Chapter 1. Building blocks for coherent implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction

The 22 Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) presented at the High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF) in July 2016 have shown that countries across the world are aligning their national strategies, adapting institutional frameworks and shifting policies for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These efforts also revealed a wide variety of starting points and implementation paths.

This chapter looks at the initial steps for SDG implementation taken by the nine OECD countries that presented VNRs at the 2016 HLPF: Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Mexico, Norway, Korea, Switzerland, and Turkey. Drawing on the VNRs, it summarises the diverse approaches that these nine countries are taking from the perspective of policy coherence for sustainable development (PCSD).

The chapter identifies good institutional practices, as well as challenges, for enhancing policy coherence for sustainable development as called for by SDG target 17.14. It is structured according to eight elements from the PCSD Framework, which are considered key building blocks for ensuring a coherent and effective implementation of the SDGs: 1) political commitment and leadership; 2) integrated approaches to implementation; 3) intergenerational timeframe; 4) analysis and assessments of potential policy effects; 5) policy and institutional coordination; 6) local and regional involvements; 7) stakeholder participation; and 8) monitoring and reporting.

A key lesson from the first year of implementation is that there is no single blueprint for enhancing policy coherence in SDG implementation. To achieve sustainable development, as highlighted by the 2030 Agenda, there are different approaches, visions, models and tools available to each country, in accordance with its national circumstances and priorities. It is up to each country to determine its institutional mechanisms for formulating, coordinating, monitoring and ensuring coherence in SDG implementation. Through the mutual exchanges of experiences and discussions on what works and what does not, countries can improve the content of national strategies, strengthen institutional mechanisms, address transboundary impacts and ultimately enhance policy coherence in the implementation of the SDGs.

The eight building blocks of policy coherence for sustainable development

The reports presented by the nine OECD countries that volunteered to participate in the national reviews at the 2016 HLPF reveal that these countries are institutionally well equipped to implement the SDGs (Table 1.1). Some of them have a long tradition of working on sustainable development. All nine countries have well-established institutional mechanisms to take forward sustainable development, which in most cases emerged as part of the Agenda 21 signed at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. These institutional mechanisms are being aligned with the vision, principles, goals and associated targets of the 2030 Agenda.

A key question is, however, to what extent these institutional mechanisms are actually operational from a policy coherence for sustainable development (PCSD) perspective. PCSD is one of the means of implementation – embodied in target 17.14 – that has a fundamental role to play in capitalising on synergies and addressing trade-offs among SDGs and targets, between different sectoral policies, and between diverse actions at the local, regional, national and international levels. It is also essential to take into account the effects of policies on the sustainable development and well-being of people living in other countries, as well as those of future generations.

The PCSD Framework (OECD, 2016), which has been updated and adapted to the vision and principles of the 2030 Agenda, aims to assist countries in updating current institutional mechanisms, processes and practices towards policy coherence with a view to ensuring they are “fit for purpose” for SDG implementation. The following eight elements (Figure 1.1), which are included in the guidance of the PCSD Framework, were selected as key building blocks for enhancing coherence in SDG implementation on the basis of the principles of the 2030 Agenda, of lessons learned and of good practices collected by the OECD over the years:

1. Political commitment and leadership – to guide whole-of-government action and translate commitment on SDGs into concrete and coherent measures at the local, national and international levels.

2. Integrated approaches to implementation – to consider systematically inter-linkages between economic, social and environmental policy areas as well as ensure consistency with international engagement before making decisions.

3. Intergenerational timeframe – to make informed choices about sustainable development considering the long-term impact of policy decisions on the well-being of future generations.

4. Analyses and assessments of potential policy effects – to provide evidence on the potential negative or positive impacts on the well-being of people at the domestic level and in other countries, and inform decision-making.

5. Policy and institutional coordination – to resolve conflicts of interest or inconsistencies between priorities and policies.

6. Local and regional involvement – to deliver the economic, social and environmental transformation needed for achieving the SDGs and ensure that no one is left behind.

7. Stakeholder participation – to make sure that SDGs are owned by people, diverse actions are aligned, and resources and knowledge for sustainable development mobilised.

8. Monitoring and reporting – to better understand where there has been progress, or lack of it and why, and where further action is needed.

