Transcript 1 - Naved Chowdhury

Improving Evidence based Policy
Engagement in South Asia
17-21 September, 2007
Shimla, India
Naved Chowdhury
[email protected]
Rijit Sengupta
[email protected]
OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE
• Development Think Tank
• 60 researchers
• Research / Advice /
Public Debate
• Rural / Humanitarian / Poverty & Aid /
Economics / Policy Processes
• DFID, Parliament, WB, EC
• Civil Society
For more information see: www.odi.org.uk
RAPID Group
• Promoting the use of
research-based evidence in
development policy
• Research / Advice / Public
Affairs & Capacity-building
• Programmes:
–
–
–
–
Research for Policy
Progressive Policymakers
Parliamentarians
Southern Think Tanks
for further information see: www.odi.org.uk/rapid
Case Studies
• Detailed:
– Sustainable Livelihoods
– Poverty Reductions Strategy
Processes
– Ethical Principles in
Humanitarian Aid
– Animal Health Care in Kenya
– Dairy Policy in Kenya
– Plant Genetic Resources
• Summary
–
–
–
–
GDN x 50
CSPP x 20
Good news case studies x 5
Mental health in the UK
ODI and Global Civil Society
Civil Society Partnerships Programme
Aim: Strengthened role of southern CSOs
in development policy processes
Outcomes:
• CSOs better understand evidence-policy process
• Capacity development to support CSOs’ policy
influencing efforts
• Improved knowledge base for CSOs on policy
influencing
• Global collaboration and experience sharing about
research/policy/practice linkages
http://www.odi.org.uk/cspp/
CSPP Objectives
Goal
Development policy is more pro-poor
Purpose
• Southern CSOs make more use of researchbased evidence to influence the establishment of
pro-poor policy
• ODI engages more effectively with southern
CSOs and other stakeholders to make more use
of ODI’s research-based evidence to influence the
establishment of pro-poor policy.
Partnership Activities
Network:
• Interactive community website
• Information and knowledge
exchange within and across
regions
• General support
Capacity-building:
• staff exchanges
• visiting fellows to ODI and
Southern institutes,
• Southern participants in
global policy events
• Training and ToT – for CSOs
and policy-makers
• Mentoring support to action
research projects
Dissemination of lessons:
• Ongoing learning
• “How to do it” guidelines
• New research on the
research-policy-practice
interface
Collaborative projects:
• Small-scale ARPs
• Continued support to
existing projects
• One new global
collaborative project each
year
Global Consultation
• Workshops were held in Africa (Southern, Eastern and
West), Asia (South and South East) and Latin America
(Southern Cone and Andes) and organized in partnership
with local CSOs
• Case studies:
– Budget Monitoring (Zambia),
– Community Participation in Waste Management
(Ghana),
– Rice pricing (Bangladesh),
– Public participation (Indonesia) etc.
– Sub-national elections and journalist capacity building
(Peru)
Civil Society Partnerships Programme
Aim: Strengthened role of southern CSOs
in development policy processes
Outcomes:
• CSOs better understanding evidence-policy
process
• Capacity to support CSOs established
• Improved information for CSOs
• Global collaboration
http://www.odi.org.uk/cspp/
Activities
• Principles of partnerships etc
• Mapping of CSO’s and support
organisations
• Regional Workshops
• Research, synthesis and toolkits
• Small-scale collaborations (internal)
• Small-scale collaborations (external)
• Identification of long-term partners
• Support (and capacity-building)
• Collaboration on global projects
Linking Evidence to Policy: Lessons Learnt
• Understanding Policy process means
understanding the politics
• Demand led vs Supply driven
• Credibility of CSOs is questioned
• Capacity to use and package research
for policy influence is limited
• Donor influence is huge
• Gradual erosion of research capacity
in the South
Establishing capacity
• Engagement with policymakers varies
• Varied level of capacity in the south
•
•
•
•
•
Retention and recruitment of qualified staff
Role of research in development organization
Lack of training opportunities
More emphasis on policy advocacy
Limited fund for research
• Strong Demand for support ( regional
bias)
• Capacity of government institutions
also in question
Partnership for Capacity Development
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Equitable
Long-term commitment
Intellectual honesty
Mutual Trust
Ethical Principle of Partnership
Contextual ( strong regional variation)
Capacity is demanded not given!!
