Suchergebnisse

In the past decades, development cooperation (DC) led by conventional bi- and multilateral donors has been joined by a large number of small, private or public-private donors. This pluralism of actors raises questions as to whether or not these new donors are able to implement projects more or less effectively than their conventional counterparts. In contrast to their predecessors, the new donors have committed themselves to be more pragmatic, innovative and flexible in their development cooperation measures. However, they are also criticized for weakening the function of local civil society and have the reputation of being an intransparent and often controversial alternative to public services. With additional financial resources and their new approach to development, the new donors have been described in the literature as playing a controversial role in transforming development cooperation. This dissertation compares the effectiveness of initiatives by new and conventional donors with regard to the provision of public goods and services to the poor in the water and sanitation sector in India. India is an emerging country but it is experiencing high poverty rates and poor water supply in predominantly rural areas. It lends itself for analyzing this research theme as it is currently being confronted by a large number of actors and approaches that aim to find solutions for these challenges . In the theoretical framework of this dissertation, four governance configurations are derived from the interaction of varying actor types with regard to hierarchical and non-hierarchical steering of their interactions. These four governance configurations differ in decision-making responsibilities, accountability and delegation of tasks or direction of information flow. The assumption on actor relationships and steering is supplemented by possible alternative explanations in the empirical investigation, such as resource availability, the inheritance of structures and institutions from previous projects in a project context, ...

Die Verabschiedung der Agenda 2030 für nachhaltige Entwicklung und die Unterzeichnung des Übereinkommens von Paris Ende 2015 war ein entscheidender Moment der globalen Initiative für Nachhaltigkeit. Es besteht ein enormes Potenzial für positive Nebeneffekte durch eine sich wechselseitig unterstützende Umsetzung der 17 Ziele für nach¬haltige Entwicklung (Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs) der Agenda 2030 und der beabsichtigten nationalen Beiträge (Nationally Determined Contributions, NDCs), die das rechtsverbindliche Übereinkommen von Paris tragen. Die Länder-NDCs, d. h. ihre Klimapläne, enthalten nicht nur Verpflichtungen zur Emissionssenkung, sondern auch zu vielen weiteren Punkten, die für die nachhaltige Entwicklung von Bedeutung sind. Im Folgenden werden die zentralen Ergebnisse einer detaillierten Analyse des Beitrags der NDC-Klimamaßnahmen zu den SDGs und ihren Zielvorgaben vorgestellt. Nach dem Übereinkommen von Paris sollten die Länder alle fünf Jahre überarbeitete NDCs vorlegen, um die Zielvorgaben sukzessive hochzusetzen. Die erste vollständige Prüfung ("weltweite Bestandsaufnahme") steht 2023 an. Eine erste Bilanz wird jedoch schon 2018 gezogen ("unterstützender Dialog"). Die Umsetzung der Agenda 2030 fußt auf den von Land zu Land unterschiedlichen nationalen Strategien für nachhaltige Entwicklung. Auf globaler Ebene greifen Überwachungs- und Überprüfungsmechanismen auf dem jährlichen hochrangigen politischen Forum für nachhaltige Entwicklung (High Level Political Forum, HLPF) der Vereinten Nationen in New York. Üblicherweise werden diese beiden Umsetzungsprozesse trotz der vielfältigen thematischen Überschneidungen und dem gemeinsamen Ziel einer globalen nachhaltigen Entwicklung getrennt behandelt. Unsere Analyse hebt dagegen hervor, dass die NDC-Klimamaßnahmen auch die Umsetzung vieler SDGs und ihrer Zielvorgaben unterstützen können. Sie decken thematisch nicht nur bedeutende Elemente für SDG 13, sondern auch für viele weitere Themen der nachhaltigen Entwicklung ab. Die NDC-Klimamaßnahmen machen zudem deutlich, dass die SDGs miteinander verflochten sind. So erzeugt eine Vielzahl der NDC-Klimamaßnahmen Synergien, die mehrere SDGs zugleich voranbringen können. Um positive Nebeneffekte zu erreichen, sollten NDCs und SDGs koordiniert umgesetzt werden. Auf diese Weise lassen sich 1) Doppelungen und damit Kosten vermeiden und 2) die Agenda 2030 auf Länderebene systematischer umsetzen, indem durch bereits verpflichtend festgelegte Maßnahmen nach den NDCs Synergien zwischen beiden Agenden erschlossen werden. Eine Verknüpfung des Übereinkommens von Paris und der Agenda 2030 sollte erwogen werden, um Politikkohärenz zu erhöhen mit dem Ziel Synergien zu maximieren und Zielkonflikte reduzieren: Im Kontext des Übereinkommens von Paris sollten die Länder zukünftige Überarbeitungen der NDCs nutzen, um ihre Klimamaßnahmen enger mit den SDGs zu koordinieren. Im Kontext der Agenda 2030 sollten Strategien für nachhaltige Entwicklung die NDCs sinnvoll ergänzen. Positive Nebeneffekte bieten das Potenzial, die Länder stärker zur Erfüllung ihrer Verpflichtungen zu motivieren. Kompromisse sollten jedoch frühzeitig vermittelt werden, um beide Agenden erfolgreicher umsetzen zu können.

