Camilla Adelle

Proceeding in Parallel or Drifting Apart? A Systematic Review of Policy Appraisal Research and Practices

Policy appraisal has spread rapidly throughout the OECD and beyond, as has the associated academic literature. In this paper we present the findings of a systematic review of this literature. We assess the extent to which developments in academic research and in everyday appraisal practices have informed one other. While there are signs that policy appraisal research is moving away from the ‘technical–rational model’ of appraisal, both research and practice remain heavily informed by it. The review reveals that research and practice are interacting in subtle ways, but these fall well short of what is sought by advocates of more reflexive approaches. We systematically examine the exact pattern of research–practice interaction depicted in the literature and explore how this may change in the future.

Policy assessment: the state of the art

Policy assessment has spread rapidly around the world in the last few decades providing an opportunity for further innovation and understanding in the way in which assessment is conceived, practised and researched. The extension of assessment from project and programme level to policy level was in part intended to improve its effectiveness by moving the focus of study upstream in the policy-making process. This paper reflects on the state of the art in policy assessment. It illustrates how the diffusion of policy assessment has led not to one standard ‘correct’ way of conducting policy assessment but to a great deal of diversity in how policy assessment is practised as well as researched and even theorized. Although the ‘textbook’ concept and everyday practices of policy assessment are based on a traditional rational linear concept of policy-making, policy assessment has become the latest arena for post-positivist conceptions of policy-making and assessment to resurface. This paper suggests that the future agenda for both research and practices could – indeed should – attempt to straddle these two theoretical approaches.

Policy Coherence for Development in the European Union: Do New Procedures Unblock or Simply Reproduce Old Disagreements?

Abstract Policy coherence for development (PCD) — the integration of the needs of developing countries into all policy areas — is now an EU policy goal. This article focuses on how far this ambitious goal has been addressed in a policy procedure — impact assessment (IA) — established to support such cross-cutting goals. Drawing on an analysis of the 2006 and 2013 reforms of the EU’s sugar policy, it finds that while IA offered a new venue in which to debate PCD, in practice it reproduced the same disagreements that previously frustrated agricultural reform. The article shows how IA was shaped during its implementation, so instead of functioning as a bureaucratic procedure to pursue policy coherence, it simply buttressed the power of dominant groups. Advocates of policy coherence in general and PCD in particular should therefore be mindful that the toolbox of implementing instruments in the EU may be more limited than sometimes assumed.

The use of policy formulation tools in the venue of policy appraisal: patterns and underlying motivations

As described in the introductory chapter, this book is concerned with the ways that actors in particular policy formulation venues gather and apply knowledge derived from using particular policy formulation tools. This chapter examines the venue of policy appraisal, which has received widespread attention from both policy formulation researchers and practitioners in the past two decades (Turnpenny et al. 2009; Adelle et al. 2012). As a formalized venue in which analysis is undertaken when formulating policy, it corresponds to the ‘InternalOfficial’ type as defined in Chapter 1. Indeed, the use of policy appraisal is often required by law: by 2008, all 31 OECD countries had either adopted, or were in the process of adopting, a formal system of policy appraisal (OECD 2009). Policy appraisal systems may in turn harness a wide range of policy formulation tools to carry out the analysis (Carley 1980; De Ridder et al. 2007; Nilsson et al. 2008). All these elements mean that the study of policy appraisal can yield revealing insights into policy formulation as a whole, since it covers, often mandatorily, the key ‘tasks’ of policy formulation noted in Chapter 1, namely: characterization of the current situation; problem conceptualization; identification of policy options; assessment of potential policy options and recommending and/or proposing a specific policy design. This chapter uses policy appraisal as a window into policy formulation activities as a whole.

