Outcome Harvesting Principles in Practice Maastricht, Netherlands 29 September 13:45 - 15:15

Added Value of Outcome Harvesting for Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning in the Complexity of Dutch Civil Society’s Development Cooperation Wolfgang Richert Consulting

‘Dialogue and Dissent’ partnerships in NL (2016-2020) Dutch Ministry with 25 alliances/consortia 2016-2020 €185 million per year Strategic Partnership between the Minister and the Alliances Support CSOs/NGOs in developing countries  increase their influence on policy  countervailing forces and constructive criticism for government and market  give the broader population there a chance at a better life

‘Dialogue and Dissent’ partnerships in NL (2016-2020) No logical framework as planning tool But Theory of Change Expected outcomes Assumptions NGOs free to propose M&E system Use of IATI* is mandatory * International Aid Transparency Initiative RW-G: Spell out what IATI means.

Lobbying & Advocacy programs Deal with changes in context Dynamic, unpredictable behaviour .. ... of people, organisations, systems Thus, relationships of cause and effect are unknown  Complex

M&E of a simple intervention Vision IMPACT OUTCOMES Plan OUTPUTS ACTIVITIES INPUTS Time

M&E of a complex intervention OUTCOME Vision OUTPUT ACTIVITY OUTCOME Time OUTCOME OUTPUT OUTCOME ACTIVITY OUTPUT OUTPUT INPUTS OUTCOME ACTIVITY OUTCOME INPUTS ACTIVITY OUTPUT INPUTS INPUTS Plan

Lobbying & Advocacy programs Actor focussed Lobbyists from industry target parliaments NGOs aim to change industry, governments, consumers Greenpeace campaign to stop Shell exploring the Arctic Non of these practitioners focusses on the outputs (Greenpeace video) … … but on how to use these tools to influence the targets

Lobbying & Advocacy in Dutch Development Cooperation Strong focus on outcomes as defined by OH For example: Green Livelihoods Alliance Example of assumption: Confrontation and Cooperation together influence governments and private sector Example of expected outcome: Companies integrate ecological and social standard in their policy and practice Country programs have ToC, long-term and short-term expected outcomes, pathways of change

OH in MEL in NL Strategic Partnerships OH is useful because it has the same language and focus as the programs and the practitioners Much easier to engage program staff (than in logframes) Expected outcomes (ToC) ↔ Achieved outcomes (ToC) Pathway of change (ToC) ↔ Revealed patterns of change (OH) 1. Ensure Usefulness 2. Harvest social change outcomes RW-G: Format the principles because the text overlaps 5. Facilitate the identification and formulation of outcomes 6. Nurture appropriate participation 9. Reveal patterns of change

Basic design of an outcome statement Outcome: Who changed what, when and where? Relevance: Why is this relevant in the light of the organization’s ToC? Contribution: How did the organization contribute to this outcome? 2. Harvest social change outcomes

Example Expected outcome at alliance level: Companies integrate ecological and social standards in their policy and practice Expected outcome at country level (Liberia) (2016-2020) Increased respect and recognition of tenure rights of local communities by concessionaires (2017) Company XX is responsive to concerns and complaints from communities about its operations, and the company is addressing grievances against its operations in landscape YY

Example Virtual future outcomes: In 2017, company XX responded to complaints from community AA and stopped converting forests into plantations in landscape YY In 2018, company XY responded to complaints from community AB and stopped polluting the river in landscape YY In 2019, the provincial government in YY withdrew concessions for 10,000 ha of plantation expansion In 2020, the provincial government in YY started a process of recognising the land rights of local communities

The relationship between ToCs and the harvested outcomes Demonstrated outcomes Social actors influenced to change Contributionn

9. Reveal patterns of change Example Useful for learning Did we achieve what we wanted or aimed for? Is what we achieved relevant? To what extent did our strategy work? Are our assumptions valid? Short term and long term CSO/Team level  Country level  Alliance level 1. Ensure Usefulness 9. Reveal patterns of change 10. Learn OH experiantially Principles 2 - 8

Challenge A quick learning cycle is useful for: New teams New programs New issues New approaches / strategies New countries Implementing staff new to lobby and advocacy

Example Useful for accountability Achieved outcomes  within the alliance & reporting to Ministry Adapted planning  reporting to Ministry IATI: Create outcome categories Then report on # of outcomes 1. Ensure Usefulness

Challenges Develop high quality planning / ToCs Design one outcome harvest format and process in multi-country, multi-issue program Support harvesters “in all these countries” Support the learning (cycle) in teams for which L&A and OH are already new Design data base for 500+ outcomes In other words, design OH while no experiantial learning with OH