Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

Targets under SDG 16 of the 2030 Agenda include institutional principles of good governance, which are considered key enablers for all other Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Despite their systemic importance, existing literature on SDG interlinkages has thus far provided limited coverage on how exactly aspects of good governance enable or constrain the improvement of social and economic systems. To fill this gap, this chapter presents the results and key findings from a scoping review of scholarly literature dealing with interlinkages between institutional aspects of SDG 16 and the achievement of poverty reduction (SDG 1) and reduced inequalities (SDG 10). The results of the review reveals that empirical evidence from across the globe testifies to the positive contribution of accountable, transparent and inclusive governance to the reduction of poverty and inequality.

Targets under SDG 16 of the 2030 Agenda include institutional principles of good governance, which are considered key enablers for all other Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Despite their systemic importance, existing literature on SDG interlinkages has thus far provided limited coverage on how exactly aspects of good governance enable or constrain the improvement of social and economic systems. To fill this gap, this chapter presents the results and key findings from a scoping review of scholarly literature dealing with interlinkages between institutional aspects of SDG 16 and the achievement of poverty reduction (SDG 1) and reduced inequalities (SDG 10). The results of the review reveals that empirical evidence from across the globe testifies to the positive contribution of accountable, transparent and inclusive governance to the reduction of poverty and inequality.

Targets under SDG 16 of the 2030 Agenda include institutional principles of good governance, which are considered key enablers for all other Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Despite their systemic importance, existing literature on SDG interlinkages has thus far provided limited coverage on how exactly aspects of good governance enable or constrain the improvement of social and economic systems. To fill this gap, this chapter presents the results and key findings from a scoping review of scholarly literature dealing with interlinkages between institutional aspects of SDG 16 and the achievement of poverty reduction (SDG 1) and reduced inequalities (SDG 10). The results of the review reveals that empirical evidence from across the globe testifies to the positive contribution of accountable, transparent and inclusive governance to the reduction of poverty and inequality.

This chapter introduces various criteria for the assessment of national Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) governance mechanisms. It proposes criteria for assessing the institutional design of national governance mechanisms for SDG implementation regarding their potential to foster coherent and effective implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Empirically, by applying these criteria to 137 country cases, it paves the way for future empirical analyses, in particular comparative cross-national analysis on institutional factors leveraging coherent and effective sustainability governance. Since the adoption of the 2030 Agenda, the governance mechanisms adopted for its implementation have been compared and analysed in several international policy reports, which focus on different dimensions of policy integration. To ensure efficient coordination, government SDG bodies should be backed by the highest levels of government while allowing line ministries to contribute both their sectoral expertise and working experience.

This chapter introduces various criteria for the assessment of national Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) governance mechanisms. It proposes criteria for assessing the institutional design of national governance mechanisms for SDG implementation regarding their potential to foster coherent and effective implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Empirically, by applying these criteria to 137 country cases, it paves the way for future empirical analyses, in particular comparative cross-national analysis on institutional factors leveraging coherent and effective sustainability governance. Since the adoption of the 2030 Agenda, the governance mechanisms adopted for its implementation have been compared and analysed in several international policy reports, which focus on different dimensions of policy integration. To ensure efficient coordination, government SDG bodies should be backed by the highest levels of government while allowing line ministries to contribute both their sectoral expertise and working experience.

This chapter introduces various criteria for the assessment of national Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) governance mechanisms. It proposes criteria for assessing the institutional design of national governance mechanisms for SDG implementation regarding their potential to foster coherent and effective implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Empirically, by applying these criteria to 137 country cases, it paves the way for future empirical analyses, in particular comparative cross-national analysis on institutional factors leveraging coherent and effective sustainability governance. Since the adoption of the 2030 Agenda, the governance mechanisms adopted for its implementation have been compared and analysed in several international policy reports, which focus on different dimensions of policy integration. To ensure efficient coordination, government SDG bodies should be backed by the highest levels of government while allowing line ministries to contribute both their sectoral expertise and working experience.

Coordination across sectors and levels is crucial for avoiding trade-offs and achieving synergies among SDGs that are directly dependent on water and land resources. However, there is an insufficient understanding of the factors that influence the effectiveness of institutions and governance mechanisms to achieve coherent policy design and implementation. The aim of the chapter is to address this knowledge gap by means of a case study of institutional arrangements for water and land governance in the lower Awash River Basin in Ethiopia. Analysing from a polycentric governance perspective, we find that the existing coordination mechanisms do not facilitate participation and representation of interests of local communities, and local governments while designing and implementing national plans. Ineffective policy instruments for ensuring environmental and social safeguards are leading to major trade-offs between goals of local food security and national economic growth by depriving pastoralists of their rights to communal land and water.

