The integration of certain policy objectives into other policy sectors – i.e. policy integration of such issues as gender, regional development, employment and environmental protection – is frequently requested in order to improve public policy. The article discusses the importance of evaluating policy integration as well as the perspective that such evaluations should extend to the outputs and outcomes of policies. Two examples of evaluating policy integration are provided: the integration of environmental concerns into technology policy and the integration of innovation objectives into environmental policy. The findings show that the integration of environmental concerns into technology policies could be increased, especially with respect to promoting technologies that do not have explicit environmental intentions. Similarly, innovation objectives could be further integrated into environmental policies. Evaluations of policy principles, such as policy integration, are important for policy development.
Bouckaert, G. , D. Ormong and G. Peters (2000) A Potential Governance Agenda for Finland. Research Report 8/2000. Helsinki: Ministry of Finance .
2.
Chen, H.-T. (1990) Theory-Driven Evaluations. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE .
3.
Christiansen, A. (2002) ‘Promoting Environmental Innovation in the Energy Sector: An Analytical Framework for Dynamic Efficiency Assessments’ , Energy and Environment13(6): 813–832 .
4.
European Commission (2003) Innovation Policy: Updating the Union's Approach in the Context of the Lisbon Strategy , Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Brussels, 11.3.2003, COM(2003) 112 final.
5.
European Commission (2005) Impact Assessment Guidelines, SEC(2005) 791. Available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/impact/docs/SEC2005_791_IA%20guidelines_annexes.pdf (accessed 16 June 2005).
6.
Heaton, G. R. (2000) ‘Workshop on innovation and the environment: Rapporteur's report’, in OECD Proceedings Innovation and the Environment: Sustainable Development, pp. 7–15. Paris: OECD .
7.
Hertin, J. and F. Berkhout (2003) ‘Analysing Institutional Strategies for Environmental Policy Integration: The Case of EU Enterprise Policy’ , Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning5(1): 39–56 .
8.
Hildén, M. , J. Lepola , P. Mickwitz , A. Mulders , M. Palosaari , J. Similä , S. Sjöblom and E. Vedung (2002) Evaluation of Environmental Policy Instruments: A Case Study of the Finnish Pulp and Paper and Chemical Industries. Monographs of the Boreal Environment Research, 21; Helsinki: Finnish Environment Institute .
9.
Hupa, M. (1994) LIEKKI Combustion Technology: Final Report on the Energy Research Programme 1988–1992. Reviews B:153; Helsinki: Ministry of Trade and Industry .
10.
Hupa, M. and J. Matinlinna (eds) (1996) LIEKKI 2 vuosikirja 1996 osa III [LIEKKI 2 Yearbook 1996 Part III]. Turku: Åbo Akademi University .
11.
Jacob, K. and A. Volkery (2003) Instruments for Policy Integration: Intermediate Report on the RIW Project POINT. FFU-Report 06–2003; Berlin: Environmental Policy Research Centre .
12.
Kivimaa, P. and P. Mickwitz (2004) ‘Driving Forces for Environmentally Sounder Innovations: The Case of the Finnish Pulp and Paper Industry’, in K. Jacob , M. Binder and A. Wieczorek (eds) Governance for Industrial Transformation: Proceedings of the 2003 Berlin Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, pp. 356–372. Berlin: Environmental Policy Research Centre .
13.
Kivimaa, P. and P. Mickwitz (2006) ‘The Challenge of Greening Technologies? Environmental Policy Integration in Finnish Technology Policies’ , Research Policy35(5): 729–744 .
14.
Komppa, A. and L. Neimo (2000) Vähävetinen paperin valmistus CACTUS 1996–1999 (Low Water Consumption Paper Manufacture CACTUS 1996–1999). Technology programme report 1/2000; Helsinki: National Technology Agency Tekes .
15.
Kooiman, J. (2000) ‘Societal Governance: Levels, Modes, and Orders of Social–Political Interactions’, in J. Pierre (ed.) Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy, pp. 138–163. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
16.
Kooiman, J. (2003) Governing as Governance. London: SAGE .
17.
Lafferty, W. M. and E. Hovden (2003) ‘Environmental Policy Integration: Towards an Analytical Framework’ , Environmental Politics12(3): 1–22 .
18.
Lähepelto, J. (1998) Sustainable Paper Research Programme Final Report 1993–1998. Helsinki: National Technology Agency Tekes .
19.
Lenschow, A. (2002) ‘Greening the European Union: An Introduction’, in A. Lenschow (ed.) Environmental Policy Integration: Greening Sectoral Policies in Europe, pp. 3–21. London: Earthscan Publications .
20.
Meadowcroft, J. (1999) ‘Planning for Sustainable Development: What can be Learned from the Critics?’, in M. Kenny and J. Meadowcroft (eds) Planning Sustainability, pp. 12–38. London: Routledge .
21.
Mickwitz, P. (2003) ‘Is it as Bad as it Sounds or as Good as it Looks? Experiences of Finnish Water Discharge Limits’ , Ecological Economics45(2): 237–254 .
22.
Mickwitz, P. , H. Hyvättinen and P. Kivimaa (2007) ‘The Role of Policy Instruments in the Innovation and Diffusion of Environmentally Friendlier Technologies: Popular Claims Versus Case Study Experiences’ , Journal of Cleaner Production, accepted.