Figure 1.1. The eight building blocks of policy coherence for sustainable development

Source: OECD PCD unit.

Political commitment and leadership at the highest level

Political commitment is an essential foundation to enhance policy coherence for SDG implementation. It needs to be clearly stated at the highest level and backed by a strategic framework, action plans, policies, legislation, instructions and incentives to better enable the whole government to pursue a national SDG agenda coherently. It entails specific measures to integrate the SDGs within the mandate of each national institution. Strong political leadership is needed to shape the national debate on how to take the SDGs forward, build ownership across institutions and actors, and ensure that policies in different areas do not conflict with or undermine each other.

Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Mexico, Norway, Korea, Switzerland, and Turkey (the nine OECD countries covered in this chapter) have clearly shown strong political commitment to the 2030 Agenda and SDGs. These countries are currently in the process of developing strategic frameworks and defining priorities according to their national contexts and needs. This is a way to emphasise commitment and the significance for all policy areas. Similarly, the fact that these countries have volunteered to participate in the 2016 national reviews at the first high-level forum held since the adoption of the 2030 Agenda, provides an indication of their commitment.

Some of these countries are focusing on updating and aligning existing national sustainable development strategies or plans as a starting point for implementation – Estonia, Finland, Germany, Korea, and Switzerland (Box 1.1). In most cases these strategies or plans were originally formulated after the 1992 Rio Conference and they have been periodically revised over the years.

Mexico and Turkey have integrated sustainable development elements into existing national development plans, and both countries are considering using their national plan as an overarching framework to guide government-wide policies and actions. In Mexico, in an earlier stage of implementation, an analysis of the National Development Plan, national and specialised programmes, and ongoing structural reforms was conducted to identify ways to align them with the SDGs. The National Development Plan is considered a central instrument for aligning and ensuring coherence of the sexennial public policy and the SDGs. In Turkey, the SDGs were integrated into the 2016 Annual Program, including the Addis Ababa Process. In the Program, it is emphasised that Turkey’s development policies mirror the global shift to sustainable development, with priority given to all three of its dimensions. As a first step towards integrating the SDGs into national policies, a stocktaking analysis study will be conducted to determine Turkey’s current status in terms of the SDGs. In addition, Turkey is currently in the process of preparing the long-term strategic vision for the 11^th National Development Plan and intends to take the SDGs as one of the main inputs.

Finland, France, Norway and Switzerland are developing specific action plans for the 2030 Agenda implementation, in addition to their strategic frameworks (Box 1.2). Mexico is also considering the creation of a National Strategy to implement the 2030 Agenda, aligned with existing national strategies. Developing a specific time-bound action plan, with clearly identified objectives that encompass all government policies is fundamental to translate political commitment into action.

Some countries have made explicit commitments to PCSD, either as part of their overall national strategy or of development co-operation plans (Box 1.3). A clearly stated commitment on PCSD, widely communicated within and outside the government, is a precondition for operationalising policy coherence. Providing specific guidance on how to proceed on PCSD across the administration is equally important.

A key challenge for governments going forward is to raise public awareness and create ownership of the SDGs. The public should understand the nature of the new sustainable development agenda, the economic, social and environmental challenges that we are all confronted with, the need to address them in an integrated and coherent manner, and the impact of our current behaviour (production and consumption patterns). The implications of economic, social and environmental sustainability need to be brought into the general policy debate and into sectoral policy agendas. The vision, principles and operational objectives for implementing the SDGs need to be well understood by the public, politicians, public organisations and across levels of government.

Integrated approaches to implementation

The integrated nature of the Sustainable Development Goals calls for policies – both domestic and international – that systematically consider inter-linkages between the economic, social and environmental spheres. Implementing the SDGs requires governments to be able to work across policy domains, and adopt more integrated and coherent approaches to sustainable development. Such policy coherence is critical to ensure that progress achieved on one goal (e.g. SDG on water) contributes to progress on other goals (e.g. SDG on food security or SDG on health or SDG on sustainable cities). It is also essential to avoid the risk that progress achieved on one goal occurs at the expense of another goal.

