Transcript Slide 1

Macro Social Analysis
Integrating Socioeconomic and Political
Factors into Policy
Progress Report
Making Macro Social Analysis Work for Policy
Dialogue Conference
May 16 - 19, 2006, Washington DC
Objectives and Structure of the Presentation
 Objectives
 Share results of the Country Social Analysis (CSA) Case Studies;
 Stimulate discussion on how to improve the quality of macro-level
social and political analysis, and how to enhance its impact on
policy dialogue and reform.
 Structure




Background (CSA Approach)
CSA Cases
Lessons Learned
Future Challenges
The CSA analyses macro socio-political
factors as a basis for policy dialogue and
reform on social development issues
 Objectives:




Inform the Bank's management of key macro socio-political
issues;
Inform in-country policy makers, donors and members of
aid groups;
Provide analytical and policy inputs for CASs, TSSs/ISs,
PRSPs, CEMs, PAs and DPLs;
Serve as basis for policy dialogue and reforms to support
more equitable, inclusive development, and better
governance.
The CSA framework focuses on the interaction
between two dimensions
 Social diversity, assets, and livelihoods
 What is the existing distribution of and access to
assets and services across different social groups?
What is the impact of that distribution in the
livelihoods and coping strategies of the poor?
 Power, institutions, and governance
 What are the institutions that mediate access of the
poor to assets and services? How do these institutions
impact policy making and resource reallocation ?
CSA Recommendations should address some of the
following issues
What
type of policy reforms and other actions can be taken to increase access to assets
that are instrumental to greater equity and social mobility for the poor and vulnerable?
What
actions can be taken to increase the accountability of institutions that build assets
and determine access to resources and services?
What
institutional reforms can be taken to remove social and cultural discriminatory
practices that generate unequal opportunities?
What
actions can be taken to increase the voice and political opportunities of disfranchised
groups in order to avoid the perpetuation of systemic inequalities?
What
actions can be taken to strengthen institutional mechanisms for managing conflict and
to increase the country’s resilience to escalation of conflict into open violence?
What
actions can be taken to prevent, mitigate and manage the impacts of structural and
development induced risks?
CSA Process
 The scope and specific emphasis of a CSA are defined by country
context and existing and planned policy interventions in the Bank’s
portfolio
 The framework seeks to simplify and guide. Rather than presenting a range
of possible analytical themes, it provides a core framework, on which
additional, country-specific themes may build.
 Combines different tools and data sources to answer the questions
identified
 From review of secondary data and interviews with key informants to
household surveys and participatory rapid appraisals.
 Conducting the CSA Process
 Stand alone CSAs
 Inputs to other reports (Poverty Assessment/ CEM / CAS/ ESW)
 Integrated with other (Poverty Assessment / Conflict/ Gender)
Systematization
 Based on a review of 14 initial pilot studies based on:




