Influencing Policy

Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategy

Current donor conditionality demands civil society participation in planning and in the implementation of plans under the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper programme (PRSP) introduced by the World Bank and IMF. At present many governments also develop policies at national and local levels with extremely limited participation of poor women and men, civil society, and also the legislature. During the past decade substantial experience has been developed with poor women and mens’ participation in project design, particularly through PRA/RRA1 techniques. These approaches have been further developed into Participatory Poverty Assessments (PPAs) 2, which have the potential to become an extremely useful tool for poverty reduction planning and implementation3.

It is a requirement of the PRSP process that the strategy is drawn up by Government together with a broad range of national stakeholders including civil society. This obviously offers the potential for the further development of institutional obligations towards increased civil society participation. While this process of change is fraught with problems, it provides substantially improved access for civil society to policymaking and implementation.

Oxfam’s view is that poor women and men have a ‘right to be heard’ and that ‘voice poverty’, the denial of people’s right to influence the decisions that affect their lives, and the lack of accountability of decision-makers, are central causes of impoverishment and suffering in the world.

The World Bank also highlights ‘voicelessness and powerlessness’ as one of the four main dimensions of poverty, as defined by the poor themselves:

‘Those materially deprived feel acutely their lack of voice, power and independence. This helplessness subjects them to rudeness, humiliation, shame, inhumane treatment, and exploitation at the hands of the institutions of state and society’4

And if they are brought in to consult, unless consultation is meaningful it merely means consult and ignore, Another problem is whether those consulted, CSOs or Parliamentarians, are adequately representing the views of those they work with, or represent. Specific methodologies: Participatory Poverty Assessments; Surveys and Public fora are required to ensure that the voices of women and marginalised groups are adequately represented.

The PRSP provides a framework to prioritise poverty reduction in the policy of government, but also IFI, and donor, policy and programming – and in all areas, the issue of pro-poor growth and redistribution, budgets, gender equity, to social sector provision, agriculture, industry, poverty monitoring and governance. The PRSP also requires the development of greater efficiency, transparency and accountability in public expenditure management (PEM). The focus is on targeted and costed policies, and as such on implementation and measurable impact. It is a requirement of the PRSP process that the strategy is drawn up by Government together with a broad range of national stakeholders including civil society. It is important that Civil Society Organisations are clear on what level of participation they expect and also that they assess what level actually is the case. It is essential that Civil Society Organisations have the tools to give a comprehensive and critical assessment itself of how participatory the process has been. This is particularly true given that the Guidelines for the Joint Staff Assessment currently do not require IMF/WB staff to assess the quality of the participatory process in producing a PRSP, only to describe it.

Varying levels or intensities of participation in policy and practice can be described in information sharing, If those in power are serious about sharing information, then drafts should be accessible to an informed reader with clear summaries; in consulting, since there is no obligation to listen to the views of others or to incorporate those views, unless consultation is meaningful and adequately represent the views; in joint decision making, since strong civil society advocacy and campaign platforms, or close relations with Parliaments can help considerably to increase the voice of civil society in decision-making; in empowerment-initiation and control by stakeholders, since this level of participation is more likely to occur in terms of Civil Society monitoring of policy implementation. Developing independent monitoring initiatives gives Civil Society the chance to really take control over the process.

Currently participation in PRSPs has generally ranged between mixed and poor, and Civil Society Organisations around the world have raised this as a major issue5. This is due firstly to time frame moving extremely fast since countries influenced by the nature of existing reforms overestimated their capacity and felt able to move forward quickly. Secondly, given that interim PRSPs did not require participation, the end result in some countries has been that substantial policy-making has been undertaken with no participation at all and was not changed later. Thirdly, many civil society organisations have been ill prepared for strong engagement in the development of PRSPs; in many countries, Parliaments have also played a marginal role. Lastly these above reasons are further compounded for women’s groups and those civil society organisations concerned with gender.

Despite these problems, the PRSP still represents an opportunity for policy influence by civil society, however small. Civil society should commit to doing its utmost to exploit this opportunity whilst continuing to push for greater participation and involvement at all times.

Influencing the Content of Policy

The policy process (formulation and implementation) is a complex and most importantly ‘intensely political matter’24. It involves many competing interests vying for the distribution of scarce resources.

In terms of formulation, this means that it is only by giving a realistic appraisal of the different interests and power being exercised in the process of drawing up policy that we can maximise the influence we can have over its content.

The challenge for civil society is to enter the debate not just with criticisms, but with proposals too. Developing proposals requires consultation within civil society, coupled with research and analysis if necessary. Taking proposals forward requires an advocacy strategy to maximise the impact of proposals and to undertake all measures to ensure they are adopted. Ultimately the development of a national development plan, or a poverty reduction strategy, is a political process. Aside from political action, civil society can help to influence the political debate by mobilising public campaigns – to show to political representatives of the people that there is genuine public concern around public policy-making. National policies have rarely been openly debated, this needs to be changed. Central to this is calling on governments to carry out assessments of the policy options available and their potential impact on poverty. In recent years the bank and the fund have come under increasing pressure to agree to carry out Poverty and Social Impact Assessments (PSIA): these are assessments of the social and poverty impacts of policy reforms they are proposing. They have committed to carrying these out and as such they can be asked when and how they intend to do them and how they will involve all stakeholders6.

