OECD Policy Coherence Scan of Austria

3. Policy implementation

Abstract

This chapter examines how Austria implements its development policy objectives and how its implementation arrangements support policy coherence for sustainable development across the government. It highlights strengths such as United Nations Sustainable Development Goal-aligned monitoring frameworks, independent oversight by the Austrian Court of Audit and Statistics Austria, and active civil society engagement. At the same time, it identifies opportunities to strengthen cross-sectoral co-ordination and co‑operation, clarify responsibilities, build institutional capacity and improve accountability and follow-up in the implementation of agreed priorities.

This is the execution phase of the policy cycle where the planned actions are carried out. It involves co‑ordinating activities, managing resources and tracking progress to ensure that intended policy objectives are achieved. Coherent and effective implementation of the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires horizontal sectoral integration and co‑ordination between different ministries and departments, as well as vertical coherence between all levels of government (local, regional, national and global).

Monitoring is essential to policy implementation, as it enables governments to determine whether resources are being used effectively, whether activities are being carried out as intended, and whether interventions are complementary and producing the desired results. It can help policymakers identify and respond to unexpected policy outcomes, adjust policies based on evidence and better plan for potential future ones. In an increasingly interconnected world where domestic policies of one country can have far‑reaching effects on others, robust monitoring mechanisms and related capacities are vital for informed and coherent decision making. This is particularly critical in fulfilling Austria’s commitment to the SDGs and its development co-operation priorities. Potential transboundary impacts may arise through taxation, trade, , migration and global supply chains. In this context, monitoring helps ensure that Austria’s actions support development policy objectives and sustainable development at large. The second Austrian voluntary national review (VNR) on the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda and the SDGs identifies robust national monitoring to track progress as one of two key enablers of desired progress in the future.

Strengths in Austria’s implementation of development policy objectives

Inclusive governance and co‑ordination mechanisms

Austria has established multiple cross-sectoral platforms to facilitate policy dialogue, co‑ordination and stakeholder engagement on cross-cutting issues. In addition to the Inter ministerial Working Group on the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (Interministerielle Arbeitsgruppe zu den Nachhaltigkeitszielen, IMAG on SDGs) and the Inter ministerial Working Group on the Three-Year Programme on Austrian Development Policy (Interministerielle Arbeitsgruppe zum Dreijahresprogramm der österreichischen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, WG 3YP), Austria has several issue-specific working groups, directly and indirectly relevant to the SDGs and development policy, such as:

• the Working Group on International Climate Finance (Arbeitsgruppe für Internationale Klimafinanzierung, AGIK), which enhances dialogue on climate-related policies

• the Business and Development Committee (Gremium Wirtschaft und Entwicklung), which ensures broad stakeholder engagement, including from the private sector1

• the Parliamentary Working Group on SDGs (Gruppe Agenda 2030 für nachhaltige Entwicklung), which fosters engagement on SDGs through informal exchanges and co-operation with the IMAG on SDGs.

These platforms facilitate regular inter-ministerial collaboration and stakeholder engagement on cross‑cutting priorities, through informal and voluntary engagement. Stakeholders interviewed during the OECD fact-finding mission to Vienna in 2024 highlighted these groups’ positive role in fostering cross‑ministry connections and strengthening interdepartmental dialogue. While the IMAG on SDGs supports a co‑ordinated approach to policy implementation across ministries, platforms such as the Business and Development Committee or the Parliamentary Working Group on SDGs foster dialogue between government, private sector and subnational actors in implementing joint policy priorities.

A promising institutional development of the 2025-2027 Three-Year Programme on Austrian Development Policy (Dreijahresprogramm der österreichischen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, 3YP) is the establishment of a monitoring system that actively involves relevant ministries, civil society organisations (CSOs) and partner countries in monitoring implementation through the WG 3YP. The WG 3YP is intended to serve as the central forum for monitoring implementation of the 3YP, holding regular meetings to review progress and promote coherence between development policy objectives and other policy areas. The system foresees concrete monitoring outputs including annual activity reports, as well as mid-term and final implementation reports. Civil society and partner countries are involved in the monitoring process through at least one annual information and dialogue event, which provides an opportunity to inform and consult stakeholders on the state of 3YP implementation. This approach helps ensure that stakeholders have a vested interest in the success of the policies and can contribute to ongoing policy adjustment. While this framework is promising and creates the conditions for more co‑ordinated implementation, it remains to be seen to what extent the strengthened role of the WG 3YP will translate into more co‑ordination across ministries and policy areas.