Key issues for Partnership
• ODI needs to change ( Org and Staff)
• Invest time and resource
• Partnership to accommodate diversity
of capacity
• Different modes of Partnerships (
research, networking, advocacy)
Capacity Development in CSPP
• Building a knowledge base of orgs
• Responding directly to CD demand of
partners
• CSPP network
– Training ( Research methodology, policy
analysis, etc).
– Facilitating exchange of information and
knowledge ( Best Practice)
– Support institutional development
– Collaborative action research projects
Key factors for CSO influence on Policy
(Malawi)
Constraints
• Lack of capacity
• Lack of local
ownership
• Translating data into
evidence
• Limited data
• Donor influence
• Crises
• Political factors
Strengths
• Evidence of the value
of CSO involvement
• Governments
becoming more
interested in CSOs
• CSOs are gaining
confidence
• Strength of networks
• Opportunities for
media engagement
• Political factors
What do CSOs need to do?
• Define clear roles and responsibilities, especially in networks
• Financial and human resources to facilitate policy influencing –
both constructive engagement and confrontational approaches
• Effective communication: develop different materials for different
target audiences
• Engage the media
• Engage with donors so that they can develop a more holistic
understanding of development challenges
• Consult with policymakers (elected officials and civil servants) from
the outset
Group work in regional teams
• What do you understand by the term “policy
influencing” or “policy engagement”?
• What are the most important policy processes for
CSOs to influence with regard to any sector?
– Please give examples at regional and national levels
• How are you trying to influence any policy in your
country?
• What are the key opportunities for CSOs and
challenges in your country to influence policies?
• Plenary: Opportunities and Challenges for influencing
development policies
Merilee Grindle’s Approach
1. Identify the policy reform – the decision to
be made
2. Political Interests Map – the actors and
“politics”
3. Institutional Contexts Map – the
organisations and processes involved
4. Circle of influence graphic – supporters
and opponents and their power
5. Policy process Matrix – what needs to be
done when
6. Communications Strategy
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Your name
Your work
What is your expectation from this
workshop?
• 3 minutes!!
The overall framework
Who?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Identify the problem
How?
Understand the context
Identify the audience(s)
Develop a SMART Strategy
Identify the message(s)
Resources – staff, time, partners & $$
Promotion – tools & activities
Monitor, learn, adapt
What?
Terms and Parameters
• What is policy?
• What explains policy change?
• What is the relationship between
researchers and policy makers?
• Tools to understand the political
context of policy change
• Tools to influence the policy process
Policy – some meanings
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Label for field of activity/space
Expression of general intent
Specific proposals
Decisions of government
Formal authority/legislation
Program
Output or outcome
Model or theory
Hogwood & Gunn, 1984
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”
• Evidence: “the available information
supporting or otherwise a belief or
proposition”
• Evidence-based Policy: “public policy
informed by rigorously established
evidence”.
Non-linear, dynamic policy processes
• The impacts of research may occur neither at the
time of the research, nor in ways that are
predictable…or in the direction in which
researchers intend. [Rather] it is mediated by the
options available to policy makers at a particular
time. [There is a] …need for researcher to be
both radical and relate to its time and place….to
make an impact but also to accord…with existing
mores
»(Lucinda Platt, 2003: 2).
Existing theory
1.
X
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
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
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 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
‘the interplay between
institutions, interests and ideas.’
John P (1998) Analysing Public Policy. London: Cassell.
Identify the problem
Commission research
Analyse the results
Choose the best option
Establish the policy
Implement the policy
Evaluation
Policy Processes
Cabinet
Donors
Policy
Formulation
Agenda
Setting
Parliament
Decision
Making
Civil Society
Monitoring and
Evaluation
Private
Sector
Ministries
Policy
Implementation
…in 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 Africa2”
• “Research is more often regarded as the
opposite of action rather than a response
to ignorance”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 Surr (2003), DFID Research Review
Factors influencing policy making
Experience &
Expertise
Pragmatics &
Judgement
Contingencies
Lobbyists &
Pressure
Groups
Habits &
Tradition
Evidence
Resources
Values and
Policy
Context
Source: Phil Davies Impact to
Insight Meeting, ODI, 2005
Different Notions of Evidence
Researchers’
Evidence
• ‘Scientific’ (Context
free)
Policy Makers’
Evidence
• Colloquial (Contextual)
• Proven empirically
• Anything that seems
reasonable
• Theoretically driven
• Policy relevant
• As long as it takes
• Timely
• Caveats and
qualifications
• Clear Message
Source: Phil Davies Impact to Insight Meeting, ODI, 2005
Policy process
The way policy is initiated, developed,
negotiated, communicated, implemented
• Agenda setting – why some issues considered
by policy makers
• Formulation – which policy alternatives and
evidence is considered, why evidence ignored
• Adoption – who is involved in deciding, formal
or informal decision-making
• Implementation – who will implement, how will
implementers change policy to suit their aims,
are implementers involved in decision-making
• Evaluation – whether and why policies achieve
their aims
Policy context
Systemic factors which effect policy
• Situational: change of leadership, focusing
events, new evidence, etc.
