Improving NBD Policy Engagement Naved Chowdhury Nicola Jones April, 2007 Naivasha, Kenya

Expectations Introduction Your name Your work What is your expectation from this workshop? 2 minutes!!

Overseas Development Institute Development Think Tank 60 researchers Research / Advice / Public Debate Rural / Humanitarian / Poverty & Aid / Economics / Policy Processes DFID, Parliament, WB, EC Civil Society For more information see:

RAPID Group Promoting the use of research-based evidence in development policy Research / Advice / Public Affairs & Capacity-building Programmes: –Research for Policy –Progressive Policymakers –Parliamentarians –Southern Think Tanks for further information see:

Case Studies Detailed: –Sustainable Livelihoods –Poverty Reductions Strategy Processes –Ethical Principles in Humanitarian Aid –Animal Health Care in Kenya –Dairy Policy in Kenya –Plant Genetic Resources Summary –GDN x 50 –CSPP x 20 –Good news case studies x 5 –Mental health in the UK

ODI and Global Civil Society Civil Society Partnerships Programme Outcomes: CSOs better understand evidence-policy process Capacity development to support CSOs policy influencing efforts Improved knowledge base for CSOs on policy influencing Global collaboration and experience sharing about research/policy/practice linkages Aim: Strengthened role of southern CSOs in development policy processes

CSPP Objectives Goal Development policy is more pro-poor Purpose Southern CSOs make more use of research- based evidence to influence the establishment of pro-poor policy ODI engages more effectively with southern CSOs and other stakeholders to make more use of ODIs research-based evidence to influence the establishment of pro-poor policy.

Partnership Activities Network: Interactive community website Information and knowledge exchange within and across regions General support Capacity-building: staff exchanges visiting fellows to ODI and Southern institutes, Southern participants in global policy events Training and ToT – for CSOs and policy-makers Mentoring support to action research projects Dissemination of lessons: Ongoing learning How to do it guidelines New research on the research-policy-practice interface Collaborative projects: Small-scale ARPs Continued support to existing projects One new global collaborative project each year

Global Consultation Workshops were held in Africa (Southern, Eastern and West), Asia (South and South East) and Latin America (Southern Cone and Andes) and organized in partnership with local CSOs Case studies: –Budget Monitoring (Zambia), –Community Participation in Waste Management (Ghana), –Rice pricing (Bangladesh), –Public participation (Indonesia) etc. –Sub-national elections and journalist capacity building (Peru)

Key factors for CSO influence (Malawi) Constraints Lack of capacity Lack of local ownership Translating data into evidence Limited data Donor influence Crises Political factors Strengths Evidence of the value of CSO involvement Governments becoming more interested in CSOs CSOs are gaining confidence Strength of networks Opportunities for media engagement Political factors

What do CSOs need to do? Define clear roles and responsibilities, especially in networks Financial and human resources to facilitate policy influencing – both constructive engagement and confrontational approaches Effective communication: develop different materials for different target audiences Engage the media Engage with donors so that they can develop a more holistic understanding of development challenges Consult with policymakers (elected officials and civil servants) from the outset

Group work in regional teams What do you understand by the term policy influencing or policy engagement? What are the most important policy processes for CSOs to influence with regard to the Nile River Basin? –Please give examples at regional and national levels How are you trying to influence water policy in your country? What are the key opportunities for CSOs and challenges in your country to influence water policies? Plenary: Opportunities and Challenges for influencing water resource policies in Nile Basin countries

Overview What is policy? What explains policy change? What is the relationship between researchers and policy makers? Tools to understand the political context of policy change Tools to influence the policy process

Merilee Grindles Approach 1.Identify the policy reform – the decision to be made 2.Political Interests Map – the actors and politics 3.Institutional Contexts Map – the organisations and processes involved 4.Circle of influence graphic – supporters and opponents and their power 5.Policy process Matrix – what needs to be done when 6.Communications Strategy

Policy – some meanings Label for field of activity/space Expression of general intent Specific proposals Decisions of government Formal authority/legislation Program Output or outcome Model or theory Hogwood & Gunn, 1984

According to Peter John - the interplay between institutions, interests and ideas. John P (1998) Analysing Public Policy. London: Cassell.

