Civil Society Organisations and Policy Entrepreneurship · PDF fileCivil Society Organisations...
-
Upload
vuongnguyet -
Category
Documents
-
view
225 -
download
2
Transcript of Civil Society Organisations and Policy Entrepreneurship · PDF fileCivil Society Organisations...
Civil Society Organisations
and Policy Entrepreneurship
Enrique Mendizabal Overseas Development Institute, London
Workshop Objectives
a) Share experiences about CSO-policy context in
African CEF partners;
b) Learn about the latest worldwide research and
practice in this area;
c) Share experiences about approaches to
influence policy and what works;
d) Start to develop strategies to improve policy
impact.
Outline of the Workshop
Day 1
• General Introductions
Day 2
• Tools
Day 3
• Tools and field trip
Day4
• Develop a strategy
Day 5
• Knowledge management
Self Introductions
2 minutes!
• Name
• Organization / Area of Work
• What do you want to get out of this workshop?
Plenary discussion:
1. What are the main opportunities and
challenges
a) Regarding CSO-policy links? (in general)
b) Affecting the policy impact of your work?
1. Individually, think about 3 opportunities
and 3 challenges (5 minutes)
2. Then in groups identify the 5 most
important opportunities and the 5 most
important challenges (30 minutes)
3. Feed-back to plenary (25 minutes)
CSOs, Evidence and Policy
Processes
Next steps:
• Definitions
• Theory
• Reality
• (Then we‟ll discuss what issues matter)
A word of warning…
• The world is complex
• We do not aim to make it simple
• Only to find recognisable patterns or beacons
• Which might guide your actions
• There is NO blueprint. NO linear, logical, rational, proper, method.
• Most of the time it is up to you.
… A word of warning
• You will probably never find out what goes
on within the policy process
• And not have all the evidence you need
• You need to be confident to act even in a
context of uncertainty
• And be systematic and scientific (context,
strategy, action, record, learn) but flexible
and original
Overseas Development Institute• 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
• Advisory work
• Policy change projects
• Workshops and seminars
• Civil Society Programme
www.odi.org.uk/rapid
Civil Society Partnerships Programme
Outcomes:
• CSOs better understanding evidence-policy
process
• Capacity to support CSOs established
• Improved information for CSOs
• Global collaboration
Aim: Strengthened role of southern CSOs
in development policy processes
http://www.odi.org.uk/cspp/
CSOs and Pro-poor Policy Influence
• Complementing state in providing services
• Innovators in service delivery
• Advocates with and for the poor
• Identifying problems & solutions
• Extending our understanding
• Providing information
• Training and capacity building
The Opportunity
• The results of household disease surveys informed processes of health service reform which contributed to a 43 and 46 per cent reduction in infant mortality between 2000 and 2003 in two districts in rural Tanzania.
– TEHIP Project
HIV Prevalence in Thailand, Uganda &
KwaZulu-Natal: 1990-2000
0%
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
36%
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
HIV
Pre
vale
nce
Thailand Kampala, Uganda KwaZulu Natal, South AfricaSource: UNAIDS
When it Works: Attitudes to HIV
“on the education sector it is evident that the project has institutionalised a new attitude towards HIV/AIDS education in primary schools ….
Teachers' and pupils' knowledge, attitudes and behaviours have also changed.
Primary School Action for Better Health Project in Kenya (PSABH)
www.odi.org.uk/rapid/Lessons/Case_studies/PSABH.html
When it works best: Aid and Debt
“all the contributors emphasise the importance of researchers forming alliances with civil society.”
- Court and Maxwell, JID Special Issue
Context• Democratization and liberalization.
• In some countries, move from challenging state to policy engagement.
• CSOs increasingly involved in policy processes (from focus on service delivery).
• CSO accountability and legitimacy of CSO involvement is questioned.
• Challenge of engaging in a way that does justice to the evidence.
• Southern research capacity has been denuded.
• CSOs, researchers and policymakers seem to live in parallel universes.
CSOs: Definitions and Functions• Definition: “organizations that work in an arena
between the household, the private sector and the
state to negotiate matters of public concern”.
• Functions:
– representation
– technical inputs and advocacy
– capacity-building
– service-delivery
– social functions
Types of CSOs• think tanks and research institutes
• professional associations
• human rights advocacy bodies and other promotional groups
• foundations and other philanthropic bodies
• trade unions and workers co-operatives
• media/journalist societies
• community based organizations
• faith based organizations
• cross-national policy dialogue groups
Definitions• Research: “any systematic effort to increase the
stock of knowledge”
• Evidence: the result/output of the research process
• 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
Evaluate the results
The linear logical policy model…
Identify the problem
Commission research
Analyse the results
Choose the best option
Establish the policy
Implement the policy
Generic Policy Processes
1. Problem Definition/
Agenda Setting
2. Constructing the Policy
Alternatives/ Policy Formulation
3.Choice of Solution/
Selection of Preferred Policy Option
4. Policy Design
5. Policy Implementation
and Monitoring
6. Evaluation
The Policy Cycle
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 Africa.” 2
• “CSOs often have very little to bring to the policy table.” 3
• “CSOs, researchers and policymakers seem to live in parallel universes.” 4
1 – Clay & Schaffer (1984)2 – Omamo (2003)3 – CSPP Consultations4 – ODI-AFREPREN Workshop
Agenda
setting
Problem
definition
& analysis
Policy
tools
Selection
Implementation Enforcement Policy
evaluation
Public
Scientists
Industry
CSOs
MediaGovernment
Source: Yael Parag
Policy
Tools
selectionMinistry
of Finance
NGOs
Scientists
Industry
Stage outcomes may be:
Direct regulation (strict or moderate)
Economic incentives
Information to the public
Voluntary agreement
Ministry
of
Environment
Ministry
of Industry
& Trade
Source: Yael Parag
CSOs and Policy: Existing theory1. Linear model
2. Too close for comfort, Edwards
3. Impact & Effectiveness, Fowler
4. „Context, evidence, links‟, RAPID
5. Policy narratives, Roe
6. CSO legitimacy, L. David Brown
7. Links and Learning, Gaventa
8. „Room for manoeuvre‟, Clay & Schaffer
9. „Street level bureaucrats‟, Lipsky
10. Policy as experiments, Rondinelli
11. Policy Streams & Windows, Kingdon
12. Disjointed incrementalism, Lindquist
13. Tipping point model, Gladwell
14. Mercenaries, missionaries and revolutionaries , Malena
15. „Non-Western?‟, Lewis
16. Global Civil Society, Salamon, Kaldor
17. Types of Engagement, Coston
18. Linear model of communication, Shannon
19. „Space‟ for thought & action, Howell
20. Simple and surprising stories, Communication Theory
21. Provide solutions, Marketing Theory I
22. Find the right packaging, Marketing II
23. Global Civil Society?, Keane
24. Global Legitimacy, van Rooy
25. Epistemic communities, Haas
26. Policy entrepreneurs, Najam
27. Advocacy coalitions, Keck & Sikkink
28. Negotiation through networks, Sabattier
29. Social capital, Coleman
30. Accountability, OneWorld Trust
31. Communication for social change, Rockefeller Foundation
32. Wheels and webs, Chapman & Fisher
www.odi.org.uk/rapid/lessons/theory
X
Existing theory – a short list• Civil Society, Edwards
• Types of Engagment, Coston
• Legitimacy, L. David Brown / van Rooy
• „Street level bureaucrats‟, Lipsky
• Global Civil Society, Keane / Kaldor / Salamon
• Policy streams and policy windows, Kingdon
• Disjointed Incrementalism, Lindblom
• Social Epidemics, Gladwell
• CSOs & Policy Processes
Key factors for CSO influence (Malawi)
Opposing
• Lack of capacity
• Lack of local ownership
• Translating data into evidence
• Lack of data
• Donor influence
• Crises
• Political factors
Supporting
• Evidence of the value of CSO involvement
• Governments becoming more interested in CSOs
• CSOs are gaining confidence
• Strength of networks
• The media
• Political factors
A word of warning…
• The world is complex
• We do not aim to make it simple
• Only to find recognisable patterns or beacons
• Which might guide your actions
• There is NO blueprint. NO linear, logical, rational, proper, method.
• Most of the time it is up to you.