Integration of SDG-aligned indicators into monitoring Austrian development co-operation

The integration of SDG-aligned indicators into the 2022-2024 3YP marked a significant step towards improving coherence, accountability and strategic focus of development co-operation. A structured matrix based on the UN SDG indicator list provided a consistent framework for monitoring progress across strategic priorities and improving co‑ordination among actors. Three annexes detailing instruments and measures employed by federal actors in developing countries, referencing relevant international agreements and mapping Austria’s geographical focuses strengthened the robustness of the matrix and encouraged active participation from all reporting entities.

Similarly, the 2025-2027 3YP incorporates SDGs into the matrix, listing objectives, implementation elements and indicators for each goal. By matching indicators to specific development priorities, the matrix aims to clarify responsibilities and step up transparency. Aligning these indicators with internationally recognised standards facilitates more effective reporting of the 3YP’s contributions to global development objectives, which is particularly relevant in the context of improving policy coherence for sustainable development (PCSD).

Active engagement of the Austrian Court of Audit and Statistics Austria in monitoring SDG implementation in Austria

The Austrian Court of Audit (ACA) provides independent oversight of Austria’s SDG implementation arrangements by integrating SDG-related criteria into its audit framework. Through regular assessments, the ACA promotes the integration of sustainable development considerations into national planning and budgeting processes.

In 2017, the ACA conducted its first SDG implementation audit, assessing the legal framework, institutional responsibilities, inter-ministerial co‑ordination mechanisms including the role of the IMAG on SDGs, monitoring systems and stakeholder engagement. The assessment identified key implementation gaps, including the absence of a national SDG strategy, lack of a clear implementation plan with defined responsibilities, specific measures and timelines, and systematic gap analyses. Governance shortcomings of the IMAG on SDGs, such as its limited mandate to steer SDG implementation beyond reporting, irregular meetings, limited subnational and civil society involvement, and unclear accountability mechanisms, were also highlighted. The ACA recommended stronger central co‑ordination, cross-sectoral collaboration and clearer allocation of responsibilities to improve policy coherence (ACA, 2018[1]).

A follow-up report in 2022 highlighted progress, including the creation of a steering committee and annual work programmes with concrete implementation measures in the context of the IMAG on SDGs, as well as increased engagement of municipalities and CSOs. However, it also emphasised remaining challenges, particularly the continued absence of a national SDG strategy and gap analyses to identify implementation weaknesses. In addition to these assessments, the ACA has produced reports on the implementation of specific SDG targets, providing detailed assessments and recommendations for improvement (ACA, 2022[2]).

Complementing these efforts, Statistics Austria plays a crucial role in SDG monitoring by tracking implementation since 2017 through a set of around 200 indicators and publishes annual reports on Austria’s progress on various SDG targets. This offers a data-driven perspective on areas requiring further attention.2

Box 3.1. Recommendations by the Austrian Court of Audit in its follow-up report (2022)

The most relevant recommendations of the ACA were the following:

• The inter-ministerial working group should be set up as a national steering body for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda to manage a coherent, nationwide implementation. Furthermore, the responsible stakeholders should consider whether the inter-ministerial working group could be chaired by one federal ministry only.

• The responsible stakeholders should encourage the preparation of a sustainability strategy that contains a structured and coherent nationwide mechanism and takes into account the provinces, municipalities and civil society.

• Reporting to the UN High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development should be ensured as early as possible and from then on periodically – at least once per legislative period – and include the provinces and civil society.

• As regards the amendment of the Federal Organic Budget Act 2013, the responsible stakeholders should encourage the legislators to embed the SDGs, in a mandatory way, – analogous to the equality target – in the outcome targets of the federal government.