Coordination across sectors and levels is crucial for avoiding trade-offs and achieving synergies among SDGs that are directly dependent on water and land resources. However, there is an insufficient understanding of the factors that influence the effectiveness of institutions and governance mechanisms to achieve coherent policy design and implementation. The aim of the chapter is to address this knowledge gap by means of a case study of institutional arrangements for water and land governance in the lower Awash River Basin in Ethiopia. Analysing from a polycentric governance perspective, we find that the existing coordination mechanisms do not facilitate participation and representation of interests of local communities, and local governments while designing and implementing national plans. Ineffective policy instruments for ensuring environmental and social safeguards are leading to major trade-offs between goals of local food security and national economic growth by depriving pastoralists of their rights to communal land and water.

Coordination across sectors and levels is crucial for avoiding trade-offs and achieving synergies among SDGs that are directly dependent on water and land resources. However, there is an insufficient understanding of the factors that influence the effectiveness of institutions and governance mechanisms to achieve coherent policy design and implementation. The aim of the chapter is to address this knowledge gap by means of a case study of institutional arrangements for water and land governance in the lower Awash River Basin in Ethiopia. Analysing from a polycentric governance perspective, we find that the existing coordination mechanisms do not facilitate participation and representation of interests of local communities, and local governments while designing and implementing national plans. Ineffective policy instruments for ensuring environmental and social safeguards are leading to major trade-offs between goals of local food security and national economic growth by depriving pastoralists of their rights to communal land and water.

The chapter presents a case study of the Azraq area in Eastern Jordan where agricultural, domestic and environmental users compete for shrinking groundwater resources. Responding to key research questions in this volume, it analyses the WEF nexus situation through the lens of pertinent SDGs, evaluates the government’s policy-mix as well as coordination mechanisms in light of the 2030 Agenda‘s core principles and asked for the role of political-institutional context factors. The chapter finds strong trade-offs among several SDGs and their targets related to SDGs 2, 6, 7, 8, and 15, including within SDG 6. The government’s recent policy-mix to govern access to groundwater combines regulatory and market-based instruments. It has had some effects on farmers, but enforcement privileges individuals with personal connections (wasta), negatively affecting leave no one behind. In the monarchy, centralized top-down governance prevails and inter-sectoral and multi-level coordination are limited, negatively affecting interconnectedness and indivisibility. Multi-stakeholder partnerships are rare and a past plan for participatory groundwater management in Azraq was never implemented. Overall, the case shows limits of Jordanian autocratic regime to deal with the complexities of the 2030 Agenda in view of resource scarcity.

The chapter presents a case study of the Azraq area in Eastern Jordan where agricultural, domestic and environmental users compete for shrinking groundwater resources. Responding to key research questions in this volume, it analyses the WEF nexus situation through the lens of pertinent SDGs, evaluates the government’s policy-mix as well as coordination mechanisms in light of the 2030 Agenda‘s core principles and asked for the role of political-institutional context factors. The chapter finds strong trade-offs among several SDGs and their targets related to SDGs 2, 6, 7, 8, and 15, including within SDG 6. The government’s recent policy-mix to govern access to groundwater combines regulatory and market-based instruments. It has had some effects on farmers, but enforcement privileges individuals with personal connections (wasta), negatively affecting leave no one behind. In the monarchy, centralized top-down governance prevails and inter-sectoral and multi-level coordination are limited, negatively affecting interconnectedness and indivisibility. Multi-stakeholder partnerships are rare and a past plan for participatory groundwater management in Azraq was never implemented. Overall, the case shows limits of Jordanian autocratic regime to deal with the complexities of the 2030 Agenda in view of resource scarcity.

The chapter presents a case study of the Azraq area in Eastern Jordan where agricultural, domestic and environmental users compete for shrinking groundwater resources. Responding to key research questions in this volume, it analyses the WEF nexus situation through the lens of pertinent SDGs, evaluates the government’s policy-mix as well as coordination mechanisms in light of the 2030 Agenda‘s core principles and asked for the role of political-institutional context factors. The chapter finds strong trade-offs among several SDGs and their targets related to SDGs 2, 6, 7, 8, and 15, including within SDG 6. The government’s recent policy-mix to govern access to groundwater combines regulatory and market-based instruments. It has had some effects on farmers, but enforcement privileges individuals with personal connections (wasta), negatively affecting leave no one behind. In the monarchy, centralized top-down governance prevails and inter-sectoral and multi-level coordination are limited, negatively affecting interconnectedness and indivisibility. Multi-stakeholder partnerships are rare and a past plan for participatory groundwater management in Azraq was never implemented. Overall, the case shows limits of Jordanian autocratic regime to deal with the complexities of the 2030 Agenda in view of resource scarcity.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) merge the three dimensions of sustainable development: environmental, social and economic. This chapter focuses on the specific goal of economic growth and the controversy surrounding it. It explores the SDGs of interest: economic growth, inequality, environmental footprints and poverty. In fact, it frames the decrease in inequality in terms of different growth rates rather than explicit redistribution of income and wealth. The inequality targets seem to be aligned with the economic growth ones but diametrically opposed to any degrowth notion. In fact, reaching the Paris Goals is nearly impossible under high economic growth and past trends of decoupling rates. We have shown this by developing a simple model of economic growth and Kaya decomposition. The growth vs. degrowth debate might welcome the “agrowth” perspective because it does not view growth necessarily as good or bad and is more flexible in adopting to the development needs of individual countries.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) merge the three dimensions of sustainable development: environmental, social and economic. This chapter focuses on the specific goal of economic growth and the controversy surrounding it. It explores the SDGs of interest: economic growth, inequality, environmental footprints and poverty. In fact, it frames the decrease in inequality in terms of different growth rates rather than explicit redistribution of income and wealth. The inequality targets seem to be aligned with the economic growth ones but diametrically opposed to any degrowth notion. In fact, reaching the Paris Goals is nearly impossible under high economic growth and past trends of decoupling rates. We have shown this by developing a simple model of economic growth and Kaya decomposition. The growth vs. degrowth debate might welcome the “agrowth” perspective because it does not view growth necessarily as good or bad and is more flexible in adopting to the development needs of individual countries.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) merge the three dimensions of sustainable development: environmental, social and economic. This chapter focuses on the specific goal of economic growth and the controversy surrounding it. It explores the SDGs of interest: economic growth, inequality, environmental footprints and poverty. In fact, it frames the decrease in inequality in terms of different growth rates rather than explicit redistribution of income and wealth. The inequality targets seem to be aligned with the economic growth ones but diametrically opposed to any degrowth notion. In fact, reaching the Paris Goals is nearly impossible under high economic growth and past trends of decoupling rates. We have shown this by developing a simple model of economic growth and Kaya decomposition. The growth vs. degrowth debate might welcome the “agrowth” perspective because it does not view growth necessarily as good or bad and is more flexible in adopting to the development needs of individual countries.

