Are you a Policy Entrepreneur? How to promote pro-poor policy & practice? An ODI Workshop London, 16th March 2004 John Young & Julius Court Research and Policy in Development Programme www.odi.org.uk/rapid/

WS Purpose Share experiences; Learn about evidence-based policy and practice in the UK and Developing Countries; Try out some simple tools for policy analysis and action; Learn about other tools and approaches which have been used elsewhere, and about where to access further information and resources; Develop a personal action-plan to improve the impact of your own work.

WS Outline Share experiences about your own work; The RAPID analytical framework; Try it out out! The RAPID action framework; Try it out! The policy entrepreneur questionnaire results; Some useful tools; Action planning; Evaluation & sources of further information.

RAPID Programme Desk-based literature reviews GDN project: 50 preliminary case studies ODI project: 4 detailed case studies Advisory work Workshops and seminars www.odi.org.uk/rapid

Existing theory www.odi.org.uk/rapid/lessons/theory Linear model Percolation model, Weiss Tipping point model, Gladwell ‘Context, evidence, links’ framework, ODI Policy narratives, Roe Systems model (NSI) External forces, Lindquist ‘Room for manoeuvre’, Clay & Schaffer ‘Street level bureaucrats’, Lipsky Policy as social experiments, Rondinelli Policy Streams & Windows, Kingdon Disjointed incrementalism, Lindquist The ‘tipping point’, Gladwell Crisis model, Kuhn ‘Framework of possible thought’, Chomsky Variables for Credibility, Beach The source is as important as content, Gladwell Linear model of communication, Shannon Interactive model, Simple and surprising stories, Communication Theory Provide solutions, Marketing Theory I Find the right packaging, Marketing II Elicit a response, Kottler Translation of technology, Volkow Epistemic communities Policy communities Advocacy coalitions etc, Pross Negotiation through networks, Sebattier Shadow networks, Klickert Chains of accountability, Fine Communication for social change, Rockefeller Wheels and webs, Chapman & Fisher There are actually far more than he mentioned – 32 at the last count – but although they may provide a reasonable picture of policy making in developed countries, they don’t address many of the issues in developing countries – like the capacity of developed countries to interfere. You can read all about them on our web site www.odi.org.uk/rapid. If you want a good easy read – try The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell. It’s about “Social Epidemics” – how ideas spread. It’s full of interesting stories and covers much of the ground: The importance of different kinds of people (connectors, mavens & salesmen) The stickiness factor (packaging and presentation to make things memorable) The importance of context (what else is happening at the time influences how we behave) www.odi.org.uk/rapid/lessons/theory

Existing theory – a short list Policy narratives, Roe Systems of Innovation Model, (NSI) ‘Room for manoeuvre’, Clay & Schaffer ‘Street level bureaucrats’, Lipsky Policy as social experiments, Rondene Policy streams and policy windows, Kingdon Disjointed Incrementalism, Lindquist Social Epidemics, Gladwell An initial review of the literature produced a long list of existing theory. Julius talked about these last time. ODI working paper 174, 2002, Hovland, de Vibe and Young Bridging Research and Policy: An Annotated Bibliography.

Reality Linear logical → dynamic, complex, two-way. “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 Africa2” Traditionally, the link between research and policy has been viewed as a linear process, whereby a set of research findings is shifted from the ‘research sphere’ over to the ‘policy sphere’, and then has some impact on policy-makers’ decisions. Opinion is now shifting away from this model towards a more dynamic and complex view that emphasises a two-way process between research and policy, shaped by multiple relations and reservoirs of knowledge. This was well described by Clay & Schaffer in their 1984 book “Room for Manoeuvre” about public policy in agriculture …… And much research doesn’t even focus on the right problems. A recent ISNAR report concluded that …….. It blamed the policy research community-and the agricultural economics profession in particular for failing to address the real problems facing agricultural policymakers: “how to assess the operational feasibility of alternative policy options, and how to promote the feasibility of the most highly valued alternatives” So the traditional question ‘How can research be transported from the research to the policy sphere?’ needs to be replaced by a more complex set of questions ‘Why are some of the ideas that circulate in the research/policy networks picked up and acted on, while others are ignored and disappear?’. So we developed a framework and a methodology to guide our work. 1 - Clay & Schaffer (1984), Room for Manoeuvre; An Exploration of Public Policy in Agricultural and Rural Development, Heineman Educational Books, London 2 – Omamo (2003), Policy Research on African Agriculture: Trends, Gaps, and Challenges, International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) Research Report No 21

Group Task 1 Discuss your own work & identify the main policy objectives, and the main factors that influence whether you achieve them. Appoint a secretary to take notes!