• Structural: resource allocation to
intervention, organization of service delivery
– public private mix, etc.
• Cultural: prevailing attitudes to situation of
women, technology, equity, tradition, etc.
• International: place of intervention on
international agenda, aid dependency,
levels and modalities, migration of staff,
ideas and paradigms, etc.
Political Context Analysis
• Systematically gather political intelligence
associated with any policy reform
– Contextual opportunities & constraints
– Formal & informal processes through which
decisions made
– Identify stakeholder groups
– Assess political resources of groups
– Understand interests, positions and
commitments of groups
• Systematically assess political palatability of
specific policy alternatives
Context Analysis and Policy Mapping Tools
•
•
•
•
•
•
Policy Process Mapping
RAPID Framework
Stakeholder Analysis
Force-Field Analysis
Outcome Mapping
More complex tools:
– Drivers of Change
– Power Analysis
– World Governance Assessment
More Complex Tools
• Civil Society Index (CIVICUS)
• Country Policy & Institutional
Assessment (World Bank)
• Democracy and Governance
Assessment (USAID)
• Drivers of Change (DFID)
• Governance Questionnaire (GTZ)
• Governance Matters (World Bank Institute)
• Power Analysis (Sida)
• World Governance Assessment
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
Problem Tree Analysis
•
•
•
The first step is to discuss and
agree the problem or issue to be
analysed.
Next the group identify the causes
of the focal problem – these
become the roots – and then
identify the consequences – which
become the branches
The heart of the exercise is the
discussion, debate and dialogue
that is generated as factors are
arranged and re-arranged, often
forming sub-dividing roots and
branches
SWOT Analysis
Strengths
Weaknesses
•Skills and abilities
•Funding lines
•Commitment to positions
•Contacts and Partners
•Existing activities
Opportunities Threats
•Other orgs relevant to the
issue
•Resources: financial,
technical, human
•Political and policy space
•Other groups or forces
• What type of policy
influencing skills and
capacities do we have?
• In what areas have our staff
used them more effectively?
• Who are our strongest
allies?
• When have they worked
with us?
• Are there any windows of
opportunity?
• What can affect our ability to
influence policy?
Stakeholder Analysis Approach
• Clarify policy change objective
High
Engage Closely and
Influence Actively
Keep Satisfied
• Identify all stakeholders
associated with this objective
Power
• Prioritise stakeholders according
to interest/commitment and power/
assets
Monitor (minimum
effort)
Low
Low
• Develop strategy to engage with
different stakeholders
Keep Informed
High
Interest
Stakeholder analysis
• Stakeholder: individuals, groups, or organizations that
have an interest in the project and can mobilize
resources to affect its outcome in some way.
Stakeholders are often specific to each policy reform
and context, and should not just be assumed.
• Stakeholder analysis: tool used to identify and
understand the needs and expectations of major
interests inside and outside the project environment in
order to plan strategically.
It is critical for assessing project risk and viability, and
ultimately the support that must be effectively obtained
and retained.
Stakeholder interests
Stakeholder
Interests
Ministry of
Environment
 Natural
resource
management
 Synergies
between land
and water
policies
 Minimum
tension with
CSOs
Estimated project
impacts
High
Medium
Medium
Estimated overall
priority
2nd priority
Actors/Stakeholders
– Identify key governmental, NGO, international,
regional, national and sub-national stakeholder
groups
– Also identify independent groups/individuals
with some influence or potential influence
– Break down categories as far as feasible (one
possibility is primary stakeholders, e.g.
ministerial advisors, and secondary
stakeholders, the minister her/himself; trade
union federation vs factor workers directly).