Past experiences with implementation of National Sustainable Development Strategies (NSDS) emerging as part of the Agenda 21 signed at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, have shown that the integration of the three dimensions (economic, social, and environmental) of sustainable development is one of the most difficult balances to achieve. In practice, most NSDS had a greater focus on environmental issues, with attempts made to integrate economic and social aspects. Sustainable development was mainly perceived as an environmental issue not an integrated concept, and NSDS were often led by the environment ministry with a focus on the domestic setting.

With the adoption of the 2030 Agenda, governments are starting to embrace all dimensions of sustainable development in a more integrated and balanced manner (Box 1.4). In Korea, for example, the Third Basic Plan for Sustainable Development 2016-2035 has expanded its scope to encompass economic and social development goals, including: health and well-being (SDG3), education (SDG4), gender equality (SDG5), good jobs and economic growth (SDG8), inequality (SDG10), and sustainable cities and communities (SDG11). Additionally, the government is working to harmonise policies and mainstream the SDGs so that they can address interlinked and indivisible goals and targets with full attention given to trade-offs, inter-linkages and complementarities between social, economic and environmental goals.

In France, the Multiannual Development and International Solidarity Policy Act, passed in July 2014, focuses on the different dimensions of sustainable development (economic growth, poverty eradication and protecting the planet). It stresses the need for an integrated approach and involves non-governmental actors in the definition of action priorities. In Turkey, a task force within the Ministry of Development composed of experts in relevant areas has been assigned to integrate the SDGs into public documents at all levels, including the National Development Plan, regional plans, annual programs, and sectoral strategies.

Intergenerational timeframe

A basic principle of sustainable development is to balance the needs of current and future generations. This calls for a long-term perspective in policy-making to consider systematically the effects of today’s decisions on the well-being of future generations, as reflected in the preamble of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This means that the well-being of future generations depends on the stock of assets the current generation leaves behind. These include: economic capital (physical, knowledge, financial); natural capital (energy and mineral resources, land and ecosystems, water, air quality and climate); human capital (labour, education, and health); and social capital (trust and institutions). The intergenerational perspective required for implementing the SDGs entails strategic choices for the longer term and capacities to maintain commitment over time.

In many cases, the time frame of governments’ plans or strategies is too short to take into account intergenerational and long-term considerations. A key challenge is to ensure that sustained efforts on SDG implementation go beyond electoral cycles, government programmes or cabinet compositions, and seek a balance with short-term challenges that often take priority.

To this end, some countries are applying timeframes of 20 or 30 years to their national strategies (Box 1.5), as well as specific measures to incorporate intergenerational considerations. In Finland, for example, the term of the National Commission on Sustainable Development has been changed explicitly to overlap rather than follow the four-year electoral cycle. The term of the current Commission will extend until the end of 2019. The purpose is to ensure that the Commission’s tasks are not excessively tied to Government programmes and that it can consider key long-term sustainable development issues.

Analyses and assessments of potential transboundary effects

Improving understanding on how policies pursuing sustainable development and the well-being of citizens in one country may affect the well-being of citizens of other countries is fundamental to enhance coherence in SDG implementation. This refers to the international dimension of sustainable development. A country may affect other countries via various channels: financial flows/income transfers (ODA, remittances, loans); imports/exports of goods and services (economic activities “here” will impact on natural resources “elsewhere”); migration (“brain-drain”); and knowledge transfers.

Strengthening analytical capacity for policy coherence is essential in order to better understand how patterns of consumption and production in one particular country affect the ability of other countries to achieve the SDGs. For example, the extent to which a country is depleting stocks of natural resources (water, land, etc.) in other countries, or the extent to which the terms of trade undermine other countries’ ability to develop sustainably. Analysis on transboundary impacts is not only fundamental for assessing how policies are performing in terms of sustainability, but also for helping policy-makers refine or re-prioritise policy objectives. Some countries are working on ways to assess the impacts of policies on sustainable development elsewhere in a more systematic fashion, as part of their implementation processes (Box 1.6).

Working towards the adoption of broader forms of impact assessment is essential for ensuring an effective interface between domestic and international policies for sustainable development. Some countries are planning to take specific measures to bridge the gap between domestic and international dimensions of sustainable development as part of their implementation processes. In Finland, with the launch of the national implementation process, the National Commission on Sustainable Development and Development Policy Committee have stepped up co-operation, since it is considered essential that Finland implement the SDGs at both national and international level, under a single national implementation plan. Development policy and development co-operation are considered key instruments in the external dimension of national implementation.