In 2023, the federal government presented a report on the implementation of the 2030 Agenda in and by Austria from 2020 to 2022, taking up key recommendations from the ACA report. The report reviews Austria’s progress on the SDGs and helped prepare its second VNR in 2024. It highlights flagship initiatives across government and includes a data chapter prepared by Statistics Austria, which presents data for all 17 SDGs.

Sources: ACA (2022[2]), Nachhaltige Entwicklungsziele der Vereinten Nationen, Umsetzung der Agenda 2030 in Österreich. Follow–up–Überprüfung, https://rechnungshof.gv.at/rh/home/home/home_7/Agenda_2030_FuP.pdf; Republic of Austria (2023[3]), Umsetzung der Agenda 2030 in und durch Österreich 2020-2022, https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:33ea3ac2-135a-40f7-aba5-c1abba391598/sdg-umsetzungsbericht-2030_bf.pdf.

Together, the contributions of the ACA and Statistics Austria provide robust and independent evidence and guidance and engage diverse stakeholders in monitoring implementation of SDG targets. This is essential for accelerating coherent and effective SDG implementation and strengthening policy coherence more broadly.

Independent SDG monitoring through CSOs

Austria recognises the important role of CSOs in promoting transparency, accountability and inclusiveness as part of its development co-operation. Both the 2022-2024 and the 2025-2027 3YPs emphasise the value of an engaged and well-informed public with CSOs contributing through education, advocacy and independent monitoring.

A prominent example of independent monitoring is the work of the Austrian Foundation for Development Research (Österreichische Forschungsstiftung für Internationale Entwicklung, ÖFSE), Austria’s leading research and information centre on development co-operation and policy. Its annual Austrian Development Policy Reports contribute to the public debate by critically assessing Austria’s actions, their implications and their coherence with broader development objectives.3 For instance, the 2025 report Net Zero Export Finance: Lessons for Austria from International Best Practice critiqued Austria’s slow progress in aligning its official export financing with the Paris Agreement and its continued support for fossil fuel projects. The report also pointed to shortcomings in Austria’s 2023 Sustainability Strategy for the Export Promotion Procedure, emphasising the need for a more comprehensive net zero approach (Schlögl, Pfaffenbichler and Raza, 2024[4]). Such analysis helps identify areas of incoherence and promote stronger alignment with international sustainability goals.

SDG Watch Austria, a civil society platform of more than 230 CSOs, advocates for an effective and ambitious implementation of the 2030 Agenda and its SDGs in Austria. One of its members, the Global Responsibility Working Group (Arbeitsgruppe [AG] Globale Verantwortung), represents 38 Austrian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and is a member of the European NGO Confederation for Relief and Development (CONCORD). It contributes to both national and European dialogues on sustainable development, highlighting critical issues in Austrian development co-operation and drawing attention to incoherences and negative transboundary impacts on developing countries.

The active engagement of CSOs like ÖFSE, SDG Watch Austria and AG Globale Verantwortung provides important external scrutiny of Austria’s policies and their alignment with the SDGs. Their work supports the identification of policy gaps, contradictions and areas for improvement, improving the design of future policies and enhancing overall policy coherence. At the same time, their contributions raise public awareness and promote broader participation, fostering a more inclusive and responsive development policy framework.

Nevertheless, the effectiveness of such independent monitoring relies on the openness of government institutions to consider and act on CSO findings and recommendations. Ensuring that CSOs have adequate resources and access to relevant data will be essential for Austria to fully leverage their contributions to PCSD and sustainable development.

Opportunities to strengthen PCSD in development policy implementation

Improving cross-sectoral understanding and expertise across administration

Austria has numerous platforms and bodies promoting knowledge sharing across ministries and federal departments. Building on these, there is scope to strengthen cross-sectoral understanding by encouraging greater familiarity with policy frameworks of other ministries. Improving mutual awareness would enhance collaboration and create more realistic expectations around joint policy implementation, ultimately supporting more coherent and effective policy outcomes.