Assessing Stakeholder Power:
Political Assets:
• Tangible
–
–
–
–
–
Votes
Finance
Infrastructure
Members
Research evidence
• Intangible
–
–
–
–
Expertise
Charisma
Legitimacy
Access to media &
decision makers
– Tacit/implicit
knowledge
Interests, Position & Commitment
• Interests – what would a stakeholder
gain or lose from the proposed
reform?
• Interests determine position:
supportive, neutral, opposed
• Commitment – importance attached
by stakeholder to issue
Type of engagement
Inform
Initiation
Planning
Implementation
Monitoring and
evaluation
Consult
Partnership
Control
Stakeholder Position Map
POSITION
LEVEL OF
INFLUENCE
High
Medium
Low
Opposed
Neutral
Supportive
Strategies for Policy Engagement
Develop political strategies to change:
• Position: deals to bring about change, horse
trading, promises, threats
• Power: provide supporters with funds, personnel,
access to media & officials
• Players: change number of actors by mobilizing
and demobilising, venue shifting
• Perceptions: use data and arguments to question,
to alter perspectives of problem/solution, use
associations, invoke symbols, emphasise doability
Bangladesh Integration Example:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Ministry of Finance
Planning Commission
Prime Minister
Minister of Health
Secretary of Min of Health
Deputy Secretary Ministry of Health
Health reformers in Ministry
Cadre of Family Planning Officials
Medical Association
Donors
Press
Academics
Select service delivery NGOs
Bangladesh Integration: Pre-2001
POSITION
LEVEL OF
INFLUENCE
Opposed
Neutral
Supportive
High
DG FP
Min of Finance
Planning
Commission
Prime Minister
Minister of Health
Secretary of Health
BMA
Some DPs (WB,
DFID, EC, USAID)
Admin cadre
FP cadre
Class III/IV
employees
Print press
DGH
Health cadre
Reformers in
MOHFW
Secretariat
Health NGOs
FP NGOs
Academia
Some DPs (WHO,
UNICEF, UNFPA,
CIDA, SIDA, GTZ,
Dutch Cooperation)
Medium
Low
Additional
Secretary
Positions Oct 2001-May 2003
LEVEL OF
INFLUENCE
POSITION
Opposed
Neutral
High
Secretary
DG FP
FP cadre
Class III/IV workers
Ministry of Finance
Prime Minister
Planning
Commission
Minister of Health
BMA
Medium
FP NGOs
Admin cadre
? Press?
DGH
Some DPs (WB,
DFID, EC, USAID)
Low
UNFPA
CIDA
SIDA
GTZ
Academia
Health NGOs
Some DPs (WHO,
UNICEF, Dutch Cooperation)
Supportive
Group work:
Questions:
a) Who are your stakeholders?
b) How powerful are they? And what
accounts for their power?
c) What are their interests? Are these
likely to differ across different stages
in the policy cycle?
d) What type of engagement is
recommendable at different junctures
in the policy cycle?
Peer Assist
A peer assist is a method whereby
participants are invited to reflect on the ideas
of their peers based on their experiences,
insights and knowledge early on in a project
• targets a specific technical or commercial
challenge;
• gains assistance and insights from people outside
the team;
• identifies possible approaches and new lines of
inquiry;
• promotes sharing of learning with each other; and
• develops strong networks amongst people involved
Policy Mapping Tool 2
Effective Evidence-based policy
influencing:
The RAPID Approach
Political context - key findings
• The design of political institutions or
regimes matter in that they channel
the flow of ideas in particular ways
and create different sets of incentives
• New regional / transnational policy
spaces present new opportunities and
challenges
• Volatility of political contexts
• Time-bound windows of opportunity
Evidence – key findings
• Research quality matters
• Research quantity matters (body of
work culminating in a tipping point)
• Triangulation of research methods is
important
– Quantitative
– Qualitative
– Experiential
– Participatory
Linkages
• Intent to shape policy matters
“The hard evidence of many cases supports
the claim that intent matters. It matters
precisely because the confusions, tensions
and accidents of the policy process itself
turn out to be so complicated and
unpredictable…Research will only have a
reliable influence on policy if it can
survive…” (O’Neil, 2005: 762).
• Credibility of messenger may be as
important as the message; this depends on
social/institutional positioning and policy
entrepreneurship skills
An Analytical Framework
External Influences
Socio-economic and
cultural influences,
donor policies etc
The links between policy
and research communities –
networks, relationships/ trust,
power, competing discourses
The political context –
political and economic structures
and processes, culture, institutional
pressures, state-civil society
relations, pol-econ history.