This chapter discusses the main challenges to be solved in terms of integrating national inequality and redistribution in climate modelling; and considers the research on revenue recycling mechanisms from micro-macro level studies on climate policies. It explores the case of India, based on the availability of data, the prevalence of inequality today and the importance of mitigation and in particular of energy system decarbonization. The chapter further adds to the literature that uses integrated assessment models (IAMs) to address sustainable development goals (SDGs) and their links. By linking environmental and socio-economic systems, IAMs are in a good position to assess the long-term prospects of the 2030 Agenda. The chapter stresses how the interaction between climate policies and inequality needs to be sufficiently considered if a policy maker has the objective to mitigate global climate change and inequality simultaneously as in the SDGs.

This chapter discusses the main challenges to be solved in terms of integrating national inequality and redistribution in climate modelling; and considers the research on revenue recycling mechanisms from micro-macro level studies on climate policies. It explores the case of India, based on the availability of data, the prevalence of inequality today and the importance of mitigation and in particular of energy system decarbonization. The chapter further adds to the literature that uses integrated assessment models (IAMs) to address sustainable development goals (SDGs) and their links. By linking environmental and socio-economic systems, IAMs are in a good position to assess the long-term prospects of the 2030 Agenda. The chapter stresses how the interaction between climate policies and inequality needs to be sufficiently considered if a policy maker has the objective to mitigate global climate change and inequality simultaneously as in the SDGs.

This chapter discusses the main challenges to be solved in terms of integrating national inequality and redistribution in climate modelling; and considers the research on revenue recycling mechanisms from micro-macro level studies on climate policies. It explores the case of India, based on the availability of data, the prevalence of inequality today and the importance of mitigation and in particular of energy system decarbonization. The chapter further adds to the literature that uses integrated assessment models (IAMs) to address sustainable development goals (SDGs) and their links. By linking environmental and socio-economic systems, IAMs are in a good position to assess the long-term prospects of the 2030 Agenda. The chapter stresses how the interaction between climate policies and inequality needs to be sufficiently considered if a policy maker has the objective to mitigate global climate change and inequality simultaneously as in the SDGs.

This chapter focuses on the poverty, inequality and growth trends in four low and middle-income countries in East and South East Asia – namely the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, and Mongolia, in the decade post-2000. Having understood the landscape of social policies, including health and education in the four East Asian countries, it discusses how successful have the countries been in reducing poverty and inequality. The chapter assesses social protection systems, including access to health and education in East and South East Asia from two key parameters: level of public expenditure on social protection, health and education, and coverage or universalization of different programs. The main argument against universal coverage is the high public expenditure. Higher levels of economic growth are associated with increasing inequality levels. In a study by the Centre for Equity Assessment, they assess how progressive a fiscal policy is in order to reduce poverty and inequality within the tax-transfer framework.

This chapter focuses on the poverty, inequality and growth trends in four low and middle-income countries in East and South East Asia – namely the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, and Mongolia, in the decade post-2000. Having understood the landscape of social policies, including health and education in the four East Asian countries, it discusses how successful have the countries been in reducing poverty and inequality. The chapter assesses social protection systems, including access to health and education in East and South East Asia from two key parameters: level of public expenditure on social protection, health and education, and coverage or universalization of different programs. The main argument against universal coverage is the high public expenditure. Higher levels of economic growth are associated with increasing inequality levels. In a study by the Centre for Equity Assessment, they assess how progressive a fiscal policy is in order to reduce poverty and inequality within the tax-transfer framework.