quatre secteurs ont tendance à fonctionner séparément les uns des autres, ce qui compromet le transfert des normes des réseaux diplomatiques et politiques aux réseaux de développement et du commerce. Ainsi, cet article montre que la séparation structuro-institutionnelle des réseaux sectoriels de politiques publiques est l’une des caractéristiques systémiques de l’UE qui restreint leur cohérence normative en matière de développement.

Summary Motivation The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) call for transformative development rooted in international norms, such as human rights, rule of law, and gender equality. Often, however, nation‐states do not implement these norms to the extent to which they are envisaged. Against this backdrop, regions have the potential to fill this implementation vacuum. Purpose Without a normative dimension, transformative development risks reproducing traditional economic development. In this special issue we focus on norm implementation in different world regions through the lens of normative coherence for development. Methods and approach The articles in this special issue all use qualitative methods, such as text analysis and in‐depth interviews. Given the different regional contexts, each article has its own approach to normative coherence for development depending on the regional normative framework. Findings This special issue indicates that regions are an important interlocutor between the global, national, and sub‐national level and, as such, are crucial for implementing the sustainable development agenda. The articles show, however, that to date normative coherence for development has not been achieved due to overriding priorities and technical approaches to policy coherence for development. Policy implications With this special issue we aim to draw more attention to the topic of normative coherence for development and show that policies need to be adjusted in order to reflect the normative dimension of sustainable development.

Policy coherence for sustainable development (PCSD) and environmental security are crucial for achieving sustainable development, yet their intersections remain largely unexplored. In this article, we combine these two approaches to examine renewable energy policies of the European Union (EU). The EU is a key actor championing sustainable development, often considered to be a ground breaker particularly in environmental policies. At the same time, the EU aims to be a significant global security actor, and it has also recognised the role of environmental change as a factor for security. In this article, we explore whether the EU coherently integrates the sustainable development dimensions (society, environment, economy) in its renewable energy policies through inductive and deductive content analysis of key policy documents. Our analysis shows that the EU's renewable energy policies are not fully coherent with all dimensions of sustainability, particularly with respects to societal considerations and impacts on third countries.

Summary Motivation The United Nations 2030 Agenda recognizes regions as important actors in implementing the sustainable development agenda. At the same time, regions are often criticized for lacking effective implementation, especially in relation to gender equality. Purpose This study examines whether the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) implements its global commitment to gender equality at a regional level. Methods and approach We apply qualitative analysis of key ASEAN documents in order to determine how gender equality is implemented regionally. We particularly focus on frameworks related to female migrant workers in ASEAN. Findings The analysis shows that ASEAN is formally committed to improving gender equality at a regional level, however, female migrants often end up in unfavourable conditions and precarious work relationships without any institutionalized protection because ASEAN's gender equality initiatives are largely concentrated in the Cultural Community and absent from the Economic Community, indicating an absence of normative coherence for development with regard to gender equality. Policy implications This limited impact of emerging regional commitments to gender equality arises from incoherences in ASEAN's normative governance framework which undermine normative coherence for development at the regional level.