Transcript Workshop Presentation - Overseas Development Institute (ODI)

Tools to understand the
political and policy context &
engage with policy makers
Kent Buse, PhD
John Young
Oxford, November 2006
Overview
• 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
What is Policy?
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
According to Peter John ‘the interplay between
institutions, interests and ideas.’
John P (1998) Analysing Public Policy. London: Cassell.
Two types of policy research
1. Research ‘for’ policy – about policy
content (what should be done) and
outcomes (policy evaluation)
2. Research ‘on’ policy – about the
policy process (explanatory, usually
not evaluative, focuses on ‘how’ and
‘why’ questions)
Research ‘on’ policy
‘Research on policy seeks to
understand how the machinery of the
state and political actors interact to
produce public actions. ...The main
tasks … are to explain how policymaking works and to explore the variety
and complexity of the decision-making
processes.’
(John, 1998, p1)
Walt & Gilson’s framework
Context • Situational factors
Actors
• Structural factors
• Cultural factors
• Global factors
• The state
• The market
• Civil society
Content
• Objectives & aims
• Assumptions
• Values
• Distributional impact
Process
• Why do issues reach the
agenda?
• Who formulates policy?
• How is policy implemented?
• What makes policies change?
Political Situation Analysis
Systematically gather political intelligence
associated with any policy reform on:
• Content – the what of policy
• Context – the social, cultural, temporal
environment in which decisions taken
• Process – how decisions are made – the
rules of the game – how we do business
• Actors – those who affect and are affected
by decisions
Bangladesh Case Study
Unanticipated opposition to ‘no-brainer’ reform
•
•
Learn lessons from poor performance to inform 2005-2010 strategy
Proposed Policy
–
–
–
•
Context:
–
–
•
•
Political volatility and partisan confrontation
Limited government ownership of health policy
Superficial analysis identified two loosing groups but did not anticipate
opposition – no plan to
–
–
–
•
Integration of two wings of ministry responsible for family planning & health
services
Substantial body of research supported integration: cost-effectiveness,
management, service delivery
Agreed by key health officials and subject of donor conditionality
Alter costs by offering to change elements of policy
Modify perceptions of costs
Compensate losers
Partial implementation reversed after affected FP managers mobilized many
groups
Donors
–
–
–
Confronted deep-rooted interests involved in distributing rents
Strategy relied on ‘sensitizing’ opponents of evidence-based virtues, failed to
mobilize potential allies or shift dialogue to new forum, and took ‘non-negotiable’
stance
Suspended disbursements for a few months and then backed down
Health Policy Reform History
• ‘Conventional’ evidence ‘for’ policy
necessary but insufficient for change
– Policy failure
– Losses fall on organized & powerful groups
– Gains distributed among marginalize
• Analysis of political-economy dimensions of
change important determinant of success
• Requires more systematic approaches to
understanding political dimensions &
influencing change
Policy content
Substance which details its
constituent parts:
• Aims and strategies of the policy
• Empirical basis of the policy
(evidence)
• Underlying values and paradigms
• Technical content (evidence informed)
• Administrative feasibility of the policy
Policy Consequences
Distribution of benefits and costs in
terms of:
• Stakeholders
• Scale
• Characteristics
• Intensity
• Timing, etc
Actors/Stakeholders
• Individuals or groups with interest in the
issue
– Some role in making or implementing decision
– Affected by policy decision
– Specific to each policy reform and context
• Stakeholder analysis
– Identify stakeholder groups
– Looking for independent groups/individuals with
some influence or potential influence
– Break down categories as far as feasible
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
Assessing Stakeholder Power:
Political Assets:
• Tangible
–
–
–
–
Votes
Finance
Infrastructure
Members
• Intangible
–
–
–
–
Expertise
Charisma
Legitimacy
Access to media &
decision makers
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
Position Map
POSITION
LEVEL OF
INFLUENCE
High
Medium
Low
Opposed
Neutral
Supportive
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
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
Policy Engagement Framework
Political situational analysis
Content
Context
Actors
Process
Strategies to change
Context Power Players Perspectives
Positions
Successful formulation & implementation of policy
Research-practice gap model
A gap that needs to be spanned
The two communities model
Researchers & policy makers: separate communities?
Advocacy coalition model
Or allied across apparent divides?
Strategies for Policy Engagement
Develop political strategies to change
• Position: deals to make to change – alter
policy, 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
Policy Process
Mapping
Policy Process Mapping
• General Context issues – domestic and
international.
• Specific Policy Issues (i.e. the policy cycle)
• Stakeholder analysis
– Arena: government, parliament, civil society,
judiciary, private sector.
– Level: local, national, international
• What is their Interest and Influence?
• Process matrix + political matrix
• Political and administrative feasibility assessment
[Sources: M. Grindle / J. Court ]
Policy Process Mapping
Formulation
Politicians
Cabinet
Government
Bureaucrats
Civil Society
International
Implementation
Other 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
RAPID Framework
Stakeholder Analysis
Why:
•
•
To understand who
gains or lose from a
policy or project.
To help Build
Consensus.
High
Keep
Satisfied
Engage
Closely
Power
Monitor
(minimum
effort)
Steps:
1. Identify Stakeholders
2. Analysis Workshop
3. Develop Strategies
Keep
Informed
Low
Low
Interest
High
Forcefield Analysis
• Identify what you
want to achieve
• Identify forces for
and against change
• Identify which are
most important
• Develop strategies
to reinforce those for
and overcome
those against
Policy Process Workshops
• 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
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
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
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: