PCD impact studies in Practice Ghana and Rwanda Suzan Cornelissen Evert Vermeer Foundation The Netherlands OECD PCD Focal points meeting February 9th, Paris

1.The EVF and the Fair Politics project 2.From policy case studies to impact studies 3.The Case of Ghana 4.The Case of Rwanda 5.The challenges of conducting an impact study Contents of the Presentation

The EVF Dutch NGO striving for international solidarity since 1960’s Focus on advocacy and raising public awareness Since 12 years with a strong focus on Policy Coherence for Development Advocacy  Fair Politics Project

Fair Politics! Make development work Monitoring the Dutch and EU policy making process in relation to PCD Establishing policy case studies on incoherent policies Bringing these cases to the attention of policy makers Generating public debate and awareness around PCD Fair Politician Awards Impact studies

From policy studies to impact studies What is the actual impact of the incoherent policy? –To what extent is the perceived policy incoherence also traceable on the ground? –Do local people/organisations and authorities share the same concerns? –How do they perceive the role of the EU? And how would they like to see the role of the EU? –How can the policy at stake become more coherent and contribute to (local) development objectives? ‘trying to contribute to bridging the gap between EU policy making and the actual situation on the ground in developing countries  facilitating more dialogue’

Ghana (May 2010) Why Ghana? The Topics: –Economic Partnership Agreements –Migration –Illegal Logging (implementation of FLEGT) Methodology –Policy case studies as the starting point / perceived policy incoherence traceable on the ground? –Micro level: Impact on daily lives local people (main focus on interviews with civil society  giving them a voice in relation to EU policy making process)

Ghana: Feedback and critiques Triggered much discussion in terms of “Evidence based PCD” It seems difficult to turn back incoherent policies which are already in place, but some progress has been made. Too much perception/civil society focused

Rwanda (Feb 2012) The topic: Raw materials (EU Raw Materials Initiative) –Upcoming debate within the EU  opportunity to make sure policy becomes coherent in practice in terms of: Certification Adding value Revenue Mobilisation Why Rwanda?! –Strong mining vision –Exporter of critical raw materials The methodology –More macro level –Semi structured interviews and snowball sampling

The challenges faced when conducting impact studies PCD: An abstract and technical European concept When can we refer to a research as “impact” Qualifying coherence/incoherence  Do we qualify a lack of policy or a lack of EU political attention as incoherent? Proving a causal relationship between policy and practice  Who is accountable? Lack of data versus the risk of perception (always opinionated) Coherent on paper but incoherent on the ground: A matter of implementation?

Points for discussion 1.Is there a need for more clarity around PCD: what exactly is it we would we like to accomplish in terms of striving to become more coherent? 2.should common OECD/EU PCD definitions and indicators be created? And what about the involvement of developing countries?  Pro active or passive approach concerning PCD?