Review of CSA reports
Interviews with CSA team members
Process mapping conducted in several cases
Interviews with users of CSA reports (Country Team members)
 Five in depth case studies focused on policy recommendations and
impact (Angola, Guinea Bissau, Haiti, Nepal, Yemen).
 Case studies selected to represent different types of CSAs (stand alone,
inputs to core diagnostics, integrated with core diagnostics, CSA with
several outputs, long term study)
 Comparison with other donor approaches based on interviews and
review of sample studies and existing evaluations
Pilots
From the initial 6 pilots we had 18 months ago now we
have 24 cases
AFR
Angola©
Guinea Bissau©
Guinea Conakry
Kenya©
Lesotho*
Liberia*
Madagascar
Mozambique
Sao Tome & P. ©
Somalia©
Sierra Leone*
© Completed
* Planned
LCR
Bolivia
Costa Rica
Ecuador
Haiti ©
Paraguay ©
MNA
Iraq
Morocco
West Bank Gaza
Yemen ©
ECA
Tajikistan ©
SA
Bangladesh*
Nepal ©
EAP
Vietnam
Lessons learned: Analytical
Framework
Framework
 Should be simple to
communicate effectively its
core components & a set of
policy recommendations
 Flexible but with clear
standards: County Staff
needs to know what they are
getting
Country
Analytical dimensions
Angola
Governance and livelihoods, land tenure, accountability,
social programs
Guinea
Bissau
Governance and livelihoods,
political conflict
Kenya
Drivers and impacts of social change , youth violence
Sao Tome
and Principe
Governance and livelihoods, oil and accountability
Somalia
Drivers of conflict
Paraguay
Governance and social risks, accountability and governance
Costa Rica
Socio-economic factors and institutions, social policies
Haiti
Conflict, socio-economic factors, institutions and political
actors
Ecuador
Governance, migration and oil
Yemen
Institutions, livelihoods and social change
Morocco
Institutions and youth exclusion
West Bank
and Gaza
Informal institutions and service delivery, governance
Tajikistan
Formal and informal institutions in the education sector
Nepal
Institutions and social exclusion
cashew,
decentralization,
Lessons learned: Data Sources
 Data sources
 Depending on data availability, it may be possible
to conduct a CSA based on existing data and key
informant interviews / consultations
 Mixed methods have generally been applied in
conducting the CSAs
 Quantitative data has generally been derived
from existing surveys (with several exceptions)
Country
Fieldwork
conducted
Somalia
Yes
Angola
Yes
Guinea
Bissau
Yes
Sao Tome &
Principe
No
Kenya
Yes
Paraguay
No
Costa Rica
No
Haiti
Yes
Ecuador
No
Yemen
Yes
Morocco
No
West Bank &
Gaza
Yes
Tajikistan
Yes
Nepal
Yes
Lessons learned: Process
 Policy impact is determined by
the management of the process
 Policy dialogue / areas of
policy recommendations
must be identified from the
start
 Country Team must be
involved at every stage
 Timing: CSA impact is
larger when coordinated
with CMU cycle
(CSA/CEM/DPR/Poverty
Assessment)
Country
Timing - CSA coordinated with:
Somalia
World Bank reengagement in Somalia, CEM
Angola
CEM
Guinea Bissau
Poverty Assessment
Sao Tome and
Principe
Poverty Assessment
Kenya
Independent
Paraguay
CAS
Costa Rica
Independent
Haiti
Rural Sector ESW, Interim Strategy Note, CEM
Ecuador
CAS Mid Term Review
Yemen
CAS, PRSP, Development Policy Review
Morocco
CAS (towards the end of CAS preparation)
West Bank and
Gaza
Independent
Tajikistan
CAS
Nepal
PRSC
Lessons Learned: Engaging in-country stakeholders
 Government
 The role of the government
differs from case to case,
depending on the objectives of
the study
 Building a cooperative
relationship with the government
can help facilitate a smooth
process
 Civil society
 Involving civil society and local
academia through workshops or
advisory groups can enhance the
legitimacy of the CSA’s findings
Country
Government counterpart
Somalia
No existing government
Angola
Ministry of Planning
Guinea Bissau
Ministry of Finance
Sao Tome and
Principe
Ministry of Finance
Kenya
Office of the President
Paraguay
Secretary of Social Action, Ministry of
Economics
Costa Rica
No official counterpart
Haiti
Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Justice
Ecuador
Office of the President
Yemen
Ministry of Planning
Morocco
Ministry of Social Development and Solidarity
West Bank and
Gaza
No official counterpart
Tajikistan
Office of the President
Nepal
National Planning Commission
Lessons learned: Partnerships
 Partnerships with other donors
Coordination with other donors enhances the impact of the
CSA
Joint analysis contributes to donor harmonization
 Partnerships within the Bank
Working with the Poverty and Economic Management
Department’s (PREM) Poverty (PO) and Public Sector (PS)
units, as well as with Fragile States (LICUS) facilitates
mainstreaming
Lessons learned: Recommendations
 Recommendations
Recommendations have generally informed country or sector
level policies
Most effective when developed in cooperation with the
Country Team over the course of the CSA process
Some CSAs have provided more specific inputs to other
Economic and Sector Work
Recommendations have been particularly effective when
directly integrated with other core diagnostics
Lessons learned: Dissemination
 Audience:
Primary audience and relationship with government should be
determined at outset in cooperation with the Country Team
 Reporting:
Need to have a basic template to define the product but
different outlets
Stand alone report to highlight specific issues
Integrated reports to facilitate mainstreaming
Policy notes for targeted audience
Internal and external documents?
Macro Socio –Political Analysis: Commonalities
Objectives
 Better understanding (identifying and prioritizing) causes and consequences of key
social factors influencing social change, in order to design more effective
strategies and interventions.
 Promoting more equitable development, inclusive institutions and better
governance.
Analytical Framework
 Focus on institutions, power relations and economic opportunities.
 Interplay between the economic, socio-cultural, institutional, and political
structures of a country.
Mainstreaming
 Existing experiences reveal the importance of the process and timing of the
analysis in influencing policy dialogue.
 Specifying the policy recommendations: operational relevance.
Future Challenges
 Strengthening Policy Recommendations
Defining the policy areas and
Linking the analysis to specific recommendations
 Mainstreaming
Process and feedback (policy dialogue)
Most appropriate format and timing
Clear indicators and a well established monitoring process
 Strengthening Partnerships
The analysis should reflect in-country policy making
processes as much as possible.
Strengthen donor coordination and joined implementation
Thank You