Suchergebnisse

Implementing the 2030 Agenda requires an improved understanding of the interdependencies among the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and targets and the design and implementation of coherent policies across different levels and sectors. The water-energy-food (WEF) nexus has emerged over the past decade as a useful concept to reduce trade-offs and increase synergies in promoting goals of water, energy and food security. While WEF scholarship substantiates the biophysical interlinkages and calls for increased and effective coordination across sectors and levels, knowledge about the conditions for effective coordination is lacking. We aim to contribute to this understanding by conceptualising WEF nexus governance from an analytical perspective as a polycentric system and by developing a framework based on the concept of networks of adjacent action situations (NAASs). The interdependence among transactions for pursuing WEF securities by actors in the differing action situations generates a need for coordination in changing or sustaining institutions, policy goals and policy instruments that guide actions leading to sustainable outcomes. Coordination is achieved through arrangements based on cooperation, coercion and competition. Coordination in complex social-ecological systems is unlikely to be achieved by a single governance mode but rather by synergistic combinations of such modes. Particular coordination arrangements that emerge in a given context depend on the distribution of authority, information and resources within and across interlinked decision-making centres. Integrating the political ecology-based conceptualisations of power into the analytical framework further extends the governance analysis to include the influence of power relations on coordination. Methodological innovation in delineating action situations and identifying the unit of analysis as well as integrating different sources and types of data are required to operationalise the conceptual framework.

Implementing the 2030 Agenda requires an improved understanding of the interdependencies among the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and targets and the design and implementation of coherent policies across different levels and sectors. The water-energy-food (WEF) nexus has emerged over the past decade as a useful concept to reduce trade-offs and increase synergies in promoting goals of water, energy and food security. While WEF scholarship substantiates the biophysical interlinkages and calls for increased and effective coordination across sectors and levels, knowledge about the conditions for effective coordination is lacking. We aim to contribute to this understanding by conceptualising WEF nexus governance from an analytical perspective as a polycentric system and by developing a framework based on the concept of networks of adjacent action situations (NAASs).The interdependence among transactions for pursuing WEF securities by actors in the differing action situations generates a need for coordination in changing or sustaining institutions, policy goals and policy instruments that guide actions leading to sustainable outcomes. Coordination is achieved through arrangements based on cooperation, coercion and competition. Coordination in complex social-ecological systems is unlikely to be achieved by a single governance mode but rather by synergistic combinations of such modes. Particular coordination arrangements that emerge in a given context depend on the distribution of authority, information and resources within and across interlinked decision-making centres. Integrating the political ecology-based conceptualisations of power into the analytical framework further extends the governance analysis to include the influence of power relations on coordination. Methodological innovation in delineating action situations and identifying the unit of analysis as well as integrating different sources and types of data are required to operationalise the conceptual framework.

Interdependencies among the goals and targets make the 2030 Agenda indivisible and their integrated implementation requires coherent policies. Coordination across different sectors and levels is deemed as crucial for avoiding trade-offs and achieving synergies among multiple, interlinked policy goals, which depend on natural resources. However, there is insufficient evidence regarding the conditions under which coordination for integrated achievement of different water- and land-based Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) functions effectively. The paper investigates the land and water governance in the Ethiopian lower Awash River basin and identifies key interdependencies among related SDGs. It assesses in how far the interactions and coordination among various decision-making centres are effective in managing the interdependencies among different goals. Systems for using and managing water and land exhibit features of polycentric governance as this process involves decision-making centres across different sectors and at various levels. Key action situations for land and water governance in operational, collective and constitutional choice levels are interlinked/networked. Each action situation constitutes actions that deliver one of the functions of polycentric governance, such as production, provision, monitoring etc. as an outcome, which affects the choices of actors in an adjacent action situation. The study shows that the existing institutions and governance mechanisms for water and land in Ethiopia are not effective in managing the interdependencies. Non-recognition of traditional communal rights of pastoralists over land and water and ineffective policy instruments for ensuring environmental and social safeguards are leading to major trade-offs among goals of local food security and economic growth. The autocratic regime of Ethiopia has coordination mechanisms in place, which fulfil the role of dissemination of policies and raising awareness. However, they are not designed to build consensus and political will for designing and implementing national plans, by including the interests and aspirations of the local communities and local governments. The study recommends efforts to achieve SDGs in the Ethiopian Awash River basin to focus on strengthening the capacities of relevant actors, especially the district and river basin authorities in delivering the key governance functions such as water infrastructure maintenance, efficient use of water, and effective implementation of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Further, urgent efforts for scaling up of recognition, certification and protection of communal land rights of pastoralists and clear definition of rules for awarding compensation upon expropriation, are required.