… A word of warning
• You will probably never find out what goes
on within the policy process
• And not have all the evidence you need
• You need to be confident to act even in a
context of uncertainty
• And be systematic and scientific (context,
strategy, action, record, learn) but flexible
and original
The Analytical Framework
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
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.
And allows useful comparisons1. Ideal model
e.g. ??
KnowledgeLinks
Contexts
2. Islands model
e.g. multilaterals
KnowledgeLinks
Contexts
3. Technocratic model
e.g. donors
KnowledgeLinks
Contexts
4. Ivory Tower model
e.g. Research institutes
Knowledge
Links
Contexts
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 evidence-based 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)
Key-note Speakers
• Zeferino Martins, Former Deputy Minister of
Education: On the needs and pressures of
policymaking
• HAI: On producing relevant and credible
research
• Questions?
1. Individually, think about 3 things you (as
an individual) and 3 things your
organisation can do different (5 minutes)
2. Then in groups identify the 5 most
important things you and an organisation
can do different (30 minutes)
3. Feed-back to plenary (25 minutes)
DAY 2
• Results of the Policy entrepreneurship
questionnaire
• Tools
– Identifying the problem and assessing the
context
>44 = Low
CEF Policy Entrepreneurs
<23 = V. High
<30 = High
Eduardo, Tome 38 36 35 41
Muzoora, Tom 42 23 38 47
Dyer, Kate 40 40 29 41
Vernyny, Francis 37 34 36 43
Karim-Sesay, Beatrice 40 36 31 43
Mokoto, John 30 39 40 41
Kamara, Sally 32 30 44 45
Baloma, Josue 36 38 35 41
Ogwai, Henry 37 36 36 41
Birungi, Teopista 44 26 36 40
Dunor, Abdou 34 35 33 48
Jarju, Nyakassi 41 30 31 43
Average 35 32 39 44
Comments
• Tendency to prefer “networking” and,
maybe, “story-telling”.
• Tendency to dislike “fixing”.
• One of you has a strong preference:
“networking” and a strong dislike: “fixing”
To Maximize ChancesYou need to:
• better understand how policy is made and options for policy entrepreneurship;
• use evidence more effectively in influencing policy-making processes;
• build stronger connections with other stakeholders;
• actively participate in policy networks
• communicate better.
Practical ToolsOverarching Tools
- The RAPID Framework
- Using the Framework
- The Entrepreneurship
Questionnaire
Context Assessment Tools- Stakeholder Analysis
- Forcefield Analysis
- Writeshops
- Policy Mapping
- Political Context MappingCommunication Tools- Communications Strategy
- SWOT analysis
- Message Design
- Making use of the media Research Tools- Case Studies
- Episode Studies
- Surveys
- Bibliometric Analysis
- Focus Group Discussion
Policy Influence Tools- Influence Mapping & Power Mapping
- Lobbying and Advocacy
- Campaigning: A Simple Guide
- Competency self-assessment
Policy Analysis: Methods and tools
– RAPID Framework
– Problem Situation Analysis (Tree Analysis)
– Stakeholder Analysis
– Policy Process Mapping
– Force field analysis
– Influence mapping
– SWOT analysis
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
Stakeholder Analysis
• Clarify the policy change
objective
• Identify all the stakeholders
associated with this objective
• Organise the stakeholders in
the matrice according to
interest and power
• Develop strategy to engage
with different stakeholders
Keep
Satisfied
Engage
Closely and
Influence
Actively
Monitor
(minimum effort)Keep
Informed
High
Power
Low
Low HighInterest
Mapping Policy Processes
Agendas Formulation Implementation
Central
Government
Parliament
Bureaucrats
Civil Society
State
Government
Implementation
Civil Society
Political Context Assessment Tool
(e.g. from Middle East)
Interests
Extent of Interests of Policymakers
High Medium Low
Public Interests 1 3 6
Personal Interests 5 4 1
Special Interests 6 1 3
• The macro political context
• The sector / issue process
• Policy implementation and practice
• Decisive moments in the policy process
• How policymakers think
Force field Analysis
• Specific Change
• Identify Forces
• (Identify Priorities)
• (Develop Strategies)
SWOT Analysis
• 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?