The Role of Policy Networks in the Coordination of the European Union’s Economic and Environmental Interests: The Case of EU Mercury Policy

Abstract Policy networks can help to coordinate different objectives. The vast literature on network governance often implies that the mere existence of networks will automatically lead to improved coordination. However, much empirical analysis so far has focused on networks within particular policy sectors, which may actually inhibit horizontal coordination across policy sectors. This focus has led to ambiguities regarding the use of networks in practice — which this article seeks to help address. By analysing the role of networks in the coordination of the EU’s economic and environmental objectives in the development of its mercury policy, the article demonstrates that policy networks need to span several policy sectors if they are to help reconcile competing policy objectives. Furthermore, certain characteristics of the policy area which contributed to the formation of an inter-sector network in this case are discussed.

The EU Water Initiative at 15 : origins, processes and assessment

ABSTRACT This article examines the activities and achievements of the European Union Water Initiative, a transnational, multi-actor partnership established in 2002 by the European Commission to support water governance reforms around the world. Two regional components of the initiative – (a) Africa and (b) Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia – are studied with a focus on their organizational structures, activities, policies and achievements. The analysis provides evidence for improved regional dialogue and cooperation in the water sector, but also points to persistent weaknesses, in particular a lack of resources, ownership and mutual understanding as to the overall aims of the Initiative.

Africa: Searching for Shared Issues and Overcoming Asymmetries

This chapter outlines the main mechanisms through which the EU pursues its external environmental objectives in Africa, namely, high-level political dialogue in the form of the Joint Africa-EU Strategy, capacity building through development projects and programmes and manipulating utility calculations in the Economic Partnership Agreements. The chapter demonstrates that the environment and climate change have become more central in EU-Africa relations over the last decade. However, the EU’s attempts at pursuing its external environmental policies through high-level political dialogue have been constrained by many of the same weaknesses that undermine its wider relationship with Africa. On the other hand, capacity building appears to have been relatively successful, especially when in line with African initiatives and priorities.

Water: Promoting EU Policy Through Dialogue and Capacity Building

This chapter explores the EU’s attempts to export its water policy through three main policy tools. The EU Water Initiative, launched in 2002, is implemented through five regional partnerships or networks which bring together stakeholders in water policy reform in individual partner countries alongside EU officials and experts. This creates opportunities for the transfer of EU water policy to third countries. Second, the EU also allocates substantial development aid to the water sector especially in sub-Saharan Africa, through which it attempts to influence water governance in third countries. Third, an interest in water issues, and especially transboundary tensions over water access, from EU foreign ministers has led to increasing levels of water diplomacy. The effectiveness of these instruments at successfully promoting EU water policy in third countries is, however, constrained by various factors which are discussed in the chapter.

Introduction: European Union External Environmental Policy

The global environment is, by many measures, in a perilous state. There are, however, signs of progress in terms of governance responses, such as the Paris Agreement on climate change. Against this backdrop, this book charts the role the European Union has played in shaping environmental policies beyond its borders. Over recent decades, the EU has developed into an important actor in global environmental governance. However, systematic analysis of the EU’s environmental policies has largely focused on its internal environmental policies and how the EU pursues its environmental objectives within its own borders, somewhat neglecting the EU’s external environmental policies. This introductory chapter elaborates the analytical framework and concepts employed in the book and provides an overview of the content of the chapters.

Environmental Instruments in Development Cooperation: Promoting Better Development and Environmental Outcomes?

This chapter focuses on the EU’s track record of integrating, or mainstreaming, environmental objectives into in its development policy. The chapter sets out the relevant legal and policy framework before briefly introducing the main policy instruments into which environmental objectives can be integrated, such as the Development Cooperation Instrument and the European Development Fund, as well as the Global Public Goods and Challenges (GPGC) programme. The chapter then empirically examines how effectively environmental integration is implemented in the 2014–2020 development cycle in Ghana with a specific focus on climate policy integration. Despite changes to the EU development policy and practice over the years, difficulties still remain in integrating the environment in practice. At times environmental objectives can even appear at odds with development objectives.