Many stakeholders reported that systematically considering policy coherence, cross-sectoral interactions and transboundary effects exceeds their current capacity, citing overstretched resources as a major challenge. Expertise remains concentrated primarily within a small team at the Austrian Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs (BMEIA) working on the 3YPs and policy coherence. Targeted capacity-building could help officials integrate coherence considerations into existing workflows and use them as practical support for implementation rather than an additional administrative requirement.

There is also an opportunity to build institutional capacity and continuity in light of regular diplomatic rotations within the foreign service. On the one hand, these rotations bring new perspectives and expertise, including insights from SDG implementation abroad. This can enrich discussions, for instance within the IMAG on SDGs, and support cross-sectoral understanding. At the same time, frequent rotations can pose challenges to continuity, institutional memory and the development of long-term expertise and working relationships. Exploring options to retain institutional knowledge and build long-term collaboration and expertise in key areas is therefore important.

Strengthening knowledge management systems or extending tenures for key roles can help ensure policy continuity and institutional learning. Investments in cross-sectoral training, knowledge exchange and institutional memory can further enhance Austria’s ability to deliver coherent development policies that support sustainable development priorities.

Strengthening existing arrangements for coherent implementation of the SDGs and development policy

While the Federal Chancellery (BKA) is formally responsible for SDG co‑ordination, its role is constrained by Austria’s constitutional framework in which ministries operate within clearly defined competences and no single ministry can overrule another. As a result, the BKA cannot issue binding directives, or enforce policy alignment, limiting its ability to ensure policy coherence in implementing the SDGs and development objectives across government. Similarly, the Federal Law on Development Co-operation (Bundesgesetz über die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, EZA-G) mandates the alignment of official development assistance (ODA) with established development policy objectives and the guidelines set out in the 3YPs, but individual ministries retain autonomy in the implementation of the 3YP within their areas of responsibility. Given that Austrian development policy is implemented by a wide array of public and private actors, the BMEIA’s ability to enforce a coherent, whole-of-government approach relies largely on co‑ordination, dialogue and consensus-building rather than formal enforcement mechanisms. The WG 3YP supports the design, monitoring and evaluation of the 3YP, but it has limited authority to resolve conflicts arising during implementation. This poses challenges to strengthening policy coherence, in particular in highly politicised areas like migration and agriculture, where competing policy objectives may be difficult to reconcile.

While ministries retain full control over their respective portfolios, equipping the BKA and BMEIA with tools to promote alignment and manage inter-ministerial trade-offs at the technical level – for example in the form of inter-ministerial data sharing platforms, planning documents, monitoring scoreboards or analytical tools to model potential cross-sectoral impacts – could enable more coherent implementation of major SDG- and development policy-related issues. Building on existing platforms such as the IMAG on SDGs or WG 3YP, there is room to move beyond dialogue and information sharing towards more structured frameworks to co‑ordinate actors involved in implementing development co-operation and actions on the ground. More specifically, strengthening the role of the WG 3YP with clearer mandates for conflict resolution and strategic guidance would allow Austria to better identify and address trade-offs, transboundary impacts and synergies across programmes and projects that impact development objectives.

Austria’s renewed commitment to the 2030 Agenda, as reflected in the current government programme, provides a timely opportunity to consider a whole-of-government implementation framework to guide inter‑ministerial co-operation on SDGs and development policy. During the 2024 OECD fact-finding mission to Vienna, stakeholders emphasised the need for the BKA to take a more active steering role in PCSD, given its mandate to co‑ordinate government action and the cross-sectoral nature of sustainable development. This could be supported by investing in the capacity of the unit currently overseeing SDG implementation within the BKA, equipping it with the mandate, resources and tools needed to manage such a broad agenda.

Clarifying shared monitoring responsibilities and strengthening accountability

The 2025-2027 3YP assigns implementation responsibilities to individual ministries within their respective competences in accordance with Section 28 of the EZA-G. Regular meetings of the WG 3YP co‑ordinated by the BMEIA are intended to monitor progress and policy coherence, and outcomes are meant to feed into the VNRs. The latest 3YP provides more clarity on the functioning of the working group, including meeting formats, requirements or structure.

