Are you a Policy Entrepreneur? How to promote pro-poor policy & practice?

Are you a Policy Entrepreneur?How to promote pro-poor policy & practice?

An ODI Workshop London, 16th March 2004

John Young & Julius CourtResearch and Policy in Development Programmewww.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

– Phase II studies (25 projects)

• ODI project: – 4 detailed case studies

– HIV/AIDS

• Advisory work

• Workshops and seminarswww.odi.org.uk/rapid

Existing theory1. Linear model2. Percolation model, Weiss3. Tipping point model, Gladwell4. ‘Context, evidence, links’ framework, ODI5. Policy narratives, Roe6. Systems model (NSI)7. External forces, Lindquist8. ‘Room for manoeuvre’, Clay & Schaffer9. ‘Street level bureaucrats’, Lipsky10. Policy as social experiments, Rondinelli11. Policy Streams & Windows, Kingdon12. Disjointed incrementalism, Lindquist13. The ‘tipping point’, Gladwell14. Crisis model, Kuhn15. ‘Framework of possible thought’,

Chomsky16. Variables for Credibility, Beach17. The source is as important as content,

Gladwell

18. Linear model of communication, Shannon19. Interactive model, 20. Simple and surprising stories,

Communication Theory21. Provide solutions, Marketing Theory I22. Find the right packaging, Marketing II23. Elicit a response, Kottler24. Translation of technology, Volkow25. Epistemic communities26. Policy communities27. Advocacy coalitions etc, Pross28. Negotiation through networks, Sebattier29. Shadow networks, Klickert30. Chains of accountability, Fine31. Communication for social change,

Rockefeller32. Wheels and webs, Chapman & Fisher

www.odi.org.uk/rapid/lessons/theory

Existing theory – a short list

ODI working paper 174, 2002, Hovland, de Vibe and Young

Bridging Research and Policy: An Annotated Bibliography.

• 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, Lindblom• Social Epidemics, Gladwell

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”

1 - Clay & Schaffer (1984), Room for Manoeuvre; An Exploration of Public Policy in Agricultural and Rural Development, Heineman Educational Books, London2 – 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 & what you do to 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 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.

Other models

Some Key Questions• The external environment: What are the major external

influences (war on terror; EU accession)? Who are the key international donors & what impact do their policies have? What impact do donor research policies have?

• The political context: What is the nature of governance and democracy? What is the current policy narrative? Is there political interest in change? What is the capacity of and incentives in the bureaucracy (to use research)?

• The evidence: What is the quantity, quality and relevance of research? Are the concepts familiar or new? How are findings packaged and communicated? Does it matter?

• Links: What are the existing networks & intermediaries? Are links formal or informal; open or closed? How important are legitimacy and trust?

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]

• Policy implementation and practice (bureaucracies, incentives, street level, participatory approaches)

• How policymakers think (narratives & policy streams)

• 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 – interactive.

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

(NB: our understanding remains limited)

External Influence• Big “incentives” can spur evidence-based policy –

e.g. EU accession, PRSP processes.

• And some interesting examples of donors trying new things regarding 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 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, Advertising, 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?

Putting it into practiceWhat researchers need to know

What researchers 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

Paravets in Kenya1970s

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 Context1970s

1980s

1990s

2000s


Structural Adjustment → collapse of services.


ITDG projects.

Privatisation.







Structural Adjustment

Privatisation

ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS.



Paravets in Kenya - Research1970s

1980s

1990s

2000s




ITDG projects.

Privatisation.








Privatisation




ITDG projects – collaborative action research.

International Research

The Hubl Study

1970s

1980s

1990s

2000s




ITDG projects.

Privatisation.








Privatisation




ITDG projects – collaborative action research.

International Research

The Hubl StudyDr Kajume

Paravets in Kenya - Links

• Political stagnation, professional protectionism

• Practical evidence invisible to policy makers

• Powerful individuals, “professional” interests

• Bad timing - ITDG missed the boat – twice!

• A “Tipping Point”

• New champions

• Collaborative policy-research

Paravets in Kenya - Lessons

What should ITDG have done• Learned more about the political context

• Involved more policy makers earlier

• Collected more empirical data & used it better

• Seized the chance in 1989

• Involved non-livestock policy makers

• Controlled the “club”

• Looked for champions

• Involved bilaterals and multilaterals

Towards a Policy Entrepreneurs Toolkit

• Toolkit for promoting evidence-based and pro-poor policy.

• The RAPID framework itself• Useful tools for your work• Approaches to organisational development• Some examples of things we do?• Discussion:

– What tools do you know that work?– Examples of when they have been used?

Tools for applying the frameworkOverarching Tools

- The RAPID Framework - Using the Framework

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 - Coalitions

Introduction – The Policy Process

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 ]

Mapping Policy ProcessesAgendas Formulation Implementation

Central Government

Parliament

Bureaucrats

Civil Society

State Government

Implementation

Civil Society

Stakeholder Analysis

Why:

• Understand who gain or lose from a policy or project.

• Help Build Consensus.

Steps:

• Identify Stakeholders.

•Analysis Workshop.