Strengths Weaknesses
Opportunities Threats
•Skills and abilities
•Funding lines
•Commitment to positions
•Contacts and Partners
•Existing activities
•Other orgs relevant to the
issue
•Resources: financial,
technical, human
•Political and policy space
•Other groups or forces
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
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
How we advise: SMEPOL Egypt
• Policy Process Mapping
• RAPID Framework
• Stakeholder Analysis
• Force-Field Analysis
• SWOT
• Action Planning
• Evaluation & Adapting
The overall framework
• Identify the problem
• 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
How?
Who?
What?
Identifying the problem
• First win the fight over the problem
• Then fight for the solution
• Therefore the first thing we are going to do
is think about the problem:
– What is the problem?
– Why is it important that we address this
problem?
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
Pick a policy issue to work on
for the rest of the workshop• Individually – that you / your organization
are working on or planning to work on. (OK to
join someone else.)
• Is there a theme a group is interested in?
• Discuss it with your neighbours?
• Keep your notes!!
Use Problem Tree analysis• Identify the problem you are working on
• Identify the roots (causes) of the problem
• Identify the branches (effects) of the
problem
•Answer:
•What is the problem?
•Why must we address this problem?
Plenary Discussion:
Tell each other about your Problem Tree
Analysis: think about:
•Mental image -reminder
•Actors, dates, numbers
Present each other‟s problem and reasons for
addressing it.
Understanding the context
• The RAPID Framework
• 28 Questions which explains how to use the
framework
An Analytical Framework
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
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.
A Practical Framework
External Influences political context
evidencelinks
Campaigning,
Lobbying
Politics and
Policymaking
Media,
Advocacy,
Networking Research,
learning &
thinking
Scientific
information
exchange &
validation
Policy analysis, &
research
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 re-packaging?
• Links: Who are the key individuals? Are there existing networks to use? How best to transfer the information? The media? Campaigns?
What CSOs need to do
What CSOs need to
know
What CSOs need to
do
How to do it
Political Context:
Evidence
Links
• Who are the policymakers?
• Is there demand for ideas?
• What is the policy process?
• 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?
• Get to know the policymakers.
• Identify friends and foes.
• Prepare for policy
opportunities.
• Look out for policy windows.
• Work with them – seek
commissions
• Strategic opportunism –
prepare for known events
+ resources for others
• Establish credibility
• Provide practical solutions
• Establish legitimacy.
• Present clear options
• Use familiar narratives.
• Build a reputation
• Action-research
• Pilot projects to generate
legitimacy
• Good communication
• Get to know the others
• Work through existing
networks.
• Build coalitions.
• Build new policy networks.
• Build partnerships.
• Identify key networkers,
mavens and salesmen.
• Use informal contacts
Example of application
• Animal Healthcare in Kenya :You could use
a time line of events…
• How PRSP came about:You could analyse
events that lead to a significant
development/change
Animal Health Care in Kenya
Why did a new approach spread rapidly in Northern Kenya?
Why despite 20 years of convincing evidence of the value of community-based animal health services provided by farmers themselves is it still illegal?
Animal Health Care in Kenya1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
Professionalisation of Public Services.
Structural Adjustment → collapse.
Paravet projects emerge.
ITDG projects.
Privatisation.
ITDG Paravet network.
Rapid spread in North.
KVB letter (January 1998).
Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
Still not approved / passed!
Animal Health Kenya - Context1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
Professionalisation of Public Services.
Structural Adjustment → collapse of services.
Paravet projects emerge.
ITDG projects.
Privatisation.
ITDG Paravet network.
Rapid spread in North.
KVB letter (January 1998).
Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
Still not approved / passed!
Professionalisation of Public Services.
Structural Adjustment
Privatisation
ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS.
KVB letter (January 1998).
Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
Animal Health Kenya - Research1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
Professionalisation of Public Services.
Structural Adjustment → collapse of services.
Paravet projects emerge.
ITDG projects.
Privatisation.
ITDG Paravet network.
Rapid spread in North.
KVB letter (January 1998).
Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
Still not approved / passed!
Professionalisation of Public Services.
Structural Adjustment
Privatisation
ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS.
KVB letter (January 1998).
Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
ITDG projects – collaborative action research.
The Hubl Study
International Research
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
Professionalisation of Public Services.
Structural Adjustment → collapse of services.
Paravet projects emerge.
ITDG projects.
Privatisation.