The 2025-2027 3YP also places greater emphasis on monitoring by outlining efforts to enhance joint planning and implementation processes and aims to strengthen the link between development policy and related initiatives. A comprehensive joint analysis is envisioned to inform the design and execution of all development co-operation activities in partner countries. In addition, the 3YP includes, for each priority area, a matrix (Verfügbare Instrumente, Modalitäten, Akteurinnen und Akteure) that identifies relevant actors across different implementation instruments and modalities. This represents a step towards clarifying roles and responsibilities and improving transparency. Nevertheless, implementation responsibilities remain relatively broad. For example, under the different categories such as policy dialogue or bilateral instruments, multiple actors are listed without being clearly linked to specific instruments or actions. This can make it difficult to determine who is responsible for delivering particular outputs or how co‑ordination between actors is expected to take place in practice. Furthermore, while the matrix in Annex 1 of the 3YP supports tracking progress toward strategic co-operation goals, it does not provide quantifiable targets to measure progress, or allocate dedicated funding.

While shared monitoring responsibilities can support ownership of the various actors involved, unclear attribution of responsibility and weak links between monitoring and decision making risks fragmented implementation across ministries. The resulting lack of accountability may lead to ministries prioritising individual goals rather than aligning with broader strategic development policy objectives. Diverging practices across government levels and sectors can also lead to data gaps, limited comparability of results, overlapping efforts and failing to share essential data, complicating the assessment of overall progress.

While Statistics Austria provides an important contribution by tracking SDG implementation through a comprehensive indicator set and publishing regular updates, statistical monitoring alone cannot ensure coherence and accountability across government actors, as it does not assign responsibilities or link results to specific policy actions. Austria could strengthen monitoring by clarifying responsibilities, using common reporting arrangements and establishing a regular process through which findings are reviewed, assigned for follow-up and considered in subsequent policy and budget decisions. Comprehensive coverage could also lead to all SDGs receiving similar attention in monitoring efforts. While Austria has taken promising steps towards results-based management, creating a formal framework that feeds monitoring results back into decision making processes would strengthen strategic learning. Overall, a more structured and adequately resourced monitoring and follow-up system would help to align Austria’s development efforts with SDG objectives and ensure meaningful results.

Box 3.2. Country examples of good practice on embedding sustainability in regulatory processes

• Germany – Sustainability impact assessments: Following a decision by the State Secretaries’ Committee for Sustainable Development on 14 November 2022, ministries are required to consider the SDGs at an early stage when drafting legislation and legal ordinances. This German Sustainable Development Strategy (GSDS) reinforces this by mandating sustainability impact assessments for new policies and legislation. Ministries carry out these assessments, supported by a digital tool –the electronic sustainability assessment (eNAP) – which guides users through relevant GSDS principles and objectives. This approach helps to systematically integrate sustainability into policymaking, improves the quality of regulatory impact assessments and makes them easier to perform.

• Luxembourg – Integrating sustainability into regulatory decision making: Luxembourg has integrated sustainable development into its legislative process by introducing a mandatory “sustainability check” for all draft legislation since June 2023. Ministries must assess proposed legislation against Luxembourg’s sustainable development priorities, defined in the National Plan for Sustainable Development. This ensures that economic, social and environmental impacts are systematically considered and proposals contribute to long-term goals. By offering targeted training for civil servants, Luxembourg not only promotes technical capacity, but also provides opportunities for collaboration between ministries, which in turn promotes ownership of sustainability objectives and the National Plan for Sustainable Development.

Sources: German Government (2025[5]), German Sustainable Development Strategy - Update 2025, https://www.bundesregierung.de/resource/blob/974430/1940716/1c63c8739d10011eb116fda1aecb61ca/german-sustainable-development-strategy-en-data.pdf; OECD (2023[6]), “Luxembourg Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development (PCSD): Light-touch institutional scan”, GOV/PCSD(2023)1; OECD (2024[7]), Unleashing Policy Coherence to Achieve the SDGs: An Assessment of Governance Mechanisms, https://doi.org/10.1787/a1c8dbf8-en.