Similarly, Germany has placed particular emphasis on clearly outlining the global impact of national policies through closer consideration of the international dimension. In Korea the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Environment have coordinated inter-ministerial meetings and conducted initial reviews to identify national priorities for domestic and international implementation of the SDGs. In Switzerland the Federal Council’s aim is to align its Sustainable Development Strategy, foreign policy, including international co-operation, and all relevant sector policies with the 2030 Agenda as comprehensively as possible.

Policy and institutional coordination

The implementation of the SDGs goes beyond the responsibility of one line ministry. It requires the active involvement of all policy communities and a wide range of stakeholders that allow for a whole-of-government/whole-of-society approach. Involving and coordinating a wide range of government departments and other stakeholders allows plans or strategies to take a holistic perspective of the issues at stake, give voice to diverse interests, address trade-offs across policy areas, raise public awareness and create ownership.

Appropriate policy coordination mechanisms are essential to enhance horizontal coherence (synergies and inter-linkages) and vertical coherence (from local to national to international) in SDG implementation. Given the potential for conflict among diverse interests both in the public and the private sector on economic, social and environmental issues, attention needs to be directed towards the following elements: (i) the position of the body responsible for the co-ordination functions throughout the administration, e.g. Centre of Government, ministries of finance, foreign affairs, environment; (ii) the mandates given to the coordinating body to deal specifically with policy divergences or tensions and resolve conflicts of interest, and (iii) the involvement of outside actors as a way to identify common challenges and build ownership of the new agenda.

A good practice adopted in some countries is to assign responsibility for overall coordination to the Prime Minister’s office or an equivalent level. The Government Office, which acts as the Centre of Government (CoG) providing daily support to the Head of Government, is an essential institution for securing policy development, policy implementation and co-operation across ministries in support of strategic domestic and international objectives. The CoG is in principle a policy-neutral body in contrast to line ministries or departments, it has a convening power which can influence policy adjustments, as well as coordination expertise and experience in dealing with cross-cutting issues and complex agendas (OECD, 2013).

Estonia, Finland, France, Germany and Mexico have placed responsibility for overall coordination of SDG implementation directly under the Head of Government’s office. Estonia plans to use the functioning national coordination mechanism for sustainable development which is led by the Government Office Strategy Unit at the central government level. Finland has established the Coordination Secretariat in the Prime Minister’s Office for national implementation. In Mexico, implementation is led by the Office of the President; the government has announced the creation of a new coordination entity: the High-Level Commission for SDG implementation led by the President’s office.1 In France inter-ministerial coordination is based on the Prime Minister’s authority, and in Germany the Federal Chancellery is leading the implementation process with the State Secretaries’ Committee for Sustainable Development as a high-level coordination mechanism (Box 1.7).

The institutional structure in a decentralised country such as Switzerland might require a different approach to enhance policy coherence in SDG implementation. An inter-ministerial task force composed of 16 federal offices was established in 2012 to coordinate Switzerland’s position for the Addis Ababa Action Agenda and 2030 Agenda. Since then the inter-ministerial task force has handled coordination within the federal administration. In a transition phase (2016-17), this task force is working to clarify institutional arrangements, processes and responsibilities for SDG implementation within the federal administration.

In Korea, Norway and Turkey responsibility is assigned to key ministries with cross-cutting influence. In Korea, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) and the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) have played a leading role in preparations for SDG implementation. These government bodies are respectively in charge of laws, decrees and special committees relating to the implementation of SDGs at home and abroad, such as the Sustainable Development Act, the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) and the Committee for International Development Cooperation (CIDC). MOFA and MOE have undertaken research, coordinated inter-ministry meetings and produced comprehensive reports for initial reviews of SDGs implementation in collaboration with academia.

In Norway, responsibility for each of the 17 SDGs is given to a coordinating ministry which has to consult with other ministries involved in the follow-up of various targets under the specified goals. Each ministry is to report on the status of follow-up for its respective goal(s) in its budget proposal. The Ministry of Finance will then sum up the main points in the national budget white paper, which is presented to the Storting (Norwegian parliament) annually, along with the state budget. In many countries, the budget is the government’s key policy and priority setting document, where policy objectives are reconciled and implemented in concrete terms. As such it has also proven to have a very important role in ensuring policy coherence.