The evidence – credibility, the
degree it challenges received
wisdom, research methodology,
message clarity, 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
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: Coalitions 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 evidencebased policy – e.g. 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)
The Key Questions
The external environment:
• Who are the key actors?
• What is their agenda?
• How do they influence the
political context?
The evidence:
• Is it there?
• Is it relevant?
• Is it practically useful?
• Are the concepts new?
• Does it need re-packaging?
The political context:
• Is there political interest in
change?
• Is there room for
manoeuvre?
• How do they perceive the
problem?
Links:
• Who are the key actors?
• Are there existing networks?
• How best to transfer the
information?
• The media?
• Campaigns?
Childhood Poverty in Ethiopia
Political context
•Govt weariness/suspicion of civil
society
•Some media access
•PRSP consultation period
•Limited capacity of social policy
ministries
External influences
•WB, donors encouraged research-based
policy recommendations
•UN Convention on Rights of the Child
•Consultants to Ministry of Finance and
Economy
Evidence
•National hh surveys
•Young Lives survey on childhood
poverty
•Good practice from other
countries, esp. indicators
•Qualitative research
Linkages
•National NGO umbrella orgs
•Save the Children Alliance
•Policy entrepreneurs
•Ethiopian Dev’t Research Institute
•PRSP technical committee
•Dept of Children and Youth
•Regional state govt officials
What you need to do
– group work
What you need to
know
Broad action steps
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
•
•
•
•
•
Links
• Get to know the others
• Work through existing
networks.
• Build coalitions.
• Build new policy networks.
• What is the current theory?
• What are the narratives?
• How divergent is it?
• 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.
Possible
strategies
• Build a reputation
• Action-research
• Pilot projects to generate
legitimacy
• Good communication
• Build partnerships.
• Identify key networkers,
mavens and salesmen.
• Use informal contacts
Group Work
• Specific examples from South Asia
• Country Case studies
• Application of RAPID to South Asian
case studies
• Presentation and Plenary Discussion
Advocacy Rules
(Or how to influence
people to make changes ....)
What are the changes you are trying to bring
about?
• Use the problem tree or some other tool to
identify problems, impact of the problem and
root causes
• Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic,
Time-Bound (SMART) objectives
Who are you advocating/communicating to?
Who needs to make these changes?
Who has the power?
What is their stance on the issue?
Awareness, Knowledge, Attitude, Behaviour
Targets and influence
Mapping where decisions happen
Analyse the outcome and then decide.
Who are you working together with?
1. Who do you need to work with?
2. Identify your ‘niche’ (SWOT)
3. Stakeholder Mapping
4. Structures for collaborative working
5. Skills needed in teams
6. Benefits and pitfalls of collaborations
Why do you want to make the changes?
Why should things change (or what is the
evidence to support your case?)
How to make sure that the evidence is
credible and ‘legitimate’?
The evidence : accurate, credible, well
researched, authoritative…
What the target audience wants to hear....
Advocacy Statement
A concise and persuasive statement that captures
What you want to achieve, Why, How and by
when?
 Should ‘communicate’ with your target
audience and prompt action
 Think about language, content,
packaging, and timing
 Persuasive
How will you communicate your messages and evidence?
 How to target and access information?
 Who is a trusted and credible messenger?
 What is the most appropriate medium?
 How will you package your information?
 Role of the media
Where and when to advocate/communicate?
 Creating opportunities (campaigns,
public mobilisation, formal and
informal lobbying etc.)
 Influencing existing agendas
 Piggybacking on other agendas
Skills of (pro-poor) policy entrepreneurs
Networkers
Storytellers
Engineers
Fixers
Policy Entrepreneurship Questionnaire
• Rank responses
• Add scores
• Don’t worry about
specifics
Bangladesh CSO Policy Entrepreneurs
>44 = Low
<30 = High
<23 = V. High
• Day 3
Strategies and Organizational factors for linking Evidence to
Policy
• How strategies are made?
• What organizational factors matter?
Why communicate?
•
•
•
•
•
•
To disseminate our research results
To provide information
To aid our research process
To engage with specific groups
To facilitate (public) discussion
To lead to change
But…
more communication
≠
more change
Key communication skills
More communication ≠ more change
• But better communication can lead to
change.
Key skills:
•
•
•
•
to understand,
to inspire,
to inform, and
to learn.
