“
How the EU can make fairer, more coherent decisions for the well-being of all
”
18
EU mechanisms for gathering evidence Institutional mechanisms do matter, but they are nothing without the political will to acknowledge research findings and act on them. PCD offers a new “thinking matrix” for policy analysis: it is a fresh way of looking at old issues. In order to succeed in this, ways to gather knowledge systematically need to be established. In terms of institutional mechanisms, this means tools that enable policymakers to make more informed choices, which will in turn result in developmentfriendly policies.
1. Prevent incoherencies: Ex-ante impact assessment One of the pivotal instruments for evidenced-based policymaking and for preventing – at the earliest possible stage – the adoption of incoherent, development-unfriendly policies within the EU system, is the so-called Impact Assessment (IA).
It is important that PCD is not perceived as an extra burden, or something that would necessarily require heavy investment. Rather, many existing mechanisms within the EU policymaking cycle can be adapted to play a valuable role in preventing, detecting or correcting incoherencies. By doing this, the EU can demonstrate compliance with its treaty obligations (see graph).
IAs are an obligation for all new major legislative or policy proposals such as regulations, directives, major strategies and mandates for negotiations with third countries. According to the Commission guidelines for impact assessment, as revised in 2009, all IAs “[…] should establish whether proposed policy options have an impact on relations with third countries. In particular they should look at: […] impacts on developing countries – initiatives that may affect developing countries should be analysed for their coherence with the objectives of the EU development policy. This includes an analysis of consequences (or spill-overs) in the longer run in areas such as economic, environmental, social or security policy”.6
We shall now look in more detail at possibilities for ensuring PCD in EU policymaking. The focus of this chapter will be on some of the mechanisms that have the greatest potential to contribute to information gathering about development impacts, in order to prevent and detect incoherencies.
Why are impact assessments in their current form not working for PCD purposes? In practice, IAs are carried out by the lead Directorate-General (DG) in the European Commission, sometimes drawing on external expertise for specific studies, and are released together with the policy proposal assessed. No dedicated support is provided to help the IA drafters to address development issues in their analysis. A
· Forward-looking studies · Policy review
New idea / new policy needed
Preparatory work
Evaluation · Ex-post impact assessment
· Stakeholders’ consultation · Ex-ante impact assessment · Commission inter-service consultation
· Political arbitration at high level in Commission
PCD Art. 208 Policy implementation
· Policy monitoring · Mid-term review · Multi-stakeholders dialogue on policy impact · Filing of complaints
Policy proposal
Policy adoption
· Inter-institutional relations · Political arbitration in EP and council
PREVENT INCOHERENCIES
REDRESS INCOHERENCIES
PCD mechanisms in EU policymaking cycle
DETECT INCOHERENCIES
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
We need clearer leadership when it comes to striving for greater policy coherence for development. MEP Charles Goerens