The Paris Agreement, the Sustainable Development Goals, the Sendai Framework and the New Urban Agenda share a vision of global sustainable development, with several overlapping goals and targets. However, these agendas are often treated along sectoral boundaries leading to highly branched implementation. Underusing potential synergies is not only a burden for governments due to the costs of redundancies and inefficiency but can also hinder collective goals and lead to inter-agenda trade-offs. Despite growing attention on policy coherence in research and policy, existing literature fails to explain why it is so hard to achieve despite widespread recognition of its theoretical value. Based on a literature review and fieldwork in Mexico, our research focuses on the perception of the people in charge of operationalizing the agendas. We develop a typology of non-monetary costs and benefits that encompasses the alternative scenarios of 1) increased coherence in the implementation of the agendas in Mexico and 2) a business-as-usual scenario. Results challenge the dominant approach that focuses on binary policy coherence/incoherence analysis, by identifying also perceived benefits of incoherence and costs of building coherence. They also highlight the importance of often overlooked barriers to cross-sectoral and cross-scalar collaboration driven by institutional arrangements and work culture. The resulting typology differentiates drivers and manifestations of (in)coherence from their impacts on institutions and society. From this, we derive that a scenario of increased coherence in the implementation of the Post-2015 Agenda represents net gains to society and only relative losses to institutions, once the current costs of incoherence are discounted. However, the process of building policy coherence is beyond easy fixes, requiring structural change. Otherwise, institutions risk falling into a cosmetic level of coherence that is both costly and ineffective.

中文翻译：

---

没有简单的解决办法：政府工作人员对墨西哥 2015 年后议程实施过程中政策一致性的看法


《巴黎协定》、可持续发展目标、仙台框架和新城市议程有着共同的全球可持续发展愿景，但有一些重叠的目标和具体目标。然而，这些议程往往按照部门界限进行处理，导致实施过程高度分散。潜在协同效应的充分利用不仅会因裁员和效率低下的成本而成为政府的负担，而且还会阻碍集体目标并导致议程间的权衡。尽管研究和政策中的政策一致性受到越来越多的关注，但现有文献未能解释为什么它如此难以实现，尽管其理论价值得到了广泛认可。基于文献综述和墨西哥的实地考察，我们的研究重点是负责实施议程的人员的看法。我们开发了一种非货币成本和收益的类型，其中包括以下替代方案：1）增强墨西哥议程实施的一致性；2）一切照旧方案。结果通过确定不连贯性的感知好处和建立连贯性的成本，对侧重于二元政策连贯性/不连贯性分析的主导方法提出了挑战。他们还强调了制度安排和工作文化驱动的跨部门和跨规模合作中经常被忽视的障碍的重要性。由此产生的类型学将一致性（不一致性）的驱动因素和表现与其对机构和社会的影响区分开来。由此，我们得出结论，如果当前的不一致性成本被贴现，那么在实施 2015 年后议程过程中提高一致性的情景代表着社会的净收益和机构的相对损失。 然而，建立政策一致性的过程并不容易解决，需要进行结构性变革。否则，机构就会面临陷入表面一致性的风险，这种一致性不仅成本高昂，而且效率低下。