Policy Processes Identify the problem Commission research Analyse the results Choose the best option Establish the policy Evaluation Implement the policy

Monitoring and Evaluation Agenda Setting Decision Making Policy Implementation Policy Formulation Policy Processes Civil Society Donors Cabinet Parliament Ministries Private Sector

…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 Research is more often regarded as the opposite of action rather than a response to ignorance 3 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 3 Surr (2003), DFID Research Review

Evidence Experience & Expertise Judgement Resources Values and Policy Context Habits & Tradition Lobbyists & Pressure Groups Pragmatics & Contingencies Factors influencing policy making Source: Phil Davies Impact to Insight Meeting, ODI, 2005

Different Notions of Evidence Colloquial (Contextual) Anything that seems reasonable Policy relevant Timely Clear Message Policy Makers Evidence Source: Phil Davies Impact to Insight Meeting, ODI, 2005 Scientific (Context free) Proven empirically Theoretically driven As long as it takes Caveats and qualifications Researchers Evidence

Policy process Agenda setting – why some issues considered by policy makers Formulation – which policy alternatives and evidence is considered, why evidence ignored Adoption – who is involved in deciding, formal or informal decision-making Implementation – who will implement, how will implementers change policy to suit their aims, are implementers involved in decision-making Evaluation – whether and why policies achieve their aims The way policy is initiated, developed, negotiated, communicated, implemented

Policy context Situational: change of leadership, focusing events, new evidence, etc. Structural: resource allocation to intervention, organization of service delivery – public private mix, etc. Cultural: prevailing attitudes to situation of women, technology, equity, tradition, etc. International: place of intervention on international agenda, aid dependency, levels and modalities, migration of staff, ideas and paradigms, etc. Systemic factors which effect policy

Political Context Analysis Systematically gather political intelligence associated with any policy reform –Contextual opportunities & constraints –Formal & informal processes through which decisions made –Identify stakeholder groups –Assess political resources of groups –Understand interests, positions and commitments of groups Systematically assess political palatability of specific policy alternatives

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?

Policy Mapping Tools Policy Process Mapping RAPID Framework Stakeholder Analysis Force-Field Analysis Outcome Mapping More complex tools: –Drivers of Change –Power Analysis –World Governance Assessment

More Complex Tools Civil Society Index (CIVICUS) Country Policy & Institutional Assessment (World Bank) Democracy and Governance Assessment (USAID) Drivers of Change (DFID) Governance Questionnaire (GTZ) Governance Matters (World Bank Institute) Power Analysis (Sida) World Governance Assessment

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

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

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

Stakeholder analysis Stakeholder: individuals, groups, or organizations that have an interest in the project and can mobilize resources to affect its outcome in some way. Stakeholders are often specific to each policy reform and context, and should not just be assumed. Stakeholder analysis: tool used to identify and understand the needs and expectations of major interests inside and outside the project environment in order to plan strategically. It is critical for assessing project risk and viability, and ultimately the support that must be effectively obtained and retained.

Stakeholder Analysis Approach Clarify policy change objective Identify all stakeholders associated with this objective Prioritise stakeholders according to interest/commitment and power/ assets Develop strategy to engage with different stakeholders Keep Satisfied Engage Closely and Influence Actively Monitor (minimum effort) Keep Informed High Power Low High Interest

Actors/Stakeholders –Identify key governmental, NGO, international, regional, national and sub-national stakeholder groups –Also identify independent groups/individuals with some influence or potential influence –Break down categories as far as feasible (one possibility is primary stakeholders, e.g. ministerial advisors, and secondary stakeholders, the minister her/himself; trade union federation vs factor workers directly).