In the past decades, development cooperation (DC) led by conventional bi- and multilateral donors has been joined by a large number of small, private or public-private donors. This pluralism of actors raises questions as to whether or not these new donors are able to implement projects more or less effectively than their conventional counterparts. In contrast to their predecessors, the new donors have committed themselves to be more pragmatic, innovative and flexible in their development cooperation measures. However, they are also criticized for weakening the function of local civil society and have the reputation of being an intransparent and often controversial alternative to public services. With additional financial resources and their new approach to development, the new donors have been described in the literature as playing a controversial role in transforming development cooperation. This dissertation compares the effectiveness of initiatives by new and conventional donors with regard to the provision of public goods and […]

In the past decades, development cooperation (DC) led by conventional bi- and multilateral donors has been joined by a large number of small, private or public-private donors. This pluralism of actors raises questions as to whether or not these new donors are able to implement projects more or less effectively than their conventional counterparts. In contrast to their predecessors, the new donors have committed themselves to be more pragmatic, innovative and flexible in their development cooperation measures. However, they are also criticized for weakening the function of local civil society and have the reputation of being an intransparent and often controversial alternative to public services. With additional financial resources and their new approach to development, the new donors have been described in the literature as playing a controversial role in transforming development cooperation. This dissertation compares the effectiveness of initiatives by new and conventional donors with regard to the provision of public goods and […]

The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the conclusion of the Paris Agreement in the closing months of 2015 represented a significant moment in the global movement towards sustainability. There is enormous potential for co-benefits to arise from the mutually supportive implementation processes of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) elaborated in the 2030 Agenda and the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) underpinning the legally binding Paris Agreement. Countries' NDCs, their climate plans, include not only commitments to mitigate emissions but also address many other themes relevant to sustainable development. We present key findings of a fine-grained analysis of how climate activities in the NDCs contribute to SDGs and their targets. Under the provisions of the Paris Agreement, countries will submit an updated NDC every five years, the intention being that they scale-up their ambitions. The first full review ("global stocktake") will occur in 2023, but an initial stocktaking exercise will take place in 2018 ("facilitative dialogue"). Implementation of the 2030 Agenda is based on national sustainable development (SD) strategies that vary from country to country. At the global level, Follow-Up and Review mechanisms take place during the annual High Level Political Forum (HLPF) at the United Nations in New York. As a rule, these two implementation processes are kept separate, despite the many existing thematic overlaps and the shared objective of achieving global SD, but our analysis emphasises that the climate activities in the NDCs can support the achievement of a multitude of SDGs and their targets. They not only cover themes relevant to SDG 13 but also many other important fields of sustainable development. NDC climate activities also underline the interlinked character of the SDGs. In fact, numerous NDC climate activities entail synergies that can promote several SDGs at once. To generate co-benefits, NDC and SDG implementation processes should be coordinated 1) to prevent duplication and thereby reduce the costs, and 2) to achieve a more systematic implementation of the 2030 Agenda at country level that utilises already committed activities in NDCs to leverage synergies between both agendas. Moving forward, the opportunity to connect the Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda should be considered in order to promote policy coherence by maximising co-benefits and systematically mediating trade-offs for a more efficient implementation: - In the context of the Paris Agreement, countries should use future NDC updates to more closely align their climate activities with the SDGs. - In the context of the 2030 Agenda, SD strategies should meaningfully complement NDCs. - Co-benefits have the potential to increase the motivation for countries to fulfil commitments, but trade-offs should be anticipated early on in order to implement both agendas more effectively.

During World Water Week in August 2011 - entitled »Water in an Urbanizing World« - UN agencies, experts, and donors will once more be promoting transnational public-private partnerships as a promising and innovative instrument for the effective provision of water and sanitation. In reality, however, many of them turn out to have deficiencies; some are even outright failures. There are specific conditions for success, and there are limits to these partnerships when used in difficult settings or for complex tasks. If the UN wants its partnerships to effectively contribute toward the realization of the Millennium Development Goals or other international goals, it needs to monitor and assess them in a more systematic manner. The Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in 2012 is a chance to initiate the necessary reforms

Transnational public–private partnerships (PPPs) are external governance actors in the field of development cooperation and vary in composition, potentially including nonprofit and for‐profit organizations, state and public agencies, and intergovernmental organizations. This article analyzes the conditions under which PPPs have been successful in providing access to basic services (water, sanitation, and food) in areas of limited statehood in Bangladesh, India, and Kenya. We focus on 10 projects carried out by two PPPs that differ in two key respects: legitimacy and institutional design. We show that partnerships with high empirical legitimacy and an appropriate institutional design are best able to fulfill complex tasks in contexts of limited statehood. A participatory approach can promote legitimacy and thus success; projects that lack legitimacy are prone to failure. Additionally, a project's institutional design must address problems that commonly affect areas of limited statehood: It should provide access to resources for capacity development, ensure adequate monitoring, and be tailored to local needs.