Policy Analysis, Engagement and Advocacy A workshop for Transparency International Bangladesh February 2007 Dhaka, Bangladesh Naved Chowdhury Overseas Development Institute, London

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:

RAPID Programme Research Advisory work Policy change projects Workshops and seminars Civil Society Programme

Workshop Objectives a)Share experiences about CSO-policy context in different countries; 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, Strategy and Knowledge management Day 3 Field trip

Any questions about the plan?

Self Introductions 2 minutes! Name 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 Bangladesh? (in general) b) Affecting the policy impact of your work?

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

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

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

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

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 Consultations 4 – ODI-AFREPREN Workshop

Agenda setting Problem definition & analysis Policy tools Selection ImplementationEnforcement Policy evaluation Public Scientists Industry CSOs Media Government Source: Yael Parag

CSOs and Policy: Existing theory 1.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 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

Any questions?

Policy life is complex. What issues matter? The RAPID Framework

A word of warning… The world is complex We do not aim to make it simple Only to find recognisable patternrs 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 comparisons 1. Ideal model e.g. ?? KnowledgeLinks Contexts 2. Islands model e.g. multilaterals Knowledge Links Contexts 3. Technocratic model e.g. donors Knowledge Links 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)

LUNCH

Key-note Speakers On the needs and pressures of policymaking On producing relevant and credible research Questions?

Plenary discussion: 1.How can we change what we do to be more useful for policymakers?

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)

Skills of (pro-poor) policy entrepreneurs Storytellers Engineers Networkers Fixers

Policy Entrepreneurship Questionnaire Rank responses Add scores Don’t worry about specifics

End DAY 1

DAY 2 Results of the Policy entrepreneurship questionnaire Tools –Identifying the problem and assessing the context

>44 = Low Kenya CSO Policy Entrepreneurs <23 = V. High <30 = High Carroll, T Lothike, F Nyaga, M Lenachuru, C Jelle, A Kisangau Mohamud, M Githuka, P Nganga, T Kaimui, M Gituthu, J Virginia Onyango, S Average

Comments Tendency to prefer “storytelling” and “networking”. Several people dislike “fixing” and “engineering” is close by. One of you has a strong preference: “networking”

Developing a strategy

To Maximize Chances You 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.

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?

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 evidence links 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?

Using the Framework

Group Work Use 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)

To do: 1.Go over all factors (pick the most relevant questions) 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 Discussion G roups (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?

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

The PRSP Story… The WB & IMF “adopted” PRSPs at the AGM in Sept as the 1 o 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”

TEA

Practical Tools Overarching Tools - The RAPID Framework - Using the Framework - The Entrepreneurship Questionnaire Context Assessment Tools - Stakeholder Analysis - Forcefield Analysis - Writeshops - Policy Mapping - Political Context Mapping Communication 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 High Interest

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? StrengthsWeaknesses OpportunitiesThreats 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

Planning: Social Network Analysis Focus on structure of relationships Nodes and links between nodes Nodes: people, groups and organizations, etc. Links: social contacts, exchange of information, political influence, membership in org etc Social processes influence organizations and vice versa

Force field Analysis Specific Change Identify Forces (Identify Priorities) (Develop Strategies)

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)

Identifying the forces for and against change and developing the Strategy

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?

Lunch LUNCH

The over all 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

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)

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) How will you package your information? Role of the media?

Different Approaches

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

Advocacy Rules (Or how to influence people to make changes....)

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

Who are you advocating/communicating to? Who needs to make these changes? Who has the power? What is their stance on the issue? Awareness, Knowledge, Attitude, Behaviour Targets and influence Mapping where decisions happen Analyse the outcome and then decide.

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

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....

Advocacy Statement A concise and persuasive statement that captures What you want to achieve, Why, How and by when?  Should ‘communicate’ with your target audience and prompt action  Think about language, content, packaging, and timing  Persuasive

How will you communicate your messages and evidence?  How to target and access information?  Who is a trusted and credible messenger?  What is the most appropriate medium?  How will you package your information?  Role of the media

Where and when to advocate/communicate ? Creating opportunities (campaigns, public mobilisation, formal and informal lobbying etc.) Influencing existing agendas Piggybacking on other agendas

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 project and its context Use your ‘What to watch for’ hand out as a guide, only. Ask questions, observe, make sketches, get quotes.

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

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

There are different forms of knowledge… Start Has it been articulated? Can it been articulated? ExplicitTacit Implicit YN Y N

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

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 contexts leadership 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

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…

Knowledge: a menu of tools

What kind of learner are you?

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

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 is the problem we face while monitoring? 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 development as a complex process.

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 impactsFocuses 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

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.

Boundary partners = Program`s Partners Program

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 TIB 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.

The three stages of OM

Further Information / Resources ODI Working Papers Bridging Research and Policy Book JID Special Issue Meeting Reports Tools for Impact

Contact Details: Naved Chowdhury – RAPID Programme, ODI

Other sources of information: Visit or for a copy of the RAPID/CSPP CD-ROM

Thank you