ITDG Paravet network.
Rapid spread in North.
KVB letter (January 1998).
Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
Still not approved / passed!
Professionalisation of Public Services.
Structural Adjustment
Privatisation
ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS.
KVB letter (January 1998).
Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.
ITDG projects – collaborative action research.
International Research
The Hubl StudyDr Kajume
Animal Health Kenya - Links
• Political stagnation, professional protectionism
• Practical evidence invisible to policy makers
• Powerful individuals, “professional” interests
• Timing
• A “Tipping Point”
• New champions
• Collaborative policy-research
Animal Health Kenya - Lessons
The PRSP Story…
• The WB & IMF “adopted” PRSPs at
the AGM in Sept. 1999 as the 1o
instrument for HIPIC II (and
subsequently for all loans)
• Why?
• What were the key factors?
• What role did “evidence” play in the
process?
PRSPs – Evidence• Long-term academic research informing new
focus on poverty, participation, ownership, aid
effectiveness etc
• Applied policy research:
– ESAF reviews
– HIPC review
– SPA Working Groups
– NGO research on debt
• Uganda‟s PEAP
PRSPs – Political Context• Widespread awareness of a “problem” with
international development policy in late 90s
• Failure of SAPs (and Asian financial crisis)
• Mounting public pressure for debt relief
• Stagnation of Comprehensive Development
Framework idea
• Diverging agendas (UK – Poverty, US –
Governance)
• WB/IMF Annual General Meeting, Sept 1999
PRSPs – Links• WB, IMF, SPA, Bilaterals, NGOs all involved
• Formal and informal networks
• “None of the players was more than two
handshakes away from any of the others”
Group WorkUse the RAPID Framework to analyse
the key factors likely to affect the
policy influence of your work
(remember you will present each
other‟s work)
1. Go over all factors (pick the most relevant questions) –but do not worry if you do not finish
2. Answer:
1. How friendly is the policy context?
2. Do you have access to the right evidence?
3. Are there clear and strong links between evidence and policy?
4. How influential are the external forces?
Feedback and DiscussionGroups (a few key points):
What is the issue?
What factors matter?
Is the evidence credible?
Others:
Are the same issues important?
Do you find the evidence credible?
What is the present policy agenda?
Tomorrow
• We will begin with a field trip.
• You will use some of the questions and tools to collect information about the problems faced by the school/project and its context
• Use your „What to watch for‟ hand out as a guide, only.
• Ask questions, observe, take pictures if possible, make sketches, get quotes.
Developing a strategy
• This is when we decide what we are going
to do to try to bring about change.
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)
Group work:• Use Force field analysis to identify key
issues and strategic objectives
• Feedback –highlighting examples
(remember you are telling each other‟s
strategies):
– Main forces for and against
– Overall strategic options
– Implications for problem analysis?
Optional session
• The lessons from the Civil Society
Partnerships Programme
– What have we learned in the last 18 months?
– What are the next steps?
– What do you think?
Civil Society Partnerships Programme
Outcomes:
• CSOs better understanding evidence-policy
process
• Capacity to support CSOs established
• Improved information for CSOs
• Global collaboration
Aim: Strengthened role of southern CSOs
in development policy processes
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
The overall framework
• Identify the problem
• 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
How?
Who?
What?
Communication Toolkit for
Researchers and CSOs• Why Communicate? (To inspire, inform and learn).
• African agriculture Researchers have failed identify the
problems facing policymakers ( Omamao 2003).
• Each stakeholder has different communication needs,
information is accessed by them differently, need research
results in different times and different formats (Mortimer et
al 2003).
• Communication capacity – is a long term process
• How to improve communication of research to
policymakers, to other researchers and the end users ( i.e
NGOs, CBOs, etc).
• Communication tools
Remember: 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
Remember: 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....
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)
Remember: 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
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) Piggybacking?
• How will you package your information?
• Role of the media?
Issues: 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.
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, jargon-free.
[Source: Young and Quinn, 2002]
Issues: 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
Networks
• Roles of Policy Networks
– Filtering
– Amplifying
– Investor / Provider
– Facilitator
– Convening
– Communities
• Policy Code Sharing
• Some networks net; some networks work.