Communications Toolkit
•
•
•
•
Planning Tools
Packaging Tools
Targeting Tools
Monitoring Tools
Communications Toolkit
• Planning Tools
– Stakeholder Analysis
– Social Network Analysis
– Problem Tree Analysis
– Force Field Analysis
– National Systems of
Innovation (NSI)
– How to Write a
Communications Strategy
• Packaging Tools
• Targeting Tools
• Monitoring Tools
Key skill:
to understand
The overall framework
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Who?
Identify the problem
Understand the context
How? What?
Identify the audience(s)
Develop a SMART Strategy
Identify the message(s)
Resources – staff, time, partners & $$
Promotion – tools & activities
Monitor, learn, adapt
Audience
•
Who needs to make these changes?
•
Who has the power?
•
What is their stance on the issue?
•
Who influences them?
•
Identify targets and influence
(use stakeholder & context mapping tools)
Message
•
Why should things change (or what is the
evidence to support your case?)
•
How to make sure that the evidence is
credible and ‘legitimate’?
•
What the target audience can hear....
frameworks of thought
•
Language, content, packaging, and timing
Messenger (Promotion)
• How to access information and target?
• Who is a trusted and credible messenger?
• What is the most appropriate medium?
(campaigns, public mobilisation, formal and
informal lobbying)
• How will you package your information?
• Role of the media?
Persuasion
•
•
•
•
•
Separate people from problem
Focus on interests, not positions
Invent options for mutual gain
Insist on using objective criteria.
Manage human emotion separately
from the practical problem
• Highlight the human need to feel
heard, understood, respected and
valued.
Lobbying
•
•
•
•
Be an authority on the subject
Include all group in the work
Be positive in your approach
Be aware of the agenda and language
on the government in power
• Identify and target politicians
• Time your input
• Use the Media to lobby
Targeting: Writing Effective Policy Papers
Providing a solution to a policy problem
• Structural elements of a paper
– Problem description
– Policy options
– Conclusion
• Key issues: Problem oriented, targeted,
multidisciplinary, applied, clear, jargonfree.
[Source: Young and Quinn, 2002]
Peer Assist
A peer assist is a method whereby
participants are invited to reflect on the ideas
of their peers based on their experiences,
insights and knowledge early on in a project
• targets a specific technical or commercial
challenge;
• gains assistance and insights from people outside
the team;
• identifies possible approaches and new lines of
inquiry;
• promotes sharing of learning with each other; and
• develops strong networks amongst people involved
Peer Assist
Multiplying Knowledge
What you know
in your context
What we
both know
What’s
possible?
What I know
in my context
Action
"...the politics
accompanying
hierarchies hampers
the free exchange of
knowledge. People
are much more open
with their peers.
They are much more
willing to share and
to listen”
What is KM & Learning?
“… keeping
track of people
who ‘know the
recipe’….
Learn
during
Activities
Goals
Learn
before
Results
Learn
after
External networks; Colleagues; Information
assets; Own knowledge
“…every time
we do
something
again we
should do it
better than the
last time…”
Different learning s
Reflector
Activist
Theorist
Pragmatist
Different forms of knowledge
Implicit
Y
Start
Has it been
articulated?
Y
Explicit
N
Can it been
articulated?
N
Tacit
KM Toolkit
•
•
•
•
Strategy Development
Management Techniques
Collaboration Mechanisms
Knowledge Sharing and
Learning Processes
• Knowledge Capture and
Storage
Knowledge Audit for CSOs
• What are the core tasks?
• What do the people doing them need
to know?
• How is the knowledge generated?
• How is it stored and accessed?
• Any problems?
• What are the relationships between
producers and users?
• How could it be improved?
• Any leadership issues?
• Any incentive problems?
Policy Influencing Tools
Tools
– Identifying the forces for and against
change and developing the strategy
Force field Analysis
• Specific Change
• Identify Forces
• (Identify Priorities)
• (Develop Strategies)
Force Field Analysis
• Think about:
– Who needs to change
– Who can support and who can resist change
• Do not confuse strength of force with
importance of force
• Look out for:
– VERY strong forces
– Priorities
– Nested FFA (you might have to re-think your
problem)
What are the problems we face while monitoring for
policy impact?