Turkey has a Sustainable Development Coordination Commission (SDCC) led by the Ministry of Development, which is responsible for the preparation of the country’s national development plans. The Commission will have a central role in the follow-up and review process of the SDGs. The government is planning to strengthen and expand the SDCC in line with its overall coordinating role, taking into account the comprehensive nature of the 2030 Agenda, notably by increasing the number of its members. The Commission will provide periodical reporting to the High Planning Council, Cabinet and Turkish Grand National Assembly.

Local and regional involvement

The implementation of the SDGs requires enhancing policy coherence across different governance levels. This is critical in an increasingly interconnected world where sustainable development challenges have inextricable global-domestic linkages that need to be managed. Some challenges need to be addressed at the global level (e.g. climate change and other systemic risks); at the national or regional level (e.g. legislative changes or changes in economic, fiscal and trade policy); and at the local level (e.g. specific details on land use; human settlement patterns, or transportation planning).

Local and regional governments are essential for delivering a wide range of public services as well as the economic, social and environmental transformations needed for achieving the SDGs. As the level of government closest to the people, local governments are in a unique political position to identify and respond to sustainable development gaps and needs. It is widely recognised that a successful implementation of the SDGs will depend on local action in coordination with all other levels of governance.

Some countries plan to build on existing mechanisms that emerged as part of the Agenda 21 process for coordinating national and local implementation. In Estonia, local municipalities apply the main principles of sustainable development through the action plans and local legislation adopted during the processes related to Agenda 21. For example, Tartu, Kuressaare, Viljandi and Pärnu have adopted the Agenda 21 action plans. In Korea, the Local Sustainability Alliance of Korea, established in 2000 as a nation-wide network of Local Commissions on Sustainable Development, has been a vital institutional platform to ensure the participation of local commissions in policy dialogues for the SDGs at national level. Some other countries are taking steps to foster innovative ways of building ownership and engaging local authorities for SDG implementation (Box 1.8).

In Norway, the Government plans to make use of existing mechanisms for co-operation with local and regional authorities, such as the regular consultative meetings between the central government and local authorities. The Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (KS) is a national members’ association for municipalities, counties and public enterprises under municipal or county ownership. Similarly, Turkey plans to use existing structures and current high level councils to promote SDGs at the local level.

Coordination and policy coherence between different levels of government, which is critical for SDG implementation, might be more complex in decentralised countries. In Switzerland, where subnational authorities – i.e. the cantons and communes – will play a key role in implementation, the federal government considers it critical to integrate sustainable development principles into all levels of government in order to create and increase ownership.

Stakeholder participation

The implementation of the SDGs involves trade-offs between economic, social and environmental objectives, as well as value judgments which cannot be determined by governments alone. Policy coordination mechanisms inside government, while essential, are not sufficient to ensure policy coherence in SDG implementation. Major barriers to policy coherence are strongly rooted in the differing stakeholder perceptions of the issues involved.

Addressing the SDGs in a coherent manner and making sure that the 2030 Agenda is owned by people requires participatory approaches. It entails putting in place mechanisms for dialogue and participation whereby governments and key stakeholders identify common challenges, set priorities, align policies and actions, and mobilise resources for sustainable development. This is the spirit of SDG target 16.7 which calls for “responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels”.

Diverse stakeholders – such as international and regional organisations, local authorities, business and industry, civil society, science and academia – have important roles to play ranging from resource mobilisation, the provision of solutions and innovations, change in production patterns and lifestyles, advocacy and accountability to voicing concerns and needs of under-represented communities and regions and helping to ensure accountability. Active stakeholder participation in the formulation, implementation and monitoring of national plans and strategies for SDGs is now an inherent feature of national processes (Box 1.9).

Several countries are reviewing existing participation formats. France has set up a multidisciplinary committee of international experts and launched a public consultation to involve civil society organisations, businesses, unions and specialised associations. It is also planning to mobilise territories through consultation workshops and develop a participatory Internet platform to engage all stakeholders and citizens, disseminate good practices, monitor progress and rally coalitions.

