Joining up or Pulling Apart? The Use of Appraisal to Coordinate Policy Making for Sustainable Development

Abstract

Abstract. Coordinated (or`joined-up') approaches to policy making are said to be an immensely important ingredient in the effective governance of sustainable development. There are, however, few detailed empirical studies of how well different policy coordination instruments perform in relation to this task. This paper identifies the United Kingdom as a critical test of how to achieve better policy coordination because it has been regularly identified as an exemplar of best practice in international benchmarking exercises. Specifically, it examines the integration of the environment into mainstream policy making through the application of policy appraisal in the strategically important areas of energy, defence, and public spending. Overall, it finds that the UK's much vaunted approach to coordinating the governance of sustainable development has struggled to tame the forces of departmentalism. While deploying carefully packaged combinations of coordinating instruments may address some causes of non-joined-up behaviour, perfectly coherent policy making is always likely to remain tantalisingly out of reach.

Expectations and Experiences of Diverse Forms of Knowledge Use: The Case of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment

“…Environmental policy has long been perceived as a relatively peripheral issue (Revell, 2005), despite efforts to mainstream it across government (e.g. Russel and Jordan, 2009). Users were particularly aware of this challenge, "especially in the time of recession" (U10), although academics may also have been sympathetic given that the origin of ecosystem services concepts is thought to be linked to academics' desire to better demonstrate nature's value to people (Costanza et al, 1997), and so better prioritise it in decision-making.…”

Reporting Systems for Sustainability: What Are They Measuring?

“…National governments such as the UK Government have established their own reporting systems. The UK government has been noted as an international leader in governance for sustainable development (Davidson 2009;OECD 2002;Swanson et al 2004;Young 2000;Russel and Jordon 2009). While these reporting systems have significantly contributed to the field, improvements are still required.…”

The politics and economics of regulatory impact assessment

“…Kysar (2010), by contrast, is an example of the philosophical and moral arguments against the kind of economic analysis that the EPA has to stick to in making the case for regulation. For Kysar, IA has profoundly and negatively altered the mission of the EPA -on the implications for sustainable development in the UK, see Russel and Jordan (2009). It has made it more difficult to reach the goals enshrined in the statute of the EPA without providing a justification for policy grounded in robust philosophical and moral arguments.…”