Definitions Research: “any systematic effort to increase the stock of knowledge” (NB: focus on science) 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

The Analytical Framework External Influences Socio-economic and cultural influences, donor policies etc The political context – political and economic structures and processes, culture, institutional pressures, incremental vs radical change etc. The links between policy and research communities – networks, relationships, power, competing discourses, trust, knowledge etc. The evidence – credibility, the degree it challenges received wisdom, research approaches and methodology, simplicity of the message, how it is packaged etc

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] 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 Context: Demand & Contestation The degree of demand and contestation matter greatly. Demand: Policymaker demand: (eg – initiating a review) Societal demand: (focus on problems) Contestation: Ideology / Narrative Vested Interests In virtually all cases: Policy uptake = demand – contestation Evidence can change the policy narrative (Need to think about how they can work to increase demand and reduce contestation.)

Links: Feedback 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 Context: Demand & Contestation The degree of demand and contestation matter greatly. Demand: Policymaker demand: (eg – initiating a review) Societal demand: (focus on problems) Contestation: Ideology / Narrative Vested Interests In virtually all cases: Policy uptake = demand – contestation Evidence can change the policy narrative (Need to think about how they can work to increase demand and reduce contestation.)

External Influence Big “incentives” can spur evidence-based policy – e.g. EU accession, 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) What we don’t know - 2. External Influences It seems that big “incentives” can spur evidence-based policy – e.g. EU accession, PRSP processes. WTO 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)

Group Task 2 Choose one of your own, or one of the teaching case studies, apply the framework and “identify the key factors in each dimension of the framework and what else may matter – and what you might want to know more about. Appoint a secretary to take notes!

The Analytical Framework External Influences Socio-economic and cultural influences, donor policies etc The political context – political and economic structures and processes, culture, institutional pressures, incremental vs radical change etc. The links between policy and research communities – networks, relationships, power, competing discourses, trust, knowledge etc. The evidence – credibility, the degree it challenges received wisdom, research approaches and methodology, simplicity of the message, how it is packaged etc

Other models

The Analytical Framework External Influences Socio-economic and cultural influences, donor policies etc The political context – political and economic structures and processes, culture, institutional pressures, incremental vs radical change etc. The links between policy and research communities – networks, relationships, power, competing discourses, trust, knowledge etc. The evidence – credibility, the degree it challenges received wisdom, research approaches and methodology, simplicity of the message, how it is packaged etc

A Practical Framework External Influences political context evidence Politics and Policymaking Campaigning, Lobbying Policy analysis, & research Media, Advertising, Networking Scientific information exchange & validation Research, learning & thinking evidence links

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?

Putting it into practice What researchers need to know What researchers need to do How to do it Political Context: Evidence Links 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 Who are the policymakers? Is there demand for ideas? What is the policy process? 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 What is the current theory? What are the narratives? How divergent is it? 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 Who are the stakeholders? What networks exist? Who are the connectors, mavens and salesmen?

Paravets in Kenya 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s Professionalisation of Public Services. Structural Adjustment → collapse. Paravet projects emerge. ITDG projects. Privatisation. ITDG Paravet network. Rapid spread in North. KVB letter (January 1998). Multistakeholder WSs → new policies. Still not approved / passed!

Paravets in Kenya - political context Professionalisation of Public Services. Structural Adjustment → collapse of services. Paravet projects emerge. ITDG projects. Privatisation. ITDG Paravet network. Rapid spread in North. KVB letter (January 1998). Multistakeholder WSs → new policies. Still not approved / passed! Professionalisation of Public Services. Structural Adjustment Privatisation and change of DVS. ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS. KVB letter (January 1998). Multistakeholder WSs → new policies. 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s

Paravets in Kenya - Research International Research 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s Professionalisation of Public Services. Structural Adjustment Privatisation and change of DVS. ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS. KVB letter (January 1998). Multistakeholder WSs → new policies. Professionalisation of Public Services. Structural Adjustment → collapse of services. Paravet projects emerge. ITDG projects. Privatisation. ITDG Paravet network. Rapid spread in North. KVB letter (January 1998). Multistakeholder WSs → new policies. Still not approved / passed! ITDG projects – collaborative action research. The Hubl Study

Group Task 3 Choose one of your own, or one of the teaching case studies, and figure out what you would do to maximise the policy impact – NB learning more about the situation is a legitimate action!” . Appoint a secretary to take notes!