Interdependencies among the goals and targets make the 2030 Agenda indivisible and their integrated implementation requires coherent policies. Coordination across different sectors and levels is deemed as crucial for avoiding trade-offs and achieving synergies among multiple, interlinked policy goals, which depend on natural resources. However, there is insufficient evidence regarding the conditions under which coordination for integrated achievement of different water- and land-based Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) functions effectively. The paper investigates the land and water governance in the Ethiopian lower Awash River basin and identifies key interdependencies among related SDGs. It assesses in how far the interactions and coordination among various decision-making centres are effective in managing the interdependencies among different goals. Systems for using and managing water and land exhibit features of polycentric governance as this process involves decision-making centres across different sectors and at various levels. Key action situations for land and water governance in operational, collective and constitutional choice levels are interlinked/networked. Each action situation constitutes actions that deliver one of the functions of polycentric governance, such as production, provision, monitoring etc. as an outcome, which affects the choices of actors in an adjacent action situation. The study shows that the existing institutions and governance mechanisms for water and land in Ethiopia are not effective in managing the interdependencies. Non-recognition of traditional communal rights of pastoralists over land and water and ineffective policy instruments for ensuring environmental and social safeguards are leading to major trade-offs among goals of local food security and economic growth. The autocratic regime of Ethiopia has coordination mechanisms in place, which fulfil the role of dissemination of policies and raising awareness. However, they are not designed to build consensus and political will for designing and implementing national plans, by including the interests and aspirations of the local communities and local governments. The study recommends efforts to achieve SDGs in the Ethiopian Awash River basin to focus on strengthening the capacities of relevant actors, especially the district and river basin authorities in delivering the key governance functions such as water infrastructure maintenance, efficient use of water, and effective implementation of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Further, urgent efforts for scaling up of recognition, certification and protection of communal land rights of pastoralists and clear definition of rules for awarding compensation upon expropriation, are required.

