Policy Analysis, Engagement and AdvocacyA workshop for Transparency International Bangladesh

12-14 February 2007Dhaka , Bangladesh

Naved ChowdhuryOverseas 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: www.odi.org.uk

RAPID Programme• Research

• Advisory work

• Policy change projects

• Workshops and seminars

• Civil Society Programme

www.odi.org.uk/rapid

Workshop Objectivesa) 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 IntroductionsDay 2• Tools, Strategy and Knowledge

managementDay 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

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

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 Consultations4 – ODI-AFREPREN Workshop

Agendasetting

Problem definition

& analysis

Policy tools

SelectionImplementation Enforcement

Policy evaluation

Public

Scientists

Industry

CSOs

MediaGovernment

Source: Yael Parag

CSOs and Policy: Existing theory1. Linear model2. Too close for comfort, Edwards3. Impact & Effectiveness, Fowler4. ‘Context, evidence, links’, RAPID5. Policy narratives, Roe6. CSO legitimacy, L. David Brown7. Links and Learning, Gaventa8. ‘Room for manoeuvre’, Clay & Schaffer9. ‘Street level bureaucrats’, Lipsky10. Policy as experiments, Rondinelli11. Policy Streams & Windows, Kingdon12. Disjointed incrementalism, Lindquist13. Tipping point model, Gladwell14. Mercenaries, missionaries and

revolutionaries , Malena15. ‘Non-Western?’, Lewis16. Global Civil Society, Salamon, Kaldor17. Types of Engagement, Coston

18. Linear model of communication, Shannon

19. ‘Space’ for thought & action, Howell 20. Simple and surprising stories,

Communication Theory21. Provide solutions, Marketing Theory I22. Find the right packaging, Marketing II23. Global Civil Society?, Keane24. Global Legitimacy, van Rooy25. Epistemic communities, Haas26. Policy entrepreneurs, Najam27. Advocacy coalitions, Keck & Sikkink28. Negotiation through networks, Sabattier29. Social capital, Coleman30. Accountability, OneWorld Trust31. Communication for social change,

Rockefeller Foundation32. 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

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 FrameworkThe 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 policyand 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)

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 entrepreneursStorytellers

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 38 31 4546

Lothike, F 36 23 39 52Nyaga, M 36 32 40

43Lenachuru, C 30 32 39

46Jelle, A 46 29 39

34Kisangau 34 33 44 39Mohamud, M 30 30 41

49Githuka, P 40 36 32 43Nganga, T 28 33 35 44Kaimui, M 38 32 34 44Gituthu, J 25 32 39 45Virginia 40 33 38

40Onyango, S 32 34 36 48

Average 35 32 3944

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 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.

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 FrameworkThe 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 policyand research communities – networks, relationships, power, competing discourses, trust, knowledge etc.

A Practical FrameworkExternal 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?

Using the Framework

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)

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 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?

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. 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”

TEA

Practical ToolsOverarching 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

Low HighInterest

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

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 RulesAdvocacy Rules

(Or how to influence (Or how to influence people to make changes ....)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 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? 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 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 StatementAdvocacy 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…

StartHas it been articulated?

Can it been articulated?

Explicit Tacit

Implicit

Y N

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 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 • www.odi.org.uk/cspp• www.odi.org.uk/rapid

Contact Details:

Naved Chowdhury – n.chowdhury@odi.org.uk

RAPID Programme, ODI www.odi.org.uk/rapid

Other sources of information:

Visit http://www.odi.org.uk/rapid

or e-mail rapid@odi.org.uk for a copy of the RAPID/CSPP CD-ROM

Thank you