Policy entrepreneurs Storytellers Networkers Engineers Fixers

Building policy entrepreneurs Mark Watson 38 28 33 51 Alan Hudson 35 37 38 40 Barbara Adolph 46 28 34 42 Birgit La Cour Madsen 29 39 43 39 Christopher Floyd 46 31 34 39 Elizabeth Cromwell 31 35 41 43 Imran Aziz 32 33 36 49 John Hellin 32 22 44 52 Natasha Sharma 32 33 36 49 Nick Hall 32 35 43 40 Stuart Coupe 42 35 27 41 Suzie Arnott 38 28 42 42 Average 36 32 38 44 >44 = Low <30 = High Julius Court 40 26 40 44 John Young 32 39 34 45 <23 = V.High

Towards a PE Toolkit? An overview of what we think is useful? Some examples of things we do? Discussion: What tools do you know that work? Examples of when they have been used?

Specific Tools Overarching Tools Context Assessment 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

Mapping the Policy Process Aim: Describe: Who makes decisions? How? What ways, formal and informal, are policies made? Analyse: What are the different interests? When: Need a comprehensive understanding. General. Give you: Where are decisions made? Who are the Stakeholders? (NB: link to stakeholder analysis) Arena: government, parliament, civil society, judiciary, private sector. Level: local, national, international. Steps: Process description (formal & informal) + political influence ratings. Based on: Experience, literature, interviews, focus groups. [Sources: M. Grindle / J. Court ] BACKGROUND Good News – Evidence can matter (e.g. bednets vs malaria). Other cases around Room. DFID Research Policy Study. Bad News – But … often major gaps (e.g. HIV/AIDS). Resistance despite clear evidence. How to bridge the gap? Key Question: When does evidence matter? We still need a systematic understanding. ODI RAPID / GDN Bridging Research and Policy Project – 50 case studies. PAPER IN PRESS - Handout Exec Summary / Soon on web CHALLENGE – Massive amount of work into 15 minutes

Mapping Policy Processes Agendas Formulation Implementation Central Government Parliament Bureaucrats Civil Society State BACKGROUND Good News – Evidence can matter (e.g. bednets vs malaria). Other cases around Room. DFID Research Policy Study. Bad News – But … often major gaps (e.g. HIV/AIDS). Resistance despite clear evidence. How to bridge the gap? Key Question: When does evidence matter? We still need a systematic understanding. ODI RAPID / GDN Bridging Research and Policy Project – 50 case studies. PAPER IN PRESS - Handout Exec Summary / Soon on web CHALLENGE – Massive amount of work into 15 minutes

Context Assessment – Policy Process

Stakeholder Analysis Why: Keep Satisfied Engage Closely Monitor (minimum effort) Keep Informed High Power Low Interest Why: Understand who gain or lose from a policy or project. Help Build Consensus. Steps: Identify Stakeholders. Analysis Workshop. (Develop Strategies)

Forcefield Analysis Specific Change Identify Forces Identify Priorities (Develop Strategies)

Policy process workshops (eg DFID) Looking at internal policy processes in organizations and role of policy documents. (What works in DFID?) How: (i) Small, informal workshop – 7 staff; (ii) Identify processes for assessment - 8; (iii) participatory pair-wise ranking of factors influencing the success. Worked quite well. In DFID - agendas and processes rather than documents are key.

Political Context Assessment Tool Best for: Systematically comparing national contexts Thinking through political context issues How to: Representative from cross-section of experts Individual – for thinking through Covers: The macro political context The sector / issue process Policy implementation and practice Decisive moments in the policy process How policymakers think (e.g. from Middle East) Interests Extent of Interests of Policymakers High Medium Low Public Interests 1 3 6 Personal Interests 5 4 Special Interests

Research: Episode Studies Look at a clear episode of policy change, assess the issues that influenced it and the relative role of research. Examples include: The Adoption of PRSPs Community-based Animal Health in Kenya Sustainable Livelihoods in DFID Principles in Humanitarian Response More at: www.odi.org.uk/RAPID/

Writing Effective Policy Papers I Providing a solution to a policy problem Targetting the policy community 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] BACKGROUND Good News – Evidence can matter (e.g. bednets vs malaria). Other cases around Room. DFID Research Policy Study. Bad News – But … often major gaps (e.g. HIV/AIDS). Resistance despite clear evidence. How to bridge the gap? Key Question: When does evidence matter? We still need a systematic understanding. ODI RAPID / GDN Bridging Research and Policy Project – 50 case studies. PAPER IN PRESS - Handout Exec Summary / Soon on web CHALLENGE – Massive amount of work into 15 minutes

Writing Effective Policy Papers II Criteria for Assessing Policy Options Option A Option B Option C Effectiveness Very Positive Positive No impact Flexibility Sustainability Negative Political Feasibility High Medium Low Administrative Feasibility Time Short Long Cost BACKGROUND Good News – Evidence can matter (e.g. bednets vs malaria). Other cases around Room. DFID Research Policy Study. Bad News – But … often major gaps (e.g. HIV/AIDS). Resistance despite clear evidence. How to bridge the gap? Key Question: When does evidence matter? We still need a systematic understanding. ODI RAPID / GDN Bridging Research and Policy Project – 50 case studies. PAPER IN PRESS - Handout Exec Summary / Soon on web CHALLENGE – Massive amount of work into 15 minutes

Communications strategy Identify the message(s) Identify the audience(s) Assess specific information needs, likes and channels Official / unofficial Personal / impersonal Develop and test material and media Printed, AV, web, CD Multi-use, multimedia, multichannel Evaluate impact and change as necessary

Lobbying Elected Officials (General) Targeting Officials: Champions – Allies –Fence Sitters – Mellow Opponents – Hard Core Opponents Inside vs Outside Lobbying: Inside: Meetings – Analysis – Committees – Negotiating Outside: Media – Constituency – Coalitions – Campaigns Practical Tips see: www.odi.org/rapid/

Specific Tools: What Else? 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

Action Plans / Evaluation List up to six things yo will do, or will do differently as a result of this workshop. Fill in the workshop evaluation form

RAPID Partnership Programme Purpose: Enhanced CSO capacity to use evidence to promote pro-poor policy CSOs understand how research → policy CSOs actively participate & link N & S Networks Regional capacity to support CSOs is established Knowledge on pro-poor policy issues is accessible CSOs understand how research → policy: Collaborative research on bridging research and policy issues Collaboration with Government and CSOs in the UK to identify useful lessons from evidence-based policy making in the UK Synthesis of results into demand-driven, user-tested information and training materials for CSOs CSOs actively participate & link N & S Networks: A collaborative study to identify CSOs and CSO networks in the North and South interested in improving their use of research-based evidence in pro-poor policy work; A series of virtual and real meetings through ODI’s own and other policy-research networks to identify and discuss common policy issues; A joint programme of analysis and action on one policy issue each year to build capacity and learn how local and international CSOs can work together effectively in networks; Information, training and capacity building programmes to strengthen networking capacity for southern development policy institutes. Knowledge on pro-poor policy issues is accessible A survey of existing users of ODI information. A demand assessment of CSOs. A more strategic range of information materials for CSOs An up-to-date database of partners & research interests Improved knowledge management within ODI Re-design of the ODI website, and better integration of ODI project and network sites Active marketing of ODI’s information materials to CSOs. An enhanced programme of public meetings and seminars for NGOs and other CSOs; Training courses for staff from NGOs and CSOs Regional capacity to support CSOs is established A collaborative survey of regional PRIs & TTs. Development of principles and guidelines for partnerships. Small-scale collaborative projects. Technical assistance and capital grants to strengthen organisational capacity; Assistance to develop closer links with CSOs and promote e.g. public affairs programmes; Assistance to develop information, training and capacity building programmes We’ll be looking for southern partners!

Other sources of information: http://www.odi.org.uk/rapid