Group work
1. In your country groups:
1. Write up a strategy brief detailing: problem,
context, audience, strategy, message and
messenger
2. Develop a presentation of your message
2. To the plenary:
1. Present your message
Optional session
• The ODI: Think tank of Research Centre
– What does the ODI do and how does it work?
– Is it a think tank or a research centre?
– What do you think?
Think Tanks or Policy
Research Institutions
Enrique Mendizabal Overseas Development Institute, London
Think tanks
– Or Policy Research Institutions play at least
one of these roles:
1. Advocacy – specific types of reform by
sector or political orientation
2. Independent Research – agnostic in
orientation and presentation
3. Consultancy – on a commissioned basis
Think Tanks
• Everyone says they are 2, when they are more likely 1 or 3.
• They influence policy at different stages of the policy process
– Advocacy: agenda setting, M&E
– Independent: agenda, analysis, options, evaluation
– Consultancy: options and implementation and Monitoring
Overseas Development Institute• Britain‟s leading development
Think Tank
• £8m, 60 researchers
• Research / Advice / Public Debate
• Rural / Humanitarian / Poverty & Aid / International Economics
• DFID, Parliament, WB, EC
• Civil SocietyFor more information see: www.odi.org.uk
RAPID Programme
• More or less what makes it a
TT/PRI
• Research
• Advisory work
• Workshops, seminars and
communicationswww.odi.org.uk/rapid
Researcher Profiles
• Two categories: Research Officer and Fellow
• Depends on the type of think tank you work in:
– Consultants
– Policy entrepreneurs
– Social entrepreneurs
– Academic researchers
– Capacity developers / trainers
Researcher Profiles
• Young generation –many new faces
• Many returning from short/mid term
placements in developing countries (e.g. via
the ODI Fellowship Scheme)
• Multicultural and Multinational (In RAPID,
for example, 6 nationalities among 9)
• Placements and secondments are not rare
Type of research work
• Some desk work (lots of emailing, debating and writing)
• But significant amount of field work. Work is done in the field and for country offices
• In the last 6 months I have not spent more than 3 weeks in London in between travels
• Networking is important (most jobs come from follow-ups)
• Increasing need for Programmatic work
Further Information / Resources
• ODI Working Papers
• Bridging Research
and Policy Book
• JID Special Issue
• Meeting Reports
• Tools for Impact
• www.odi.org.uk/
• www.odi.org.uk/rapid
Plenary Discussion
• Think about 1 way in which you:
– monitor impact?
– learn from what you do?
– learn from what others do?
• Discuss in Plenary
Why is this important?
• Because we need to be able to be strategic
• And strategies need to be evidence based
• But most relevant evidence is held by the process of policy influence –we will learn it as we do it
• And we must have the capacity to respond to new evidence and adapt our strategy
– Do not think about evaluation!
– Think monitoring LEARNING and adapting
External networks; Colleagues;
Information assets
“…The idea is not to
create an
encyclopaedia of
everything that
everybody knows,
but to keep track of
people who „know
the recipe‟, and
nurture the
technology and
culture that will get
them talking…”
Goals ResultsUsing
Knowledge
UsingKnowledge
Learnduring
Learnafter
Learnbefore
Getting the environment right
• Shared beliefs and common values
• A willingness to ask for help
• Common technology which connects
people
• Effective Peer Processes
• Rewarding and recognising learning
• Identifying and reinforcing the right
leadership behaviours
Some quotes
"Practice provides the rails
on which knowledge flows." John Seely-Brown
"When knowledge gained somewhere
doesn't move elsewhere, that's not a
learning organization; that's just a
bunch of projects." Saratoga Institute
“It is not the strongest of the
species that survives, nor the
most intelligent, but the one
most responsive to change.”
Charles Darwin
“Most activities or tasks are not one
time events… our philosophy is fairly
simple: every time we do something
again we should do it better than the
last time.” Lord Browne
ODI experience• Knowledge and learning are at the heart of the ODI
approach to bridge research, policy and practice
• ODI research groups and networks provide a
substantial knowledge base
– e.g. ALNAP and RAPID
• The CSPP has systematic learning as a core principle
The Knowledge Strategies Framework
organisational contextsleadership approaches,
governance structures,
management processes,
institutional pressures, funding
cycles, historical evolution etc.
knowledge – forms and
locations; processes – e.g.:
creation, sharing, storage, use;
key activities and tools; staff
capacities; relevance, M&E
external factors knowledge of partners,
donors, other external
agencies; networks;
national and global
factors
links within and
across the organisation
boundaries – via communities
and ICTs; to communications
plans; to core functions and
support functions, etc
The framework can be used to devise
and revise strategies
• The external factors How does the knowledge and learning strategy address issues emerging from external relationships and factors?