In Germany, non-governmental stakeholders have been involved in the preparation of the first National Voluntary Report to the HLPF 2016. It was discussed with representatives of NGOs, churches, local authorities, the scientific and academic community, the business community and the trade unions in the dialogue forum on the 2030 Agenda, where these non-state actors had the opportunity to engage in a critical exchange of views with government representatives and to suggest changes to the report. In Mexico, the negotiation process for the SDGs and national deliberations contributed to establish a constructive dialogue with civil society organisations. Multiple stakeholders contributed to the official position of Mexico.

Some countries involve stakeholders in national commissions and advisory councils. In Estonia, the national Sustainable Development Commission established in 1996, which brings together non-governmental actors, meets four to five times per year to hold thematic discussions on different sustainable development issues, discuss drafts of sustainable development related strategic action plans before they are adopted by the government and publish focus reports with policy recommendations. In Finland, two major multi-stakeholder committees have a key role in the national coordination, implementation and follow-up system: (i) The Development Policy Committee, a parliamentary body, is tasked to follow up on SDG implementation from the development policy perspective, and monitor the implementation of the Government Programme in compliance with development policy guidelines. (ii) The National Commission on Sustainable Development, a Prime Minister-led partnership forum, is tasked with integrating sustainable development into Finnish policies, measures and everyday practices.

Monitoring and reporting

Successful implementation of the SDGs at the national level requires mechanisms to monitor progress, report to governing bodies and the public, and to provide feedback information for improvement making use of appropriate assessment tools. Monitoring mechanisms are essential to ensure that strategies or national plans for SDG implementation, as well as sectoral policies, can be adjusted in light of progress, new information, and changing circumstances. Some countries are working to put in place national mechanisms for reviewing progress in SDG implementation (Box 1.10.)

Some countries are adapting and strengthening existing monitoring frameworks. Finland is planning to monitor and review progress and achievements on a regular basis to ensure accountability to citizens and the global community. The role of the Finnish Development Policy Committee and the National Commission on Sustainable Development as well as of the National Parliament and all political parties is considered fundamental in this work and is currently under discussion. In Norway, following the adoption of the 2030 Agenda, the Government decided that domestic reporting on the SDGs should take place via the budget process.

Structured indicator frameworks are essential to assist in reviewing progress towards the SDGs. Most countries covered in this note have developed sets of indicators associated with their past sustainable development strategies. Some countries are refining their approaches and choice of indicators as they update their national strategies (Box 1.11). Norway, for example, is planning to adapt the indicators that are most relevant to the national context and define other indicators of its own as required to ensure follow-up.

Some countries are planning to develop new indicators. In Estonia, the Statistics Office has conducted an initial overview of 231 global sustainable development indicators and approximately 14% of the indicators are measurable right now. The renewal of sustainable development indicators started in 2016. The aim is to include indicators that help to measure achievements in the fields covered by the SDGs. It will allow the next indicator-based reports on sustainable development to provide information about performance regarding Estonian sustainable development goals and global SDGs. A new list of indicators will be established in co-operation with an inter-ministerial working group, the Estonian Statistics Office and the Estonian Sustainable Development Commission.

In France, the French National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies (INSEE) is already conducting a feasibility study with all the ministries’ statistical departments on their production at national level. The government statistics system should be able to produce just over half of the indicators (given or comparable definition) in the short to medium term. The indicators could be transposed nationally. In Germany, suitable indicators have yet to be defined; however, the intent is to develop these indicators. The Federal Statistical Office publishes an independent report on the status of the sustainability indicators once every two years. In Mexico, by June 2016, the National Institute of Statistics (INEGI) mapped out the 230 global indicators and matched 180 of them with the different government agencies responsible for each. During the second half of 2016, INEGI organised working groups to define national indicators.

A key challenge for most countries is to develop, as part of their monitoring systems, ways to track progress on policy coherence. This entails identifying and developing qualitative and quantitative indicators to: (i) capture functions and capacities to formulate coherent policies (i.e. institutional mechanism for coherence); (ii) illustrate and make clear, to policy makers and the public alike, the synergies and trade-offs between economic, social and environmental values; and (iii) to assess the transboundary as well as the long-term impacts of current policy decisions.