谁的政策连贯性很重要?评估加纳的可持续渔业和欧洲联盟的参与

IF 2 3区 经济学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Niels Keijzer, Lina Galvis, Sarah Delputte
{"title":"谁的政策连贯性很重要?评估加纳的可持续渔业和欧洲联盟的参与","authors":"Niels Keijzer,&nbsp;Lina Galvis,&nbsp;Sarah Delputte","doi":"10.1111/dpr.12736","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Motivation</h3>\n \n <p>Promoting coherence for sustainable development (PCSD) is a key means of implementation for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, yet it has been overlooked as policy discussions have focused predominantly on the financing of the agenda. The literature and policy debates about PCSD largely focus on processes and on OECD countries, and they neglect their political and normative dimensions. This article complements recent literature on PCSD by elaborating and testing a relational perspective on the concept.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>To address these issues, this article elaborates a relational perspective that responds to the misrepresentation of third countries as passive recipients of (in)coherent OECD policy preferences.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\n \n <p>The analysis presented summarizes the literature on the related concepts of PCSD and Policy Coherence for Development (PCD). On this basis, the article articulates a relational perspective on policy coherence that complements other critical perspectives in the literature. Subsequently, it explores the potential and relevance of this relational perspective by analysing how the fisheries policy preferences of the European Union interact with those of Ghana.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>Overall, the analysis shows that a commitment to sustainable fisheries cannot be assumed for either the EU or Ghana. Furthermore, assessing the responsibilities of the EU and Ghana around sustainability and degrees of adherence is difficult due to the presence of other fishing nations and influences. In the context of the EU's ambitious policy framework, the continued overfishing in Ghanaian waters negatively affects the credibility and justification of its continued involvement. Policy dialogue between the EU and the Ghanaian government and accompanying EU technical assistance have supported changes to Ghanaian fisheries policies, but overfishing continues.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\n \n <p>Discussions on promoting PCSD should be supported by more empirical research into the extent and manner that policy preferences consider by policy-makers to be coherent with the 2030 Agenda contribute to advancing the agenda in different country and regional contexts.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51478,"journal":{"name":"Development Policy Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dpr.12736","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Whose policy coherence counts? Assessing sustainable fisheries in Ghana and the European Union's engagement\",\"authors\":\"Niels Keijzer,&nbsp;Lina Galvis,&nbsp;Sarah Delputte\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dpr.12736\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Motivation</h3>\\n \\n <p>Promoting coherence for sustainable development (PCSD) is a key means of implementation for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, yet it has been overlooked as policy discussions have focused predominantly on the financing of the agenda. The literature and policy debates about PCSD largely focus on processes and on OECD countries, and they neglect their political and normative dimensions. This article complements recent literature on PCSD by elaborating and testing a relational perspective on the concept.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>To address these issues, this article elaborates a relational perspective that responds to the misrepresentation of third countries as passive recipients of (in)coherent OECD policy preferences.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\\n \\n <p>The analysis presented summarizes the literature on the related concepts of PCSD and Policy Coherence for Development (PCD). On this basis, the article articulates a relational perspective on policy coherence that complements other critical perspectives in the literature. Subsequently, it explores the potential and relevance of this relational perspective by analysing how the fisheries policy preferences of the European Union interact with those of Ghana.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>Overall, the analysis shows that a commitment to sustainable fisheries cannot be assumed for either the EU or Ghana. Furthermore, assessing the responsibilities of the EU and Ghana around sustainability and degrees of adherence is difficult due to the presence of other fishing nations and influences. In the context of the EU's ambitious policy framework, the continued overfishing in Ghanaian waters negatively affects the credibility and justification of its continued involvement. Policy dialogue between the EU and the Ghanaian government and accompanying EU technical assistance have supported changes to Ghanaian fisheries policies, but overfishing continues.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Discussions on promoting PCSD should be supported by more empirical research into the extent and manner that policy preferences consider by policy-makers to be coherent with the 2030 Agenda contribute to advancing the agenda in different country and regional contexts.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dpr.12736\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12736\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12736","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