Interests, Position & Commitment Interests – what would a stakeholder gain or lose from the proposed reform? Interests determine position: supportive, neutral, opposed Commitment – importance attached by stakeholder to issue

Stakeholder interests

Assessing Stakeholder Power: Tangible –Votes –Finance –Infrastructure –Members –Research evidence Intangible –Expertise –Charisma –Legitimacy –Access to media & decision makers –Tacit/implicit knowledge Political Assets:

Type of engagement

Strategies for Policy Engagement Develop political strategies to change: Position: deals to bring about change, horse trading, promises, threats Power: provide supporters with funds, personnel, access to media & officials Players: change number of actors by mobilizing and demobilising, venue shifting Perceptions: use data and arguments to question, to alter perspectives of problem/solution, use associations, invoke symbols, emphasise doability

LEVEL OF INFLUENCE POSITION OpposedNeutralSupportive High Medium Low Policy Mapping Tool 1 Stakeholder Position Map

Bangladesh Integration Example: Ministry of Finance Planning Commission Prime Minister Minister of Health Secretary of Min of Health Deputy Secretary Ministry of Health Health reformers in Ministry Cadre of Family Planning Officials Medical Association Donors Press Academics Select service delivery NGOs

LEVEL OF INFLUENCE POSITION OpposedNeutralSupportive High DG FPMin of Finance Planning Commission Prime Minister Minister of Health Secretary of Health BMA Some DPs (WB, DFID, EC, USAID) Medium Admin cadre FP cadre Class III/IV employees Print press DGH Health cadre Reformers in MOHFW Secretariat Low Additional Secretary Health NGOs FP NGOs Academia Some DPs (WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, CIDA, SIDA, GTZ, Dutch Co- operation) Bangladesh Integration: Pre-2001

LEVEL OF INFLUENCE POSITION OpposedNeutralSupportive High Secretary DG FP FP cadre Class III/IV workers Ministry of Finance Prime Minister Planning Commission Minister of Health BMA Medium FP NGOs Admin cadre ? Press? DGHSome DPs (WB, DFID, EC, USAID) Low UNFPACIDA SIDA GTZ Academia Health NGOs Some DPs (WHO, UNICEF, Dutch Co- operation) Positions Oct 2001-May 2003

Panel discussion Regional representatives to present on: How can CSOs improve their engagement with relevant stakeholders? Questions from audience

Day 2

Group work: Questions: a) Who are your stakeholders? b) How powerful are they? And what accounts for their power? c) What are their interests? Are these likely to differ across different stages in the policy cycle? d) What type of engagement is recommendable at different junctures in the policy cycle?

Policy Mapping Tool 2 Effective Evidence-based policy influencing: The RAPID Approach

Definitions Research: any systematic effort to increase the stock of knowledge Policy: a purposive course of action followed by an actor or set of actors Evidence: the available information supporting or otherwise a belief or proposition Evidence-based Policy: public policy informed by rigorously established evidence.

Non-linear, dynamic policy processes The impacts of research may occur neither at the time of the research, nor in ways that are predictable…or in the direction in which researchers intend. [Rather] it is mediated by the options available to policy makers at a particular time. [There is a] …need for researcher to be both radical and relate to its time and place….to make an impact but also to accord…with existing mores »(Lucinda Platt, 2003: 2).