• (Develop Strategies)

Keep Satisfied

Engage Closely

Monitor (minimum effort)

Keep Informed

High

Power

Low

Low HighInterest

Forcefield Analysis

• Specific Change

• Identify Forces

• (Identify Priorities)

• (Develop Strategies)

Political Context Assessment ToolBest for:• Systematically comparing national

contexts• Thinking through political context issues

How to:• Representative from cross-section of

experts• Individual – for thinking through

(e.g. from Middle East)Interests

Extent of Interests of Policymakers

High Medium Low

Public Interests 1 3 6

Personal Interests 5 4 1

Special Interests 6 1 3

Covers:• The macro political context

• The sector / issue process

• Policy implementation and practice

• Decisive moments in the policy process

• How policymakers think

Communications strategy• Identify the audience(s)

– Assess specific information needs, likes and channels• Official / unofficial• Personal / impersonal

• Identify the message(s)• Promotion

– Develop and test material and media• Printed, AV, web, CD / Multi-use, multimedia, multichannel

– Implement

• Evaluate impact and change as necessary

Writing Effective Policy Papers IProviding a solution to a policy problem

Targeting a policy community• Structural elements of a paper

– Problem description– Policy options (& criteria for assessment)– Conclusion & Recommendations

• Key issues: Problem oriented, targeted, multidisciplinary, applied, clear, jargon-free.

[Source: Young and Quinn, 2002]

Writing Effective Policy Papers II

Option A Option B Option C

Effectiveness Very Positive Positive No impact

Flexibility Very Positive Positive Positive

Sustainability Positive Positive Negative

Political Feasibility High Medium Low

Administrative Feasibility

High Medium Low

Time Short Medium Long

Cost High Medium Low

Criteria for Assessing Policy Options

• 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 TipsSee: www.odi.org/rapid/ See: www.wilder.org/

Lobbying Elected Officials (General)

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

http://www.wilder.org/

http://www.wilder.org/pubs/lobbying_handbook/lobbying_handbook-lrg.jpg

More / Other Sources• RAPID: http://www.odi.org

/rapid/ • Strategy Unit's Policy Tools section http://

www.policyhub.gov.uk/tools/index.asp • Mind Tools:

http://www.mindtools.com/ • DFID (Development Tools):

http://www.dfid.gov.uk/ • Wilder Foundation (lobbying & advocacy for NPOs)

http://www.wilder.org/ • CEDPA (advocacy & networking for NGOs)

http://www.cedpa.org/

http://ww.odi.org/rapid/



http://www.policyhub.gov.uk/tools/index.asp

http://www.policyhub.gov.uk/tools/index.asp

http://www.mindtools.com/

http://www.dfid.gov.uk/

http://www.wilder.org/

http://www.cedpa.org/

Task 3 – as Individuals• Focusing on a specific piece of work where you

are trying to influence policy or practice - do a Force-Field Analysis.

• Specify policy change

• Identify forces for & against

• Assess weightings

• Assess points of possible impact

• Identify ways of achieving impact

Organisational development tools• Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices:

– The entrepreneurship questionnaire– Training & mentoring etc

• Knowledge Management• Organisational development

– Finance, admin & personnel systems– Strategic (action & business) planning– Fundraising & reporting

• Building an organisational profile– Communications, Public Affairs and the Media

Policy entrepreneurs

Storytellers

Engineers

Networkers

Fixers

Ashley Parashram 45 25 35 45Bernard Lawer Tetteh-Dumanya 36 27 37 50Dan Start 26 34 43 47David Redhouse 39 36 39 36Enrique Mendizabal 40 29 37 44Gerry Power 39 35 35 41Harinder Janjua 22 38 43 47Karen Iles 41 37 40 32Lydia Richardson 39 36 39 36Marta Foresti 42 30 38 40Michael Majale 36 36 37 41Mike Albu 41 32 32 45Monica Blagescu 38 37 35 40Patrick Watt 31 41 41 37Richard Graham 37 26 37 48

Average 37 33 38 42

>44 = Low

Building policy entrepreneurs

<23 = V.High

<30 = High

Policy process workshops• 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.

ODI’s Knowledge Management Strategy• Building on existing processes:

– Project management– Financial Systems– Web/Intranet– Tuesday Trading / Research Retreats

• Specific new actions:– To improve learning – AARs, Peer-Assists etc– To improve information systems – Intranet-linked

databases & financial systems– Building KM into HR systems– Obtaining & applying resources for KM

Action Planning• An Action Plan is a sequenced plan of specific

actions to deliver defined objectives.

• It involves thinking through a series of questions:– What are your policy objectives?

– What are the major forces?

– Which ones can you engage with?

– Who are the key players?

– What resources do you have?

– Are there any other issues?

– How will you engage with the key players and what will you do?

Task 4 – as individuals• Build on the force-field analysis you have already

completed, to develop an action plan to deliver your policy objectives.

RAPID - Next steps• Further research:

– GDN Phase II studies– HIV/AIDS– How CSOs use research-based evidence– Action-research (does it work?)

• “Institutionalisation” within ODI

• Promotion, partnerships and capacity-building

Other sources of information:

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

How you can help us• Fill in the evaluation form

• Survey of other useful tools

• Opportunities for Action-Research

• Keep in touch

Documents

Are you a Policy Entrepreneur? How to promote pro-poor policy & practice?