INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

“Collaboration and sharing of data, tools, and research capacities to inform future food security strategies”

Michael Johnson

International Food Policy research Institute

February 7th, 2012

“Food Secure Arab World: A Roadmap for Policy and Research”, UN-ESCWA, Beirut, Lebanon

Motivation & Context

Translating evidence into policy action – to strengthen and impact on food security and economic growth in the region

Large benefits to had from enhancing the spillover of knowledge and analysis across countries facing similar policy challenges and opportunities

Generating regional and international public goods (knowledge products, capacity strengthening, and outreach)

Motivation & Context #1 “Translating Evidence into Action”

Links between research and policy tends to be weak – different capacities, cultures and incentives:

• On supply side - capacity to generate sufficient, relevant and credible evidence

• On demand side – capacity among policymakers to demand and use research

Research, including data collection and analysis tend to suffer from a shortage of attention and resources.

Knowledge sharing is often minimal, with different agencies sometimes carrying out parallel and overlapping processes of information gathering and analysis.

Motivation & Context #2 “Enhancing knowledge spillovers”

Underlying biophysical, climatic, and socio-economic characteristics – across borders (similar and diverse)

Political, economic and social ties - variations

Some common problems and emerging issues, policy, and investment options for ensuring food and nutrition security

Diversities in stages of economic development and experiences

Variations in state of poverty and food insecurity (depth, distribution)

Research and technical capacities (individuals & institutions)

Knowledge base and data systems

Motivation & Context #3 “Generating public goods”

Evidence-based dialogue and knowledge sharing among researchers, practitioners and policy makers on key policy challenges - to contribute to improved food security outcomes

Regional and global platforms for exchange of knowledge, data, analysis, tools, and outreach - to encourage greater development partner coordination

Collaborative research outputs and sharing lessons of practice and data (working papers, policy briefs, web-based tools) - strengthening national and regional capacities

Translating evidence into action “when evidence matters”

It is less politically contentious (e.g. in the design of policy instruments), thus playing a marginal role to politics

It is accidental or purposefully, so long as there is a policy window of opportunity

It supports a specific political viewpoint

It satisfies a number of criteria – it is relevant, credible and salient by policy makers

Translating evidence into action “Understanding the policy process

matters a great deal”

Social aspects... multiple actors and actor networks who are defined by local political, social (cultural and belief systems), as well as institutional (bureaucratic structures and capacities) realities.

Human behavior... because they are rooted in people, vested interests, corruption, and external influence can sometimes play a distinct role

Politics.. Power relations and ideas are particularly important – easily superseding any credible evidence.

Office of the President; Government ministries of ARD, Finance, and

Development Planning; departments, agencies

Local academic & research institutions,

policy analysts, think tanks,

statisticial bureaus

local farmers & trader associations,

practitioners, private

sector,NGOs, media, civil society

One way of bringing evidence into the policy process - the boundary network

Strategic Analysis

Network

Knowledge System / Dialogue

Capacity Strengthening

Links

Local policy process for planning, implementation, and M&E of ARD strategies (not necessarily circular or linear as illustrated here)

External Influences

Regional , International (e.g. World Bank, UN/FAO, donors, academic & research institutions, NGOs, private sector)

Examples

Africa Model (ReSAKSS-Africa) – launched in 2006 and established to support the Africa Union and NEPAD’s Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP).

Asia Model (ReSAKSS_Asia) – in its infancy, to be officially launched this year.

ReSAKSS-Africa Support to CAADP

Informing and supporting country and multi-country supra-natural strategy development processes – integration with the CAADP agenda and process

COUNTRY LEVEL

Support for planning,

Implementation, &

Progress Review

REGIONAL LEVEL

Support for

Regional Coordination and

Peer Review

CONTINENT-WIDE LEVEL

Support for Policy

Dialogue and

Mutual Review

Providing analysis, data, interactive

IT-based tools, and capacity support

to promote evidence-based policy

planning and implementation

associated with the CAADP agenda.

ReSAKSS-Africa Website Tool (www.resakss.org)

ReSAKSS-Asia Conference

ReSAKSS-Asia Web Portal

Reflecting on lessons

Networking and dialogue with local policy makers, analysts, and existing networks is essential during the early stages

Having local champions has had an important impact on the effectiveness and speed of implementation – especially on Steering/Advisory Committee

Stronger ties with local partner institutions and government bodies (ownership)

Ability to maintain quality products produced in close collaboration with local partners and institutions—raises credibility and relevance

Multiple donor support and sufficient levels of resources

Lessons also raise research questions

What’s the existing tools and network in the region?

What drives the interactions in ReSAKSS networks?

What factors constrain their ability to function well (such as incentives, institutional affiliations and tensions, transaction costs, competitiveness, different underlying development paradigms, values, and approaches)?

Does the type of membership mix in the networks affect the credibility of the analysis?

How can the ReSAKSS balance the supply of credible information (which is limited) with its demand (which is almost endless)?

How to incorporate knowledge and research evidence in policy process?

Can those who seek the information most also pay for it? If not, what are the tradeoffs for accepting external donor involvement and influence?