Existing theory 1.Linear model 2.Percolation model, Weiss 3.Tipping point model, Gladwell 4.Context, evidence, links framework, ODI 5.Policy narratives, Roe 6.Systems model (NSI) 7.External forces, Lindquist 8.Room for manoeuvre, Clay & Schaffer 9.Street level bureaucrats, Lipsky 10.Policy as social experiments, Rondinelli 11.Policy Streams & Windows, Kingdon 12.Disjointed incrementalism, Lindquist 13.The tipping point, Gladwell 14.Crisis model, Kuhn 15. Framework of possible thought, Chomsky 16.Variables for Credibility, Beach 17.The source is as important as content, Gladwell 18.Linear model of communication, Shannon 19.Interactive model, 20.Simple and surprising stories, Communication Theory 21.Provide solutions, Marketing I 22.Find the right packaging, Marketing II 23.Elicit a response, Kottler 24.Translation of technology, Volkow 25.Epistemic communities 26.Policy communities 27.Advocacy coalitions etc, Pross 28.Negotiation through networks, Sebattier 29.Shadow networks, Klickert 30.Chains of accountability, Fine 31.Communication for social change, Rockefeller 32.Wheels and webs, Chapman & Fisher X

An Analytical Framework The political context – political and economic structures and processes, culture, institutional pressures, state-civil society relations, pol-econ history. The evidence – credibility, the degree it challenges received wisdom, research methodology, message clarity, how it is packaged etc External Influences Socio-economic and cultural influences, donor policies etc The links between policy and research communities – networks, relationships/ trust, power, competing discourses

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

Political context - key findings The design of political institutions or regimes matter in that they channel the flow of ideas in particular ways and create different sets of incentives New regional / transnational policy spaces present new opportunities and challenges Volatility of political contexts Time-bound windows of opportunity

Evidence – key findings Research quality matters Research quantity matters (body of work culminating in a tipping point) Triangulation of research methods is important –Quantitative –Qualitative –Experiential –Participatory

Linkages Intent to shape policy matters The hard evidence of many cases supports the claim that intent matters. It matters precisely because the confusions, tensions and accidents of the policy process itself turn out to be so complicated and unpredictable…Research will only have a reliable influence on policy if it can survive… (ONeil, 2005: 762). Credibility of messenger may be as important as the message; this depends on social/institutional positioning and policy entrepreneurship skills

The Key Questions The external environment: Who are the key actors? What is their agenda? How do they influence the political context? Links: Who are the key actors? Are there existing networks? How best to transfer the information? The media? Campaigns? The evidence: Is it there? Is it relevant? Is it practically useful? Are the concepts new? Does it need re-packaging? The political context: Is there political interest in change? Is there room for manoeuvre? How do they perceive the problem?

Childhood Poverty in Ethiopia Political context Govt weariness/suspicion of civil society Some media access PRSP consultation period Limited capacity of social policy ministries External influences WB, donors encouraged research-based policy recommendations UN Convention on Rights of the Child Consultants to Ministry of Finance and Economy Evidence National hh surveys Young Lives survey on childhood poverty Good practice from other countries, esp. indicators Qualitative research Linkages National NGO umbrella orgs Save the Children Alliance Policy entrepreneurs Ethiopian Devt Research Institute PRSP technical committee Dept of Children and Youth Regional state govt officials

What you need to do – group work What you need to know Broad action stepsPossible strategies 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

Feedback and Discussion What is the present policy agenda? Are there clear and strong links between researcher and policy-making/policy implementing communities? How open are policy spaces on water policy? Do you have access to or are you generating policy relevant evidence? What are the external forces and how influential are they?

A peer assist is a method whereby participants are invited to reflect on the ideas of their peers based on their experiences, insights and knowledge early on in a project Peer Assist targets a specific technical or commercial challenge; gains assistance and insights from people outside the team; identifies possible approaches and new lines of inquiry; promotes sharing of learning with each other; and develops strong networks amongst people involved

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

Tea

Day 3

Why communicate? To disseminate our research results To provide information To aid our research process To engage with specific groups To facilitate (public) discussion To lead to change

But… more communication more change

Key communication skills More communication more change But better communication can lead to change. Key skills: to understand, to inspire, to inform, and to learn.

Communications Toolkit Planning Tools Packaging Tools Targeting Tools Monitoring Tools

Communications Toolkit Planning Tools –Stakeholder Analysis –Social Network Analysis –Problem Tree Analysis –Force Field Analysis –National Systems of Innovation (NSI) –How to Write a Communications Strategy Packaging Tools Targeting Tools Monitoring Tools Key skill: to understand

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?