To strengthen policy coherence in the implementation of Austrian development policy, the recommendations in Box 3.3 could be considered.

Box 3.3. Opportunities for more coherent implementation of development policy

• Enhance capacity building for integrated policy implementation: Expand existing training programmes or develop targeted offers for government officials at all levels to build transversal expertise, particularly on SDG implementation and policy interaction and impacts. Training should equip officials with practical tools to address cross-sectoral policy challenges and foster a shared understanding of integrated policymaking. This also includes strengthening institutional capacity to retain knowledge and build long-term collaboration and expertise in key areas.

• Clarify co‑ordination, escalation and follow-up functions for implementation: Clearly define the complementary roles of the WG 3YP and the IMAG on SDGs in monitoring implementation, identifying cross-sectoral issues and following up on agreed actions within their respective mandates. Strengthen arrangements for information sharing, joint analysis, and the escalation of potential unresolved trade-offs to the administrative or political level, in line with Austria’s legal framework, to support a more coherent approach to sustainable development and development policy implementation.

• Develop shared monitoring and co‑ordination tools: Promote the use of practical tools to support inter-ministerial implementation efforts, such as shared planning documents, data platforms, monitoring scoreboards or analytical models to assess potential cross-sectoral impacts. These tools should include clear monitoring requirements, accountability structures and dedicated resources to ensure effective use and follow-up. Building on existing instruments, Annex 1 of the 3YP could be further developed into a more operational tool by identifying responsible actors for each objective and implementation instrument, establishing baselines, defining quantifiable targets for indicators wherever possible and clearly attributing responsibilities for delivery.

References

[2] ACA (2022), Nachhaltige Entwicklungsziele der Vereinten Nationen, Umsetzung der Agenda 2030 in Österreich. Follow–up–Überprüfung, Austrian Court of Audit, https://rechnungshof.gv.at/rh/home/home/home_7/Agenda_2030_FuP.pdf.

[1] ACA (2018), Nachhaltige Entwicklungsziele der Vereinten Nationen, Umsetzung der Agenda 2030 in Österreich, Austrian Court of Audit, https://www.rechnungshof.gv.at/rh/home/home/Entwicklungsziele_Vereinten_Nationen_2030.pdf.

[5] Government of Germany (2025), German Sustainable Development Strategy - Update 2025, https://www.bundesregierung.de/resource/blob/974430/1940716/1c63c8739d10011eb116fda1aecb61ca/german-sustainable-development-strategy-en-data.pdf.

[7] OECD (2024), Unleashing Policy Coherence to Achieve the SDGs: An Assessment of Governance Mechanisms, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a1c8dbf8-en.

[6] OECD (2023), “Luxembourg Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development (PCSD): Light-touch institutional scan”, GOV/PCSD(2023)1, https://one.oecd.org/document/GOV/PCSD(2023)1/en/pdf.

[3] Republic of Austria (2023), Umsetzung der Agenda 2030 in und durch Österreich 2020-2022, https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:33ea3ac2-135a-40f7-aba5-c1abba391598/sdg-umsetzungsbericht-2030_bf.pdf.

[4] Schlögl, L., D. Pfaffenbichler and W. Raza (2024), Net Zero Export Finance: Lessons for Austria from International Best Practice, Austrian Foundation for Development Research, https://doi.org/10.60637/2025-rr22.

Notes

← 1.  The Business and Development Committee (Gremium Wirtschaft und Entwicklung) brings together representatives of various federal ministries, social partners, private sector and the Austrian Development Agency. It reviews projects approved by the executive or supervisory board of the Development Bank of Austria, assessing their alignment with development policy objectives.

← 2.  The indicators can be found at: https://www.statistik.at/services/tools/datenzugang/sdgs.

← 3.  ÖFSE’s annual Austrian Development Policy Reports (1999-2024) are accessible at: https://www.oefse.at/en/publications/austrian-development-policy/.