• The context How do issues of institutional governance, politics and economics support or hinder the knowledge
and learning strategy?
• Links How does knowledge and learning link to structures, functions, core activities, supporting activities and processes of a given organisation?
• The knowledge How is knowledge and learning
understood and applied within each organisation? What tools are used, why and how?
Knowledge: processes and tools• There are a range of processes to consider
– Mapping and creation of knowledge
– Managing and storing knowledge
– Learning and sharing knowledge
– Use of knowledge
• The different processes and different forms of knowledge can be brought together…
What kind of learner are you?• People show preferences for particular learning styles, and different
learning activities are suited to different styles of learning. You are most likely to learn when your learning style and the nature of the activity match.
• So if you can choose among activities to learn the same subject, you may be able to choose an activity to match your preferred style. But often you aren‟t given the luxury of a choice, so you will need to use a style that may not come naturally.
• If you are prepared to use different styles on occasion, so that you strengthen styles that you currently don‟t often use, you can become an all-round learner, able to benefit from any learning opportunity.
Activists
• Activists are people who learn by doing. They like to involve themselves in new experiences, and will „try anything once‟. They tend to act first and consider the consequences afterwards
Reflectors• Reflectors learn by
observing and thinking about what happened. They like to consider all the possible angles and implications before coming to a considered opinion. They spend time listening and observing, and tend to be cautious and thoughtful
Theorists
• Theorists like to understand the theory behind the actions. They need models, concepts and facts in order to learn. They like to analyse and synthesise, and feel uncomfortable with subjective judgements
Pragmatists• Pragmatists are keen
on trying things out. They look for new ideas that can be applied to the problem in hand. They like to get on with things and tend to be impatient with open-ended discussions; they are practical, down-to-earth people
• It can be used to work out needs and priorities for knowledge and learning, hopefully pointing to specific actions
• It also provides a common framework and common language to support knowledge and learning activities
• The self assessment has 5 practices each with 5 levels of competence from BASIC to HIGH. For knowledge and learning, these are as follows:
– Strategic alignment
– Management behaviours
– Collaboration mechanisms
– Learning and knowledge sharing processes
– Capturing and storing knowledge
• It is likely that you will be good at some practices – but may not have considered all 5 practices
– may not be highly competent in all of them
TaskKnowledge and learning self assessment explained
Four Simple Questions:
• What was supposed to happen?
• What actually happened?
• Why was there a difference?
• What can we learn from it?
15 minute team debrief, conducted in a “rank-free” environment.
After action reviews: learning during
projects
• What was the objective of the project?
• What did we achieve?
• What were the successes? Why? How can we repeat the success?
• What were the disappointments? Why? How can we avoid them in future?
• „Marks out of 100‟, what would move it closer to 100?
Facilitated, forward looking team meeting, soon after the
project has ended
The Retrospect – Learning after projects
What are the problems we face?
• 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 Accountability vs.
Learning
What is the problem we face?
• 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 Accountability vs.
Learning
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.
Some terminology
• Outcomes: changes in behaviours, relationships, activities and/or actions of the people, groups and organisations with whom we work
• Vision: the broad human, social and environmental betterment we desire
• Mission: how we intend to contribute towards the achievement of the vision
• Boundary partners: individuals, groups and organisations with whom we interact directly to effect change
• Outcome challenges: changed behaviours of the boundary partner as identified by the vision
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
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.
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
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
Contact Details:
Naved Chowdhury – [email protected]
Enrique Mendizabal: [email protected]
RAPID Programme, ODI www.odi.org.uk/rapid
Other sources of information:
Visit http://www.odi.org.uk/rapid
or e-mail [email protected] for a copy of the RAPID/CSPP CD-ROM
Closing comments
1. Was this useful?
2. What will you do different from now on?
3. How can we help you?