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?

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.

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

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]

A peer assist is a method whereby participants are invited to reflect on the ideas of their peers based on their experiences, insights and knowledge early on in a project Peer Assist targets a specific technical or commercial challenge; gains assistance and insights from people outside the team; identifies possible approaches and new lines of inquiry; promotes sharing of learning with each other; and develops strong networks amongst people involved

Starts with the attitude that someone has probably already done what I am about to do. I wonder who? Peer Assist

What you know in your context What I know in my context "...the politics accompanying hierarchies hampers the free exchange of knowledge. People are much more open with their peers. They are much more willing to share and to listen What we both know Whats possible? Action Multiplying Knowledge

What is KM & Learning? … keeping track of people who know the recipe…. …every time we do something again we should do it better than the last time… Goals Results Activities Learn during Learn after Learn before External networks; Colleagues; Information assets; Own knowledge

Different learning styles… Reflector Theorist Activist Pragmatist

Different forms of knowledge Start Has it been articulated? Can it been articulated? ExplicitTacit Implicit YN Y N

KM Toolkit Strategy Development Management Techniques Collaboration Mechanisms Knowledge Sharing and Learning Processes Knowledge Capture and Storage

Knowledge Audit for NBD What are the core tasks? What do the people doing them need to know? How is the knowledge generated? How is it stored and accessed? Any problems? What are the relationships between producers and users? How could it be improved? Any leadership issues? Any incentive problems?

What are the problems we face while monitoring for policy impact? 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 attribution CEF National Gov Family Local Gov GRO USAID Church CSO DFID

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 develpment as a complex process.

Monitoring ex-ante … ex-post is sometimes too late A short introduction to OUTCOME MAPPING

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

Outcome Mapping OUTCOME MAPPING: Building Learning and Reflection into Development Programs Sarah Earl, Fred Carden, and Terry Smutylo

The 3 Stages of OM The intentional design stage: helps answer 4 questions: 1) Why? (developing a vision statement); 2) Who? (identifying the primary partners); 3) What? (specifying desired outcomes and relevant progress markers); and, 4) How? (articulating the mission and a portfolio of strategies). The outcome and performance monitoring stage: provides a framework for a continuous monitoring of the initiative as a tool to achieving its outcomes. The program uses progress markers, a set of graduated indicators of behavioural change, identified in the intentional design stage to clarify directions with its primary partners and to monitor outcomes. The evaluation planning stage: helps identify the evaluation priorities assessing the strategy at greater depth than the performance monitoring stage.

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 PartCom 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.

Intentional design Progress markers –Step by step progressive changes that one expects to see (short run), would like to see (medium to long run) and love to see (very long run) –keep it simple, 15 max! –Are about CHANGES IN BEHAVIOURS OF BOUNDARY PARTNERS –Are linear but NOT static –Must be revised –Help monitor the effectiveness of the strategy

Intentional design Strategy Map –Outlines the programmes approach in working with the boundary partners –How will the programme contribute to the achievement of the outcome challenged over the next X months/years? –Use force field analysis

The three stages of OM

Discussion How will Nile Basin countries monitor its policy engagement work and impacts?

Summary –Evidence-informed policy challenging –Policy about interests, institutions & ideas –Variety of tools to understand these factors - range in sophistication/complexity and ease of use –Tools to use the understanding to engage in policy processes – less well developed –Extent to which the tools are helpful depends on creativity, tenacity, inside knowledge – advocacy coalitions useful –You can get more info at …

Further Information Mapping Political Contexts: Tools for Policy Impact: Best Practice in Policy Making: Understanding Policy Process:

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

Closing comments 1.Was this useful? 2.What will you do different from now on? 3.How can we help you? Action Planning

Contact Details: Naved Chowdhury Nicola Jones RAPID Programme, ODI