Governing the Interlinkages between the SDGs: Approaches, Opportunities and Challenges identifies the institutional processes, governance mechanisms and policy mixes that are conducive to devising strategies of integrated Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) implementation. The book edited by Anita Breuer, Daniele Malerba, Srinivasa Srigiri and Pooja Balasubramanian examines the dedicated policies targeting the SDGs, as well as political and institutional drivers of synergies and trade-offs between the SDGs in selected key areas – both cross-nationally and in specific country contexts. Their analysis moves beyond the focus on links between SDG indicators and targets. Instead, the book takes advantage of recent evidence from the initial implementation phase of the SDGs and each chapter explores the question of which political-institutional prerequisites, governance mechanisms and policy instruments are suited to accelerate the implementation of the SDGs. The findings presented are intended to both inform high-level policy debates and to provide orientation for practitioners working on development cooperation.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the fragility of health systems and highlights the need for renewed efforts to finance pandemic preparedness, prevention and response (PPR) mechanisms, and universal health coverage (UHC). Two lessons emerge from this global health challenge. First, it has shown that global problems need global solutions, as well as the agency of local and national actors to make them work, so it is recommended that public health be considered a global public good. This requires solidarity between rich and poor countries to attain a globally "highest attainable standard" for managing pandemics and other public health emergencies. The provision of such a global public good requires substantial public resources. Furthermore, the focus should not only be on preventing the spread of diseases but also on detecting and fighting infectious diseases at their source. The second lesson is that prevention is a good investment, as it costs less than remedial interventions at later stages. Health systems can be considered as the means by which health priorities, such as pandemic PPR and UHC, can be operationalised. Studies show that health systems that could effectively leverage both robust health security core capacities (e.g. laboratories) and fundamental UHC interventions (e.g. accessible health facilities) were often in a better position to protect their citizens against the negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Focusing on the landscape of health financing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), it becomes clear that during the COVID-19 pandemic there was a substantial increase in international health financing. However, continued high out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) in LMICs points to a structural imbalance in health financing, which is one of the major barriers for achieving SDG3. Further contribution from international development assistance and an increase in domestic government expenditure by LMICs through improved mobilisation of domestic resources is therefore impera-tive. Funding gaps to achieve PPR and UHC in LMICs are small in relation to the projected costs of a pandemic such as COVID-19. However, as global debt levels soar, fiscal spaces to close these funding gaps become smaller. The following policy options for governments and international development partners should be considered to protect and improve spending on health in times of shrinking fiscal spaces: reallocation within budgets towards health, better priority-setting of health financing, and greater use of debt-to-health swaps, health taxes and national health insurance schemes. Importantly, investment in health is critical not just for the health benefits, but also because of the positive socio-economic impacts that result, in excess of the level of investment. Improved well-being and health outcomes translate into higher productivity and income, with a benefit–cost ratio of nine for low-income countries and 20 for lower-middle income countries. Given the high rates of unemployment in many LMICs, investments that create jobs in the healthcare sector are also beneficial for other sectors. Evidence shows that for every healthcare professional job that is created, 3.4 jobs are created on average in other sectors. As a large proportion of healthcare workers is female, these new jobs can be an opportunity for young women, in particular, and can help to promote female empowerment and gender equality. Altogether, these long-term benefits affirm that investment in health can enable large spillover effects on the social and economic dimensions of sustainable development and the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Die Corona-Pandemie hat uns die Anfälligkeit der Gesundheitssysteme vor Augen geführt und gezeigt, dass wir neue Finanzierungsmechanismen für Pandemieprävention, -vorsorge und -reaktion (PPR) und die flächen-deckende Gesundheitsversorgung (Universal Health Coverage, UHC) brauchen. Aus der Pandemie lassen sich zwei allgemeine Lehren ziehen. Erstens: Globale Probleme erfordern globale Lösungen, und dabei sind sowohl lokale als auch nationale Akteure gefragt. Deshalb sollte öffentliche Gesundheit als globales öffentliches Gut betrachtet werden. Dies erfordert Solidarität zwischen reichen und armen Ländern, um die Bewältigung von Pandemien und anderen Gesundheitskrisen zu ermöglichen. Die Bereitstellung eines solchen globalen öffentlichen Gutes erfordert jedoch erhebliche öffentliche Mittel. Die Bereitstellung zusätzlicher Mittel, insbesondere für den Pandemiefonds, die WHO, sowie die Umsetzung des internationalen Pandemieabkommens sind erste Schritte in die richtige Richtung. Wichtig ist dabei, dass der Schwerpunkt nicht nur auf der Verhinderung der Ausbreitung von Infektionskrankheiten liegt, sondern auch auf ihrer Erkennung und Bekämpfung direkt an der Quelle, was eine systemische Blickweise erfordert. Die zweite Lehre ist, dass Prävention sich lohnt, da sie weniger kostet als spätere Abhilfemaßnahmen. Gesundheitssysteme lassen sich als Instrument zur Umsetzung von PPR und UHC begreifen. Studien zeigen, dass Gesundheitssysteme mit verlässlichen Kernkapazitäten im Bereich Gesundheitssicherheit (z. B. Labore) und grundlegenden UHC-Strukturen (z. B. Zugang zu Gesundheitseinrichtungen) ihre Bürger*innen oft besser vor den negativen Auswirkungen der Corona-Pandemie schützen konnten. Gerade mit Blick auf Länder mit niedrigem bis mittlerem Einkommen (LMICs) wird deutlich, dass die internationale Unterstützung im Bereich Gesundheit während der Corona-Pandemie deutlich anstieg. Die nach wie vor hohen Zuzahlungen von privaten Haushalten für Gesundheitsdienstleistungen (Out-of-Pocket-Ausgaben (OOPE)) in LMICs deuten jedoch auf ein strukturelles Ungleichgewicht in der Gesundheitsfinanzierung hin. Daher ist eine weitere finanzielle Unterstützung durch die internationale Entwicklungszusammenarbeit und höhere nationale Gesundheitsausgaben der LMICs durch eine verstärkte Mobilisierung inländischer Ressourcen zur Erreichung von PPR und UHC unerlässlich. Regierungen und internationale Entwicklungspartner sollten in Zeiten begrenzter Mittel ihre Gesundheitsausgaben mithilfe der folgenden Maßnahmen stabilisieren oder ggf. ausweiten: i) Priorisierung des Gesundheitssektors bei den nationalen Ausgaben ii) bessere Prioritätensetzung bei der internationalen Gesundheitsfinanzierung, iii) Debt-Health Swaps, iv) Gesundheitssteuern, v) öffentliche Krankenversicherungen. Ein wichtiger Grund für diese Maßnahmen ist, dass Investitionen in die Gesundheit nicht nur aufgrund des gesundheitlichen Nutzens von entscheidender Bedeutung sind, sondern auch positive sozioökonomische Wirkungen haben, deren Wert die ursprünglichen Investitionen oft bei weitem übersteigt. Studien belegen, dass der wirtschaftliche und soziale Nutzen der Investitionen dabei die Kosten in Ländern mit niedrigem Einkommen um das Neunfache und in Ländern mit niedrigem und mittlerem Einkommen um das Zwanzigfache übersteigt. Angesichts der hohen Arbeitslosenquoten in vielen LMICs kommen Investitionen, die Arbeitsplätze im Gesundheitssektor schaffen, auch anderen Sektoren zugute. Es ist belegt, dass für jeden neu geschaffenen Arbeitsplatz im Gesundheitswesen durchschnittlich 3,4 Arbeitsplätze in anderen Sektoren entstehen. Da ein großer Teil des Gesundheitspersonals weiblich ist, bieten diese neuen Arbeitsplätze insbesondere jungen Frauen eine Chance und können Geschlechtergleichheit fördern.