From Demand to Disinterest:Contexts for Policy Influence

Fred Carden

International Development Research Centre

October 2005

The Study

IDRC will foster and support the production, dissemination and application of research results leading to policies and technologies that enhance the lives of people in developing countries.

IDRC Program Directions 2000-2005

The Framework

Expanding Policy Capacities

Broadening Policy Horizons

Affecting Policy Regimes

Dimensions of Analysis

What we do (inputs)

Where we do it (context)

How we do it (action)

Where: External Factors

Stability of decision-making institutionsCapacity of decision-makers to use researchDecentralization vs tight controlCountries in « transition »Economic pressures

Where: Context Matters

1. Policy Maker Demand

2. Policy Maker Interest, Leadership Gap

3. Policy Maker Interest, Resources Gap

4. Policy Maker Neutral, Research Interest

5. Policy Maker Disinterest, Research Interest

time

Changes in ContextClear demand: MIMAP-S, Nepal ICTs, Viet Nam, Acacia (South Africa, Mozambique, Senegal, Uganda)

Policy Maker interest/leadership gap: TEHIP, MIMAP-B, MIMAP-P, LATN, G-24

PM interest, resources gap: Ukraine

PM neutral, research interest: High Altitude Mining, ECAPAPA, Arsaal (local), AFSSRN, SRISTI, Jordan, Copper Mining

PM disinterest, research interest: Syria, Arsaal (national)

Changes in ContextClear demand: MIMAP-S, Nepal ICTs, Viet Nam, Acacia (South Africa, Mozambique, Senegal, Uganda)

AFSSRN, SRISTIPolicy Maker interest/leadership gap: TEHIP, MIMAP-B, MIMAP-P, LATN, G-24

Copper Mining, JordanPM interest, resources gap : Ukraine

Arsaal (Local)PM neutral, research interest :

PM disinterest, research interest : Syria, Arsaal (national)

ECAPAPA, High Altitude Mining

Afterword on Use

Influence on Centre thinkingRe-shaping the conversationFocusing thinkingEvolving practiceEvolving futures

Influence on Centre profileThe story of influenceThe story of the study

From Demand to Disinterest:Contexts for Policy Influence

http://www.idrc.ca/evaluation/policy

What: Resources More money does not mean more influence

but it does make a difference Other factors:

Intellectual contributions Technical contributions Previous history with recipientDevelopment projects as part of research

What: Intent

No 1:1 correspondence between intent and influence Explicit intent encourages success

especially if the intent is shared Researcher intent matters most Other factors:

ContextLevel of influence (local/national)Timeline for results

What: IDRC Role

Role evolves over timeBuild researcher capacities

(quality, reputation, policy relevant research, communications)

Level the playing field

Build the capacity of policy makers

How: Partnerships

Factors in Effective partnerships/networks: Researchers: willingness, capacity, skills &

resources Map out structures & develop strategies

early on Create partnerships that reflect all

stakeholders Common vision – coordinate efforts among

partners

How: Communications

Communication through informationPassing on informationDialogue about the findingsFollow-up with key stakeholders

Communication through peoplePolicymakers as researchersResearchers as policy entrepreneursFinding allies

How: TimeExternal:

Government support: policy windowsInternal:

RelationshipsReputationPersistence

Project cycle:Supply approach – capacity & enlightenmentDemand approach - responsive

In Conclusion

Essential elementsIdentification of key decision makersBuilding relations of trust

Some tensions to considerAdvanced planning vs. flexibilityIDRC contributions (+/-)Inclusion of all stakeholdersOpportunities vs. funding cycles