Policy Entrepreneurship:

How to promote more informed policy & practice?

John Young and Julius CourtResearch and Policy in Development ProgrammeOverseas Development Institute, Londonwww.odi.org.uk/rapid/

Chisinau, Moldova

17 June 2004

Self Introductions• 1 minute!• Name & organization• Country

Workshop Purpose & OutlinePurpose:• Improved capacity to analyse the context of research and

use simple approaches and tools to improve impact on policy and practice.

Outline:• Introductions• Theory (& Reality)• Research-Policy Links in the EE/FSU Region• The RAPID Framework & Lessons• A Strategy for Action• Some Tools• Maximising Influence• Evaluation & Conclusion

Overseas Development Institute (ODI)

• Britain’s leading development Think Tank

• £8m, 60 researchers

• Research / Advice / Public Debate

• Rural / Humanitarian / Poverty & Aid / Economics (HIV, Human rights, Water)

• DFID, Parliament, WB, EC

• Civil Society

For more information see: www.odi.org.uk

RAPID Programme• Research

– Desk-based literature reviews• Bridging Research and Policy

• Communications

• Knowledge Management

– GDN project: • 50 preliminary case studies

• Phase II studies (25 projects)

– ODI projects• 4 detailed case studies

• HIV/AIDS

• Advisory work

• Workshops and seminars www.odi.org.uk/rapid

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”

– Agendas / policy horizons

– Official statements documents

– Patterns of spending

– Implementation processes

– Activities on the ground

Generic Policy Processes

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

• Policy narratives, Roe• National Systems of Innovation, (NSI)• ‘Room for manoeuvre’, Clay & Schaffer• ‘Street level bureaucrats’, Lipsky• Policy as social experiments, Rondenelli• Policy streams and policy windows, Kingdon• Disjointed Incrementalism, Lindblom• Social Epidemics, Gladwell

Existing theory – a short list

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

Bridging Research and Policy: An Annotated Bibliography.

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…• “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

• “(in CEE countries) The climate surrounding public sector reforms has become increasingly more complex and interconnected.” 3

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 213 – Gabor Peteri (foreword to Managing Think Tanks by Ray Struyk).

Reality II … Parallel Universes?

• Speed

• Superficiality

• Spin

• Secrecy

• Scientific Ignorance

More at: www.odi.org.uk/RAPID/Meetings/Evidence

Vincent Cable – MP on legislators & use of evidence:

Any Questions?

Group Task 1For the EE/FSU region:

• What are the key factors affecting …

– The impact of your Institutes’ Work?– Research policy interaction in EE/FSU?

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.

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. Power.]

• 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

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

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)

Other models

Discussion• Any clarifications?

• Does the framework make sense?

• What is missing?

• Is the framework useful?

• What is OSI experience?

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, Advocacy, 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?

What researchers need to doWhat 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

Programme Pt II• The framework in action – a case study

• Group Work – what works for you?

• Implications for TTs

• Tools & Approaches

• What we do

• Networks

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

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

ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS.

KVB letter (January 1998).

Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.

Paravets in Kenya - Research1970s

1980s

1990s

2000s

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

ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS.

KVB letter (January 1998).

Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.

ITDG projects – collaborative action research.

The Hubl Study

International Research

1970s

1980s

1990s

2000s

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

ITDG Paravet network and change of DVS.

KVB letter (January 1998).

Multistakeholder WSs → new policies.

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

When and how to use it• Historical analysis of a policy event

– Identify the event– Elaborate the history – critical events, key people– Review context, evidence and links at key

moments– Identify & prioritise the influences

• Current analysis & strategic planning– Identify key players– “Workshop” the issues & develop a strategy for

maximising impact

A current example• to maximise impact of DFID forest/ground

water research project in India• Researchers, policy makers and activists• Used framework to analyse factors in

water sector in India• Developed strategy for final phase:

– Less research– More communication– Developing champions in regional and national

government – Local, Regional & National advocacy campaign

Any Questions?

Group Discussion 2• Influencing policy: What do you do?

– Stories – Successes and Failures

– Specific Approaches that work

– What works in different contexts

Appoint a secretary to take notes!

Implications for Think Tanks• Need to be able to:

– Understand the political context– Do credible research – Communicate effectively– Work with others

• Need organisational capacity– Staff – Internal processes– Funds

Practical ToolsOverarching 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

Assessing Political Contexts

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

Forcefield Analysis

• Specific Change

• Identify Forces

• (Identify Priorities)

• (Develop Strategies)

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

Communications strategy

• Identify the audience(s)

• Identify the message(s)

• Promotion

• Evaluate impact and

change as necessary

• Clear Strategy – Interactive – Multiple formats

How?

Who?

What?

Policy process workshops (eg DFID)• Looking at internal policy processes –

what works in DFID. • Small, informal workshop with 7 staff.• Participatory pair-wise ranking of factors

influencing the success of 8 policy processes.

• Worked quite well.• In DFID - agendas and processes rather

than documents are key

Meetings• Does evidence matter – Halpern, Millstone

• The political context – Cable, Court

• The role of research – Spray, Young

• NGO campaigns – Forsyth, Simms

• Think-tanks – Bentley, Maxwell, Garnett

• Using knowledge effectively – Cheuk, Borton

• Policy entrepreneurship – Maxwell, Pettifor

• International policies – Desai, Wilks

More at: www.odi.org.uk/RAPID/Meetings

Policy entrepreneurs

Storytellers

Engineers

Networkers

Fixers

Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 45 25 35 45Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 36 27 37 50Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 26 34 43 47Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 39 36 39 36Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 40 29 37 44Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 39 35 35 41Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 22 38 43 47Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 41 37 40 32Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 39 36 39 36Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 42 30 38 40Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 36 36 37 41Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 41 32 32 45Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 38 37 35 40Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 31 41 41 37Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx 37 26 37 48

Average 37 33 38 42

>44 = Low

Building policy entrepreneurs

<23 = V.High

<30 = High

Managing Think Tanks • Type, Focus and Niche• Staff and Motivation• Quality Control• Communication• Getting the most from your board• Fund-raising• Financial Management

(surprisingly little on policy influence in different contexts)

[Source: Struyk, 2002]

Think Tanks – 3 Modes of Influence

www.odi.org.uk/RAPID/Meetings/Evidence/Evidence_Series.html

Gas

SolidLiquid

How we’re doing it in RAPID• Clear Aim & Outputs• Building credibility with research/action• Employing the right staff & staff development• Good internal systems (Mgt, Comms & KM)• Programme approach:

– Strategic opportunism– Research / practical advice / stimulating debate– Engagement with policy makers & practitioners– Community of practice cf network

• Financial opportunism

RAPID Programme Plans• Further research

– GDN– HIV/AIDS– Networks– CSOs

• Engagement in the UK – EBP – Research Councils – Evidence Network

• Global promotion and capacity-building – PPA – DFID– Advisory work

Any Questions?

Networks• Roles of Policy Networks

– Filtering

– Amplifying

– Investor / Provider

– Facilitator

– Convening

– Communities

• Policy Code Sharing

• Some networks net; some networks work.

Group Discussion 3• The APPC

– What do you want it to do?

– What is the added value?

Conclusions• Research is essential but…

• Other work is needed to ensure it contributes to the development and implementation.

• Clear lessons about how are emerging:– Political context is crucial – understand it to

maximize your chances– Figure out what evidence is needed and how to

package it for policy makers– Collaborate with other actors

Other sources of information:

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

or e-mail rapid@odi.org.uk for a copy of the RAPID CD-ROM

Evaluation• Please fill in the evaluation form