Effects of policy and functional (in)coherence on coordination – A comparative analysis of cross-sectoral water management problems

How does policy coherence shape effectiveness and inequality? Implications for sustainable development and the 2030 Agenda

“…Recognize policy coherence as a political process in which actors seek to advance their own interests. Our findings underscore the need to consider the role of power dynamics, vested interests, and political and economic structures in promoting coherence and shaping its outcomes (Bocquillon, 2018;Brand et al, 2021;Dombrowsky et al, 2022;Nilsson, 2021;Purdon, 2014;Shawoo et al, 2022;Trein et al, 2023). Traditional institutional fixes, such as improved dialogue and coordination, are unlikely to contribute to reducing inequality if policymakers and practitioners fail to account for actors' interests (Ravikumar et al, 2018).…”

“…Instead, we see cases where coherent policymaking led to more effective policies but fell short in meeting goals to reduce inequality. This shows that while incoherence may hinder policy effectiveness, coherence is not a sufficient pre‐condition to ensuring effectiveness, and in particular to reducing inequality (Dombrowsky et al, 2022). We also see a case where incoherent and ineffective policies nevertheless succeeded in reducing inequality (Buch & Dixon, 2009).…”

Greening recovery – Overcoming policy incoherence for sustainability transformations

“…Although widely researched, studies on policy coherence tend to focus on crosssectoral aspects of coherence (Carbone, 2008;Carbone et al, 2016;Dombrowsky et al, 2022;Glass & Newig, 2019;Koff, 2017;May et al, 2006;McGowan et al, 2019;Monkelbaan, 2019;Nilsson et al, 2012;Tosun & Lang, 2017;Tosun & Leininger, 2017), and less so on the political and temporal factors. However, previous studies indicate that potential incoherence may be due not only to incongruent goals, but potentially, to the existence of differing frames, discourses and underlying values or power asymmetries impacting policy design and implementation (Bocquillon, 2018;Dombrowsky et al, 2022;Lenschow et al, 2018;Strambo et al, 2015). For example, how synergies are framed and how they can be regarded as positive, negative or neutral for different actors is essential for political discussions on trade-offs (Linnér, 2006).…”

“…Although definitions of the concept vary; from instrumental, for example, policy coherence as “the ability of multiple goals to co‐exist with each other in a logical fashion” (Howlett & Rayner, 2013, p. 170), to more political, for example, as an attribute which “promotes synergies between and within different policy areas to achieve outcomes associated with jointly agreed policy objectives” (Nilsson et al, 2012, p. 369). Although widely researched, studies on policy coherence tend to focus on cross‐sectoral aspects of coherence (Carbone, 2008; Carbone et al, 2016; Dombrowsky et al, 2022; Glass & Newig, 2019; Koff, 2017; May et al, 2006; McGowan et al, 2019; Monkelbaan, 2019; Nilsson et al, 2012; Tosun & Lang, 2017; Tosun & Leininger, 2017), and less so on the political and temporal factors. However, previous studies indicate that potential incoherence may be due not only to incongruent goals, but potentially, to the existence of differing frames, discourses and underlying values or power asymmetries impacting policy design and implementation (Bocquillon, 2018; Dombrowsky et al, 2022; Lenschow et al, 2018; Strambo et al, 2015).…”

“…The calls for policy coherence for sustainable development and transformations have been increasing since the adoption of the United Nations (UN) 2030 Agenda, and there is a vast body of literature on policy coherence and integration of sustainable development agendas, climate change governance, development-or energy policy (see e.g., Bocquillon, 2018;Carbone, 2008;Carbone et al, 2016;Dombrowsky et al, 2022;Glass & Newig, 2019;Koff, 2017;Lenschow et al, 2018;May et al, 2006;McGowan et al, 2019;Nilsson et al, 2012;Nilsson & Persson, 2017;Strambo et al, 2015;Tosun & Lang, 2017;Tosun & Leininger, 2017). Despite the calls to understand temporal- (OECD, 2015), and political- (Bocquillon, 2018) impacts on coherence, less is known empirically of how such factors impact coherent policymaking.…”