动机 促进可持续发展的一致性(PCSD)是落实 2030 年可持续发展议程的一个关键手段,但由于政策讨论主要集中在议程的筹资问题上,它一直被忽视。有关可持续发展协调委员会的文献和政策辩论主要集中在进程和经合组织国家,而忽略了其政治和规范层面。本文通过阐述和检验关于可持续发展教育项目概念的关系视角,对有关这一概念的最新文献进行了补充。 目的 为解决这些问题,本文阐述了一种关系视角,以回应将第三国视为经合组织(不)一致政策偏好的被动接受者的错误表述。 方法和途径 本文的分析总结了与 "可持续发展政策协调 "和 "发展政策协调 "相关概念的文献。在此基础上,文章阐述了政策一致性的关系视角,对文献中的其他批判性视角进行了补充。随后,文章通过分析欧盟的渔业政策偏好如何与加纳的渔业政策偏好相互影响,探讨了这一关系视角的潜力和相关性。 研究结果 总体而言,分析表明,欧盟和加纳都不能对可持续渔业做出承诺。此外,由于其他捕鱼国的存在和影响,很难评估欧盟和加纳在可持续发展方面的责任和遵守程度。在欧盟雄心勃勃的政策框架下,加纳水域持续的过度捕捞对欧盟继续参与的可信度和合理性产生了负面影响。欧盟与加纳政府之间的政策对话以及随之而来的欧盟技术援助支持了加纳渔业政策的变革,但过度捕捞仍在继续。 政策影响 有关促进可持续发展和社区发展计划的讨论应得到更多实证研究的支持,研究决策者 认为与 2030 年议程一致的政策偏好在多大程度上和以何种方式在不同国家和地区背景下有 助于推进该议程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Whose policy coherence counts? Assessing sustainable fisheries in Ghana and the European Union's engagement

Whose policy coherence counts? Assessing sustainable fisheries in Ghana and the European Union's engagement

Motivation

Promoting coherence for sustainable development (PCSD) is a key means of implementation for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, yet it has been overlooked as policy discussions have focused predominantly on the financing of the agenda. The literature and policy debates about PCSD largely focus on processes and on OECD countries, and they neglect their political and normative dimensions. This article complements recent literature on PCSD by elaborating and testing a relational perspective on the concept.

Purpose

To address these issues, this article elaborates a relational perspective that responds to the misrepresentation of third countries as passive recipients of (in)coherent OECD policy preferences.

Methods and approach

The analysis presented summarizes the literature on the related concepts of PCSD and Policy Coherence for Development (PCD). On this basis, the article articulates a relational perspective on policy coherence that complements other critical perspectives in the literature. Subsequently, it explores the potential and relevance of this relational perspective by analysing how the fisheries policy preferences of the European Union interact with those of Ghana.

Findings

Overall, the analysis shows that a commitment to sustainable fisheries cannot be assumed for either the EU or Ghana. Furthermore, assessing the responsibilities of the EU and Ghana around sustainability and degrees of adherence is difficult due to the presence of other fishing nations and influences. In the context of the EU's ambitious policy framework, the continued overfishing in Ghanaian waters negatively affects the credibility and justification of its continued involvement. Policy dialogue between the EU and the Ghanaian government and accompanying EU technical assistance have supported changes to Ghanaian fisheries policies, but overfishing continues.

Policy implications

Discussions on promoting PCSD should be supported by more empirical research into the extent and manner that policy preferences consider by policy-makers to be coherent with the 2030 Agenda contribute to advancing the agenda in different country and regional contexts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Development Policy Review
Development Policy Review DEVELOPMENT STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Development Policy Review is the refereed journal that makes the crucial links between research and policy in international development. Edited by staff of the Overseas Development Institute, the London-based think-tank on international development and humanitarian issues, it publishes single articles and theme issues on topics at the forefront of current development policy debate. Coverage includes the latest thinking and research on poverty-reduction strategies, inequality and social exclusion, property rights and sustainable livelihoods, globalisation in trade and finance, and the reform of global governance. Informed, rigorous, multi-disciplinary and up-to-the-minute, DPR is an indispensable tool for development researchers and practitioners alike.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信