This article discusses two ostensibly antagonistic themes: right-wing populism (RWP) and the UN 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). European politics has seen a sharp increase in right-wing populist influence over the last few election periods. More recently, such political influence has led to questions about right-wing populism’s impact on environmental and sustainable development policy. This paper takes a novel approach to understanding the potential connections between the rise of RWP in Europe and the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and SDGs in two ways. First, the paper is based on two workshops, informed by a preceding literature review on the topic of RWP in Europe, requested and organised by the European Sustainable Development Network (ESDN). Secondly, the results from the workshops are used to discuss and interpret the role of potentially differing worldviews (ontology, axiology, epistemology and societal vision) and how these relate to specific policy and governance responses, thereby impacting upon the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and SDGs in European countries.
Policy coherence is crucial in the 2030 Agenda's transformative ambitions and heralded as of paramount importance to ensure the successful implementation of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and climate policy targets. Despite political efforts to achieve policy coherence, apparent trade-offs and goal conflicts have emergedeven in a proclaimed 'front-runner' country like Sweden. This paper examines the role of ideas in proposing and legitimising policy options and achieving policy coherence in the light of the Swedish recovery debate in 2020 following the COVID-19 pandemic.Ideas of a green economic recovery put forward in the public debate are examined through thematic text and frame analysis. We show that ideas of a green transition, boosted by economic recovery spending, draw on a synergistic frame in combining social, environmental, and economic policy options, carrying a potential for coherency.However, the absence of a discussion on power, as in who stands to gain what under which circumstances, coupled with an inherent understanding of a temporal hierarchy of policy priorities does not only impact the ability to design coherent policies but may have considerable impacts on the prospects of achieving sustainability transformations.
During the formulation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, many promoted policy coherence as a key tool to ensure achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in a way that “leaves no one behind.” Their argument assumed that coherent policymaking contributes to more effective policies and supports over‐arching efforts to reduce inequality. As the 2030 Agenda reaches the halfway point, however, countries are falling short on many SDGs, particularly SDG 10 (reduce inequality). This study revisits the basic assumptions about policy coherence underpinning the SDGs. We systematically screened the peer‐reviewed literature to identify 40 studies that provide evidence about whether coherent policymaking contributes to more effective outcomes and helps to reduce inequality. We find that coherent policymaking did not help reduce inequality in a majority of cases and made it worse in several. Our findings challenge the narrative that coherence is a necessary pre‐condition for progress on the SDGs for all people.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.