• The problem with attribution
– Multiple actors and factors contribute
– Unintended results are often ignored
– Influence shifts overtime (indirect
relation)
– Impact of our interventions occurs further
down the development chain
The problem with attribution
Family
National Gov
CEF
Church
Local Gov
DFID
GRO
CSO
USAID
Why do we face these problems?
• Because the responsibility for
achieving results ultimately depends
on the actions of our partners as
influenced by the contexts in which
they work
• Focusing on downstream impact
increases programming
bureaucratisation and is inconsistent
with our understanding of develpment
as a complex process.
Monitoring ex-ante
• … ex-post is sometimes too late
• A short introduction to OUTCOME
MAPPING
What is OM?
• OM is a dynamic methodology useful in the
development of planning, monitoring and
evaluation mechanism. OM:
– Provides the tools to think holistically and
strategically about how it intends to achieve
results
– Focuses on Outcomes instead of impacts
– It deals with Contribution instead of attribution
– Forces us to limit our planning and evaluation to
our sphere of influence
– Deals with changes in the behaviours of our
direct partners
Outcome Mapping
OUTCOME
MAPPING:
Building Learning
and Reflection
into Development
Programs
Sarah Earl, Fred
Carden, and Terry
Smutylo
http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-9330-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
The 3 Stages of OM
• The intentional design stage: helps answer 4 questions: 1)
Why? (developing a vision statement); 2) Who? (identifying the
primary partners); 3) What? (specifying desired outcomes and
relevant progress markers); and, 4) How? (articulating the
mission and a portfolio of strategies).
• The outcome and performance monitoring stage:
provides a framework for a continuous monitoring of the
initiative as a tool to achieving its outcomes. The program uses
progress markers, a set of graduated indicators of behavioural
change, identified in the intentional design stage to clarify
directions with its primary partners and to monitor outcomes.
• The evaluation planning stage: helps identify the
evaluation priorities assessing the strategy at greater depth
than the performance monitoring stage.
Intentional design
• Boundary Partners
– Individuals, groups and organisations with
whom the programme interacts directly to effect
changes.
– Those that you are trying to encourage to
change so that they can contribute to the
vision? With whom will you work directly?
– We must try to group similar partners according
to the type of behavioural changes sought.
Boundary partners are different from strategic
partners.
Boundary partners
Program
= Program`s Partners
Intentional design
• Outcome Challenges
– The changed behaviours (relationships,
activities and/or actions) of the boundary partner
and how they would be behaving if they were
contributing ideally to the vision.
– Imagine that in 3-5 years PartCom has been
extremely successful. What would our boundary
partners be doing to contribute maximally to the
vision?
– Outcome challenges are about the boundary
partner, not the programme.
Intentional design
• Progress markers
– Step by step progressive changes that one
expects to see (short run), would like to see
(medium to long run) and love to see (very long
run) –keep it simple, 15 max!
– Are about CHANGES IN BEHAVIOURS OF
BOUNDARY PARTNERS
– Are linear but NOT static
– Must be revised
– Help monitor the effectiveness of the strategy
Intentional design
• Strategy Map
– Outlines the programmes approach in working
with the boundary partners
– How will the programme contribute to the
achievement of the outcome challenged over
the next X months/years?
– Use force field analysis
The three stages of OM
Discussion
• How will we design and deliver
training on Evidence based Policy
Advocacy?
Summary
–
–
–
–
–
–
Evidence-informed policy challenging
Policy about interests, institutions & ideas
Variety of tools to understand these factors range in sophistication/complexity and ease of
use
Tools to use the understanding to engage in
policy processes – less well developed
Extent to which the tools are helpful depends
on creativity, tenacity, inside knowledge –
advocacy coalitions useful
You can get more info at …
Further Information
Mapping Political Contexts:
http://www.odi.org.uk/RAPID/Publications/Tools_Political_Context.html
Tools for Policy Impact:
http://www.odi.org.uk/RAPID/Publications/Tools_Policy_Impact.html
Best Practice in Policy Making:
http://www.policyhub.gov.uk/policy_tools/
Understanding Policy Process:
Further Information / Resources
• ODI Working Papers
• Bridging Research
and Policy Book
• JID Special Issue
• Meeting Reports
• Tools for Impact
• www.odi.org.uk/cspp
• www.odi.org.uk/rapid
Closing comments
1. Was this useful?
2. What will you do different from now
on?
3. How can we help you?
Action Planning
Contact Details:
Naved Chowdhury
[email protected]
RAPID Programme, ODI www.odi.org.uk/rapid