23.
Ministry of the Environment (1998) Hallituksen kestävän kehityksen ohjelma (Council of State Sustainable Development Programme). Suomen ympäristö, 254; Helsinki: Ministry of the Environment .
24.
Ministry of the Environment (1999) Water Protection Targets for the Year 2005. The Finnish Environment, 340; Helsinki: Ministry of the Environment .
25.
Ministry of the Environment (2003) Ympäristöministeriö 20: 1983–2003, handout, 54-54 pp. Helsinki: Ministry of the Environment .
26.
OECD (2002) Improving Policy Coherence and Integration for SD: A Checklist. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development .
27.
Paavilainen, L. (ed.) (2002) Final Report: Finnish Forest Cluster Research Programme WOOD WISDOM (1998–2001). Report 3; Helsinki: Tekes, Academy of Finland, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Ministry of Trade and Industry .
28.
Partanen, J. (ed.) (2003) Modelling of Combustion Processes: CODE Technology Programme 1999–2002. Technology Programme Report, 4/2003; Helsinki: National Technology Agency Tekes .
29.
Paulapuro, H. and A. Komppa (1994) RAINA Energy-Efficient Paper Production: Final Report. Reviews B:165; Helsinki: Ministry of Trade and Industry .
30.
Peters, G. (1998) ‘Managing Horizontal Government: The Politics of Coordination’ , Public Administration: An International Quarterly76(2): 295–311 .
31.
Picciotto, R. (2002) ‘The Logic of Mainstreaming: A Development Evaluation Perspective’ , Evaluation8(3): 322–339 .
32.
Pietilä, S. (1991) SIHTI Energia-ja ympäristötekniikan tutkimus-ja kehitysohjelma: Tutkimussuunnitelma 1991 [SIHTI Energy and Environmental Technology R&D Programme: Research Plan 1991]. Helsinki: Ekono Ympäristötekniikka .
33.
Pollitt, C. and G. Bouckaert (2000) Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
34.
Rennings, K. , R. Kemp , M. Bartolomeo , J. Hemmelskamp and D. Hitchens (2003) Blueprints for an Integration of Science, Technology and Environmental Policy (BLUEPRINT). Mannheim: Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung GmbH .
35.
Sabatier, P. (1999) ‘The Need for Better Theories’, in P. Sabatier (ed.) Theories of the Policy Process, pp. 3–17. Boulder, CO: Westview Press .
36.
Science and Technology Policy Council (1990) Katsaus 1990: Tiede-ja teknologiapolitiikan suuntaviivat 1990-luvulla [Review 1990: Guidelines for Science and Technology Policy in the 1990s]. Helsinki: Science and Technology Policy Council of Finland .
37.
Science and Technology Policy Council (1993) Tiedon ja osaamisen Suomi: Kehittämisstrategia [Towards an Innovative Society: A Development Strategy for Finland]. Helsinki: Science and Technology Policy Council of Finland .
38.
Science and Technology Policy Council (1996) Suomi: Tiedon ja osaamisen yhteiskunta [Finland: A Knowledge-Based Society]. Helsinki: Science and Technology Policy Council of Finland .
39.
Science and Technology Policy Council (2000) Review 2000: The Challenge of Knowledge and Know-how. Helsinki: Science and Technology Policy Council of Finland .
40.
Science and Technology Policy Council (2003) Knowledge, Innovation and Internationalisation. Helsinki: Science and Technology Policy Council of Finland .
41.
Seth, R. , X. Deglise , P. Ilmakunnas , R. Kliger , J-M. Leban , D. M. O'Malley and U. Westermarck (2002) Finnish Forest Cluster Research Programme 1998–2001 Evaluation Reporty. Publications of the Academy of Finland 15/02; Helsinki: Academy of Finland .
42.
Similä, J. (2002) ‘Pollution Regulation and its Effects on Technological Innovations’ , Journal of Environmental Law14(2): 143–160 .
43.
Sundholm, J. (1993) KUITU Energy-Efficient Mechanical Pulping: Final Report. Reviews B:167; Helsinki: Ministry of Trade and Industry .
44.
Tekes (2002) Pigmentit paperin raaka-aineena 1998–2001 loppuraportti [Pigments as Raw Material of Paper 1998–2001 Final Report]. Technology programme report 5/2002; Helsinki: National Technology Agency Tekes .
45.
Tekes (2004a) ‘Technology Strategy and Online Information on Applying for Project Funding’. Available at: www.tekes.fi (accessed 7 April).
Thun, R. and M. Korhonen (eds) (1999) SIHTI 2 Energia ja ympäristöteknologia: Tutkimusohjelman vuosikirja 1998 [SIHTI 2 Energy and Environmental Technology: Research Programme Yearbook 1998]. Espoo: VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland .
48.
UN (1994) Agenda 21: Earth Summit. The United Nations Program of Action from Rio. New York: United Nations Department of Public Information .
Vedung, E. (1997) Public Policy and Program Evaluation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers .
51.
Vedung, E. (1998) ‘Policy Instruments: Typologies and Theories’, in M.-L. Bemelmans-Videc , R. C. Rist and E. Vedung (eds) Carrots, Sticks, and Sermons: Policy Instruments and their Evaluation, pp. 21–58. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers .
