Transcript Policy Entrepreneurship - Overseas Development Institute (ODI)

Policy Entrepreneurship:
How to promote more informed
policy & practice?
Chisinau, Moldova
17 June 2004
John Young and Julius Court
Research and Policy in Development Programme
Overseas Development Institute, London
www.odi.org.uk/rapid/
Self Introductions
• 1 minute!
• Name & organization
• Country
Workshop Purpose & Outline
Purpose:
• Improved capacity to analyse the context of research and
use simple approaches and tools to improve impact on
policy and practice.
Outline:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introductions
Theory (& Reality)
Research-Policy Links in the EE/FSU Region
The RAPID Framework & Lessons
A Strategy for Action
Some Tools
Maximising Influence
Evaluation & Conclusion
Overseas Development Institute (ODI)
•
•
•
•
Britain’s leading development Think Tank
£8m, 60 researchers
Research / Advice / Public Debate
Rural / Humanitarian / Poverty & Aid /
Economics (HIV, Human rights, Water)
• DFID, Parliament, WB, EC
• Civil Society
For more information see: www.odi.org.uk
RAPID Programme
• Research
– Desk-based literature reviews
• Bridging Research and Policy
• Communications
• Knowledge Management
– GDN project:
• 50 preliminary case studies
• Phase II studies (25 projects)
– ODI projects
• 4 detailed case studies
• HIV/AIDS
• Advisory work
• Workshops and seminars
www.odi.org.uk/rapid
Definitions
• Research: “any systematic effort to increase the
stock of knowledge”
• Policy: a “purposive course of action followed by an
actor or set of actors”
– Agendas / policy horizons
– Official statements documents
– Patterns of spending
– Implementation processes
– Activities on the ground
Generic Policy Processes
1. Problem Definition/
Agenda Setting
2. Constructing the Policy
Alternatives/ Policy Formulation
6. Evaluation
The Policy Cycle
5. Policy Implementation
and Monitoring
3.Choice of Solution/
Selection of Preferred Policy Option
4. Policy Design
Existing theory
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Linear model
Percolation model, Weiss
Tipping point model, Gladwell
‘Context, evidence, links’ framework, ODI
Policy narratives, Roe
Systems model (NSI)
External forces, Lindquist
‘Room for manoeuvre’, Clay & Schaffer
‘Street level bureaucrats’, Lipsky
Policy as social experiments, Rondinelli
Policy Streams & Windows, Kingdon
Disjointed incrementalism, Lindquist
The ‘tipping point’, Gladwell
Crisis model, Kuhn
‘Framework of possible thought’,
Chomsky
16. Variables for Credibility, Beach
17. The source is as important as content,
Gladwell
18. Linear model of communication, Shannon
19. Interactive model,
20. Simple and surprising stories,
Communication Theory
21. Provide solutions, Marketing Theory I
22. Find the right packaging, Marketing II
23. Elicit a response, Kottler
24. Translation of technology, Volkow
25. Epistemic communities
26. Policy communities
27. Advocacy coalitions etc, Pross
28. Negotiation through networks, Sebattier
29. Shadow networks, Klickert
30. Chains of accountability, Fine
31. Communication for social change,
Rockefeller
32. Wheels and webs, Chapman & Fisher
www.odi.org.uk/rapid/lessons/theory
Existing theory – a short list
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Policy narratives, Roe
National Systems of Innovation, (NSI)
‘Room for manoeuvre’, Clay & Schaffer
‘Street level bureaucrats’, Lipsky
Policy as social experiments, Rondenelli
Policy streams and policy windows, Kingdon
Disjointed Incrementalism, Lindblom
Social Epidemics, Gladwell
ODI working paper 174, 2002, Hovland, de Vibe and Young
Bridging Research and Policy: An Annotated Bibliography.
Existing theory – a short list
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Policy narratives, Roe
Systems of Innovation Model, (NSI)
‘Room for manoeuvre’, Clay & Schaffer
‘Street level bureaucrats’, Lipsky
Policy as social experiments, Rondene
Policy streams and policy windows, Kingdon
Disjointed Incrementalism, Lindblom
Social Epidemics, Gladwell
ODI working paper 174, 2002, Hovland, de Vibe and Young
Bridging Research and Policy: An Annotated Bibliography.
Reality…
• “The whole life of policy is a chaos of purposes and
accidents. It is not at all a matter of the rational
implementation of the so-called decisions through selected
strategies” 1
• “Most policy research on African agriculture is irrelevant to
agricultural and overall economic policy in Africa” 2
• “(in CEE countries) The climate surrounding public sector
reforms has become increasingly more complex and
interconnected.” 3
1
- Clay & Schaffer (1984), Room for Manoeuvre; An Exploration of Public Policy in
Agricultural and Rural Development, Heineman Educational Books, London
2 – Omamo (2003), Policy Research on African Agriculture: Trends, Gaps, and Challenges,
International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) Research Report No 21
3 – Gabor Peteri (foreword to Managing Think Tanks by Ray Struyk).
Reality II … Parallel Universes?
Vincent Cable – MP on legislators &
use of evidence:
• Speed
• Superficiality
• Spin
• Secrecy
• Scientific Ignorance
More at: www.odi.org.uk/RAPID/Meetings/Evidence
Any Questions?
Group Task 1
For the EE/FSU region:
• What are the key factors affecting …
– The impact of your Institutes’ Work?
– Research policy interaction in EE/FSU?
Appoint a secretary to take notes!
The Analytical Framework
External Influences
Socio-economic and
cultural influences,
donor policies etc
The links between policy
and research communities –
networks, relationships, power,
competing discourses, trust,
knowledge etc.
The political context –
political and economic structures
and processes, culture, institutional
pressures, incremental vs radical
change etc.
The evidence – credibility, the
degree it challenges received
wisdom, research approaches
and methodology, simplicity of
the message, how it is packaged
etc
Political Context: Key Areas
• The macro political context (democracy, governance, media
freedom; academic freedom)
• The sector / issue process (Policy uptake = demand –
contestation) [NB Demand: political and societal. Power.]
• How policymakers think (narratives & policy streams)
• Policy implementation and practice (bureaucracies,
incentives, street level, room for manoeuvre, participatory
approaches)
• Decisive moments in the policy process (policy processes,
votes, policy windows and crises)
• Context is crucial, but you can maximize your chances
Evidence: Relevance and credibility
• Key factor – did it provide a solution to a problem?
• Relevance:
– Topical relevance – What to do?
– Operational usefulness – How to do it? :
• Credibility:
– Research approach
– Of researcher > of evidence itself
• Strenuous advocacy efforts are often needed
• Communication
Links: Feedback and Networks
• Feedback processes often prominent in successful
cases.
• Trust & legitimacy
• Networks:
– Epistemic communities
– Policy networks
– Advocacy coalitions
• The role of individuals: connectors, mavens and
salesmen
External Influence
• Big “incentives” can spur evidence-based policy –
e.g. EU accession, PRSP processes.
• And some interesting examples of donors trying
new things re. supporting research
• But, we really don’t know whether and how donors
can best promote use of evidence in policymaking
(credibility vs backlash)
Other models
Discussion
•
•
•
•
•
Any clarifications?
Does the framework make sense?
What is missing?
Is the framework useful?
What is OSI experience?
The Analytical Framework
External Influences
Socio-economic and
cultural influences,
donor policies etc
The links between policy
and research communities –
networks, relationships, power,
competing discourses, trust,
knowledge etc.
The political context –
political and economic structures
and processes, culture, institutional
pressures, incremental vs radical
change etc.
The evidence – credibility, the
degree it challenges received
wisdom, research approaches
and methodology, simplicity of
the message, how it is packaged
etc
A Practical Framework
External Influences
Politics and
Policymaking
Campaigning,
Lobbying
Scientific
information
exchange &
validation
political context
Media,
Advocacy,
Networking
links
Policy analysis, &
research
Research,
learning &
thinking
evidence
Using the framework
• The external environment: Who are the key actors? What
is their agenda? How do they influence the political context?
• The political context: Is there political interest in change?
Is there room for manoeuvre? How do they perceive the
problem?
• The evidence: Is it there? Is it relevant? Is it practically
useful? Are the concepts familiar or new? Does it need repackaging?
• Links: Who are the key individuals? Are there existing
networks to use? How best to transfer the information? The
media? Campaigns?
What researchers need to do
What researchers
need to know
What researchers
need to do
Political Context:
• Get to know the policymakers. • Work with them – seek
commissions
• Identify friends and foes.
• Strategic opportunism –
• Prepare for policy
prepare for known events
opportunities.
+ resources for others
• Look out for policy windows.
• Who are the policymakers?
• Is there demand for ideas?
• What is the policy process?
Evidence
• What is the current theory?
• What are the narratives?
• How divergent is it?
Links
• Who are the stakeholders?
• What networks exist?
• Who are the connectors,
mavens and salesmen?
•
•
•
•
•
Establish credibility
Provide practical solutions
Establish legitimacy.
Present clear options
Use familiar narratives.
• Get to know the others
• Work through existing
networks.
• Build coalitions.
• Build new policy networks.
How to do it
• Build a reputation
• Action-research
• Pilot projects to generate
legitimacy
• Good communication
• Build partnerships.
• Identify key networkers,
mavens and salesmen.
• Use informal contacts
Programme Pt II
•
•
•
•
•
•
The framework in action – a case study
Group Work – what works for you?
Implications for TTs
Tools & Approaches
What we do
Networks
Paravets in Kenya
1970s - Professionalisation of Public Services.
- Structural Adjustment → collapse.
- Paravet projects emerge.
1980s - ITDG projects.
- Privatisation.
- ITDG Paravet network.
1990s
- Rapid spread in North.
- KVB letter (January 1998).
- Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
2000s
- Still not approved / passed!
Paravets in Kenya - Political Context
1970s - Professionalisation of Public Services.
- Structural Adjustment → collapse of services.
- Paravet projects emerge.
1980s - ITDG projects.
- Privatisation
Privatisation.
- ITDG Paravet network
network.and change of DVS.
1990s
- Rapid spread in North.
- KVB letter (January 1998).
- Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
2000s
- Still not approved / passed!
Paravets in Kenya - Research
International
Research
1970s - Professionalisation of Public
Services.
- Structural Adjustment → collapse of services.
- Paravet projects emerge.
1980s - ITDG projects
projects.– collaborative action research.
- Privatisation
Privatisation.
- ITDG Paravet network
network.and change of DVS.
1990s
- Rapid spread in North. The Hubl Study
- KVB letter (January 1998).
- Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
2000s
- Still not approved / passed!
Paravets in Kenya - Links
International
Research
1970s - Professionalisation of Public
Services.
- Structural Adjustment → collapse of services.
- Paravet projects emerge.
1980s - ITDG projects
projects.– collaborative action research.
- Privatisation
Privatisation.
- ITDG Paravet network
network.and change of DVS.
1990s
- Rapid spread in North. The Hubl Study
Dr Kajume
- KVB letter (January 1998).
- Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
2000s
- Still not approved / passed!
Paravets in Kenya - Lessons
• Political stagnation, professional
protectionism
• Practical evidence invisible to policy makers
• Powerful individuals, “professional” interests
• Bad timing - ITDG missed the boat – twice!
• A “Tipping Point”
• New champions
• Collaborative policy-research
What should ITDG have done?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Learned more about the political context
Involved more policy makers earlier
Collected more empirical data & used it better
Seized the chance in 1989
Involved non-livestock policy makers
Controlled the “club”
Looked for champions
Involved bilaterals and multilaterals
When and how to use it
• Historical analysis of a policy event
– Identify the event
– Elaborate the history – critical events, key people
– Review context, evidence and links at key
moments
– Identify & prioritise the influences
• Current analysis & strategic planning
– Identify key players
– “Workshop” the issues & develop a strategy for
maximising impact
A current example
• to maximise impact of DFID forest/ground
water research project in India
• Researchers, policy makers and activists
• Used framework to analyse factors in
water sector in India
• Developed strategy for final phase:
– Less research
– More communication
– Developing champions in regional and national
government
– Local, Regional & National advocacy campaign
Any Questions?
Group Discussion 2
• Influencing policy: What do you do?
– Stories – Successes and Failures
– Specific Approaches that work
– What works in different contexts
Appoint a secretary to take notes!
Implications for Think Tanks
• Need to be able to:
– Understand the political context
– Do credible research
– Communicate effectively
– Work with others
• Need organisational capacity
– Staff
– Internal processes
– Funds
Practical Tools
Overarching Tools
- The RAPID Framework
- Using the Framework
- The Entrepreneurship
Questionnaire
Communication Tools
- Communications Strategy
- SWOT analysis
- Message Design
- Making use of the media
Policy Influence Tools
- Influence Mapping & Power Mapping
- Lobbying and Advocacy
- Campaigning: A Simple Guide
- Competency self-assessment
Context Assessment Tools
- Stakeholder Analysis
- Forcefield Analysis
- Writeshops
- Policy Mapping
- Political Context Mapping
Research Tools
- Case Studies
- Episode Studies
- Surveys
- Bibliometric Analysis
- Focus Group Discussion
Assessing Political Contexts
Mapping the Policy Process
• Aim:
•
•
•
•
Describe: Who makes decisions? How? What
ways, formal and informal, are policies made?
Analyse: What are the different interests?
When: Need a comprehensive understanding. General.
Give you: Where are decisions made? Who are the
Stakeholders? (NB: link to stakeholder analysis)
– Arena: government, parliament, civil society, judiciary,
private sector.
– Level: local, national, international.
Steps: Process description (formal & informal) + political
influence ratings.
Based on: Experience, literature, interviews, focus groups.
[Sources: M. Grindle / J. Court ]
Mapping Policy Processes
Agendas
Central
Government
Parliament
Bureaucrats
Civil Society
State
Government
Implementation
Civil Society
Formulation
Implementation
Forcefield Analysis
• Specific Change
• Identify Forces
• (Identify Priorities)
• (Develop Strategies)
Stakeholder Analysis
High
Why:
Keep
Satisfied
• Understand who gain or
lose from a policy or
project.
Engage
Closely
Power
• Help Build Consensus.
Monitor
(minimum
effort)
Steps:
Keep
Informed
• Identify Stakeholders.
•Analysis Workshop.
Low
Low
High
Interest
• (Develop Strategies)
Communications strategy
•
•
•
•
Identify the audience(s)
Identify the message(s)
Promotion
Evaluate impact and
change as necessary
• Clear Strategy
– Interactive
– Multiple formats
Who?
How? What?
Policy process workshops (eg DFID)
• Looking at internal policy processes –
what works in DFID.
• Small, informal workshop with 7 staff.
• Participatory pair-wise ranking of factors
influencing the success of 8 policy
processes.
• Worked quite well.
• In DFID - agendas and processes rather
than documents are key
Meetings
• Does evidence matter – Halpern, Millstone
• The political context – Cable, Court
• The role of research – Spray, Young
• NGO campaigns – Forsyth, Simms
• Think-tanks – Bentley, Maxwell, Garnett
• Using knowledge effectively – Cheuk, Borton
• Policy entrepreneurship – Maxwell, Pettifor
• International policies – Desai, Wilks
More at: www.odi.org.uk/RAPID/Meetings
Policy entrepreneurs
Storytellers
Engineers
Networkers
Fixers
Building policy entrepreneurs
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx
Average
45
36
26
39
40
39
22
41
39
42
36
41
38
31
37
37
25
27
34
36
29
35
38
37
36
30
36
32
37
41
26
33
35
37
43
39
37
35
43
40
39
38
37
32
35
41
37
38
45
50
47
36
44
41
47
32
36
40
41
45
40
37
48
42
>44 = Low
<30 = High
<23 = V.High
Managing Think Tanks
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Type, Focus and Niche
Staff and Motivation
Quality Control
Communication
Getting the most from your board
Fund-raising
Financial Management
(surprisingly little on policy influence in different
contexts)
[Source: Struyk, 2002]
Think Tanks – 3 Modes of Influence
Gas
Liquid
Solid
www.odi.org.uk/RAPID/Meetings/Evidence/Evidence_Series.html
How we’re doing it in RAPID
•
•
•
•
•
Clear Aim & Outputs
Building credibility with research/action
Employing the right staff & staff development
Good internal systems (Mgt, Comms & KM)
Programme approach:
–
–
–
–
Strategic opportunism
Research / practical advice / stimulating debate
Engagement with policy makers & practitioners
Community of practice cf network
• Financial opportunism
RAPID Programme Plans
• Further research
–
–
–
–
GDN
HIV/AIDS
Networks
CSOs
• Engagement in the UK
– EBP
– Research Councils
– Evidence Network
• Global promotion and capacity-building
– PPA
– DFID
– Advisory work
Any Questions?
Networks
• Roles of Policy Networks
– Filtering
– Amplifying
– Investor / Provider
– Facilitator
– Convening
– Communities
• Policy Code Sharing
• Some networks net; some networks work.
Group Discussion 3
• The APPC
– What do you want it to do?
– What is the added value?
Conclusions
• Research is essential but…
• Other work is needed to ensure it contributes
to the development and implementation.
• Clear lessons about how are emerging:
– Political context is crucial – understand it to
maximize your chances
– Figure out what evidence is needed and how to
package it for policy makers
– Collaborate with other actors
Other sources of information:
Visit http://www.odi.org.uk/rapid
or e-mail [email protected] for a copy of the RAPID CD-ROM
Evaluation
• Please fill in the evaluation form