FANRPAN Adding Value in Agricultural and Natural Resources Policies and Processes in Southern Africa

Does Southern Africa Need FANRPAN? ? Would region benefit from exchanges of FANR policy best practices? ? Would region benefit from FANR policy harmonisation and collaboration in implementation? ? Would region benefit from joint action? ? Would region benefit from sharing of competencies? ? Would the region benefit from better accountability for policy design and implementation? ? Would regional and national policies be more relevant if developed with stakeholder input?

Contextual Overview Food insecurity & Climate change Urgent action required Old problems, new dimensions Knowledge of technical solutions not enough -need to be translated into policy -Policy needs drivers for implementation -Policy cannot be static Actions need to be effective on a large scale Single country actions Regional level actions Technology Models of accountability strategies Wealth of experience among members in region & Increased focus on regional approaches Urgency of issues -greater accessibility Of decision-makers Context for FANRPAN The Need The enabling factors Growing guidance on network development and management

The FANRPAN value proposition A values development platform for national and regional level policy processes A vehicle for citizens’ engagement in policy processes An information exchange platform A sharing platform for competencies A capacity building vehicle A source of legitimacy for policy positions

The Value of Networks 1+1>2 Eliminates overlap and duplication Unique in that it assembles capacities of individual members Has a greater prospect of achieving an ambitious set of goals

Policy networks and Policy Process Stage of policy process ObjectivesNetwork roles Agenda settingConvince policymakers that the issue does indeed require attention Marshall evidence to enhance the credibility of the argument Extend an advocacy campaign Foster links among researchers, CSOs and policymakers FormulationInform policymakers of the options and build a consensus Collate good-quality representative evidence and act as a ‘resource bank’ Channel international resources and expertise into the policy process Build long-term collaborative relationships with policymakers Bypass formal barriers to consensus ImplementationComplement government capacity Enhance the sustainability and reach of the policy Act as dynamic ‘platforms for action’ Evaluationevidence and channel it into the policy process Provide good-quality representative evidence and feedback Link policymakers to policy end-users UnderlyingCapacity building for CSOs aiming to influence policy Provide a dynamic environment for communication and collaborative action Provide support and encouragement Provide a means of political representation

Understanding the expectations on the Network Types of problems and options for solutions Summation Weakest link Best shot Region Country A Country C Country B

2 Types of problems Common problems Transboundary problems 3 Types of solutions Best Shot Summation Weakest Link 3 Reasons for non-investment in solutions Lack of coordination Risk aversion Free-rider syndrome Persistent Organising Problems Low intensity of activity Inadequate financial resources Weak investment in network development Policy change vs network development FANRPAN Projects Largely best shot Some Weakest link No summation FANRPAN and Regional Work

The FANRPAN Structure Multi-tiered network with coordinating hubs 1 Regional secretariat, 12 country nodes, 240+ member organisations

Network Typology and FANRPAN Alignment Connectivity Production Need all three elements Easier to work on connectivity, Current funding emphasises alignment, No real investments in meaningful ‘production’ capacity -Easy flow -and access - to information -Collective values/ Positions development -Joint action including policy changes

Expectations  Policy changes at national level  Emergence of regional policies  Contribution to regional integration Investments  Evidence for agenda setting  Links between stakeholders  Information exchange  Policy recommendations Expectations on networks vs investments Missing! Connectivity & Alignment! Production Investment in Underlying capacities for production

Moving beyond what we know  Recognising that action requires more than knowing what to do  How to get policy makers to act  Getting them to act  Checking on implementation  Recommending improvements  Exerting pressure to ensure improvements are adopted and implemented Policy advocacy Policy recommendations

Capacity Requirements at each Hub (Secretariat and Node Coordination) Level Weaving – linking actors Facilitating – Eliminating barriers Coordinating – Keeping processes moving Operating – administration & management Monitoring and Evaluating – Taking pulse Vibrant & Effective Network Wide participation and influence Ability to organise & manage national/regional dialogues and actions Ability to develop work through all stages of policy processes Ability to fund early stage organising The Front-End

Funder Weaver Facilitator Coordinator Steward Organiser Multiple Leadership Roles for Effective Networks Coach

Two Part Business Plan Programme Institutional development Developed funding proposals for the institutional development component Used the programme work to carry some aspects of institutional development FANRPAN Efforts to Address Capacity Requirements Not popular! Thin, No continuity, Weak connection with policy makers!

Summary There is value in policy networks FANRPAN has been doing good work but could do more The key limitation has been the limited investment in network development Investment in ‘products’ without investment in processes undermines quality of process and follow-through on use of products. Products tend to be policy recommendations rather than policy change. The regional and country level secretariats have multiple complex roles to perform and the capacities to perform such roles need to be developed to realise the benefits of the network

THANK YOU!