Measuring policy and institutional
coherence for migration and
development
Operationalising a dashboard of indicators
A KNOMAD initiative
Thematic Working Group 5
Policy and Institutional Coherence
Why does policy
coherence matter?
 Policy and institutional coherence for migration and development
(PICMD) can:
 Help reduce the negative effects of incoherence, e.g., spill
over effects, financial costs and large-scale inefficiencies
 Assist in balancing policy trade-offs and enhance
collaboration, trust and synergies among stakeholders
 Help clarify the interrelations between policies, migration and
development
Measuring coherence
3 main challenges
 Who defines the objectives?
Defining
objectives
 Is coherence
measurable?
 Can we compare
countries?
 What are the priorities?
 How to limit conflicting
objectives?
Monitoring
policy
coherence
Assessing
impacts
 What are the benefits/costs
of coherence/incoherence?
 How to identify causal
chains?
The dashboard of indicators
Objectives
 The dashboard of indicators for measuring policy and institutional
coherence for migration and development (PICMD) aims to:
 Take stock of their existing policies and institutional
arrangements in different sectors related to migration and
development;
 Consider what policies and institutions may be needed to
maximise the positive impact of migration and development.
Levels of measurement
Inputs, outputs and outcomes
 The dashboard of indicators aims to measure policy and institutional coherence at
three different levels: inputs, outputs and outcomes, defined as:

INPUTS: processes that lead to government interventions, such as consultations,
statements of commitment and the allocation of financial resources.

OUTPUTS: government interventions, in particular policy and institutional changes.
These include the adjustment and establishment of policies, as well as the set-up
and modification of formal mechanisms such as inter-ministerial committees and
centralised oversight bodies.

OUTCOMES: short and medium-term effects on society of government outputs.
They differ from impacts, which refer to the intended and unintended long-term
effects of interventions.
A dashboard of indicators
Monitoring policy coherence
Inputs

Consultations
with
stakeholders

Public
commitment
to harnessing
the positive
links between
migration and
development
Sending/
receiving
countries
Sending/
receiving
Receiving
Sending

Budget size
and allocation
Outputs
Outcomes
Formal mechanisms for interministerial co-ordination
Increased number of policy decisions
aimed at maximising the positive impact of
migration on development
Health services for migrants
Increased access of all migrants to health
care
Systems for recognition of
foreign degrees and skills
Increased labour market opportunities for
migrants; reduction of brain waste
Remittances comparison
website
Lower remittance costs
Regulation framework for
recruitment agencies
Lower costs of migrating
Investment incentives offered
to diaspora members
Increased diaspora investment in countries
of origin
Dashboard operationalisation
Practical details
 Participating countries: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cape Verde, Jamaica,
Moldova, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland,
and Trinidad and Tobago
 The Thematic Working Group’s research team works closely with a national
focal point in each participating country.
 An international expert meeting was held in June 2015 to bring experts
and policy makers together to discuss the strength of the indicators.
 Two national workshops (June-July), in the Netherlands and Cape Verde,
will serve as opportunities to discuss challenges related to operationalising
the dashboard at the country level.
 The final results of the initiative will be presented at the 8th Global Forum
on Migration and Development in Istanbul in October 2015.
THANK YOU