Although insider strategies such as this are very useful, there is also always a place for good quality independent research to influence policy debates and generate policy choice. Civil society has a pivotal role in generating such research. Civil society can play a key role in ensuring gender issues are integrated into all national policies rather than simply regarding women as a special interest group. For example advocating to increase girls education and change perceptions of policy makers and communities on girls rights to education. One example is advocacy to see government policy implemented to prevent very young marriages that are a major obstacle to girl’s education.

Maximizing policy influence

Focus
It is vital that civil society groups focus down on areas that they believe have the most impact on the poor, or on areas where they have the most expertise. Within any national or local coalition of civil society, different actors can lead on different issues depending on their strengths and weaknesses. Prioritisation is about picking 3-5 key issues and doing them well. This means ignoring other issues, and making tough choices.

Research
All too often Civil Society is accused of simply criticising without giving good arguments or alternatives. This undermines the credibility of Civil Society, and the extent to which its views are heeded. Although strong arguments do not guarantee success, nevertheless you have to know what you are talking about if you are to successfully influence policy. Researches need to argue your purpose well using credible data. Consider all aspects of social identity. Make every attempt to generate disaggregate information that establishes the specific impacts on marginalized and poor the way they see it. Clearly showing how policy affects the poor, and highlighting how poor women and men feel about the effects of certain policies provides an extremely convincing argument that everyone can understand.

Key messages
With growing openings for increased participation, there is now more room to propose alternatives. What is good, what is harmful and what alternative measures could be implemented instead for poor women and men in current government action and proposed reforms.

Briefings
Preparing written briefings on issues - short, clear and concise, with a few key recommendations are vital (4 recommendations are better than 10). Briefings are an important tool in influencing government officials, politicians, media etc.

Targets
Identifying decision making institutions or bodies concerning policy changes are important. A useful approach is what is known as an ‘insider/outsider’ strategy, whereby civil society organisations develop close contacts inside the target in order to influence them, but retain a tougher external or public position in meetings, in the media and in campaigning. When combining advocacy with strong campaigning, this approach is essential, but again, care is needed if relationships become too close – you need to always keep in mind your overall objectives and purpose. It is important to spot where the power lies, to negotiate, and to be clear about the bottom line. Identify your allies and opponents, in the media, politicians, academics, policy makers. Build relationships, trust and credibility.

In most countries undertaking PRSPs, the Ministry of Finance has generally taken over management of the process, and thus poverty reduction has gained a higher profile and higher importance within government (rather than being seen as some add-on in the Ministry of Social Affairs for example). Clearly officials in the Ministry of Finance will become key targets, but other line ministries are important too, the Cabinet, the President and his/her office, key Parliamentary committees or other similar structures in the legislature and lastly key donors.

Lobbying: Attending Meetings
Meetings are an important part of lobbying, but it should be remembered that without other pressure, meetings alone are unlikely to be sufficient to achieve the change you want. Access does not equal influence. Informal meetings are very useful, over a drink or something to eat, they help build relationships and trust, and share ideas while avoiding fixed positions. Sometimes it may be appropriate to be tough in a meeting, but it is rarely appropriate to be confrontational. Generally engagement is more effective than condemnation.

Building effective coalition/alliance

All too frequently civil society undermines itself through lack of co-operation. Sometimes civil society groups can be more concerned with their own profile, or fundraising efforts, than in working together for policy change. However, the fact remains that with regards to influencing national or local strategies, civil society can achieve far more together than separately. Develop consensus over aims and objectives. Establish whose agenda you are working to; and work through differences of emphasis or tone before implementation. Remember at all times to focus and prioritise. Identify different roles. Ensure that everyone knows what is expected of them. At the first meetings ensure as broad a representation as possible, but do not be disheartened if the real work is done by a handful at first. As you build your reputation others will become more involved; in the meantime consult them and inform them of all decisions.


Media Strategy
Unless your advocacy has to be carried out behind the scenes use the media as an important ally to achieve your aims. What follows are a few tips on working with the media.
__Who are you trying to influence?
__Where do they get their information from?
__Be familiar with the media.
__How can you get your message carried by the media?
__Develop a relationship with key journalists; find out what they are interested in, what they will cover.
__In many countries, radio is the main media source for the poor. However, often it is controlled by the state so there is a limit to what news it will cover. Here positive and constructive criticism based on issues is most likely to be successful.
__Think globally, international media can put pressure on your government or international institutions and donors.
__What do you want to say? - Draw up a press release (see box below).
__Timing – Think of when will you have most impact with your media work

Public Action/Campaigning
Where there are vested interests involved and serious obstacles to change, more pressure is required. A strong public campaign on an issue can help push for change in a powerful way, building substantial public support for pro-poor change. Identify activities that will help develop a groundswell of public opinion in favour of your message. Be aware of how a campaign may affect your relationships inside government or institutions when these are the targets of your campaign. Have a simple and strong message, and be supported by strong evidence. be sustainable through a progression of actions and milestones, while being flexible and reactive.

Plan of Activities
Draw up timetabled outline of activities required to implement the strategies. Make sure that the component parts interrelate:
__Specify who will do what.
__Bear in mind the particular opportunities for influencing - e.g. key governmental meetings.
__Be realistic about the time-scale. Allow flexibility.
__Identify materials that you will use to further the strategy. Think carefully about materials appropriate to the different targets - e.g. press releases or politicians' briefings should be short (one page), pithy, accurate and convincing. Materials must include thoroughly researched information, be well argued and objective.
__Identify allies (beyond the coalition) who can be approached at different points in the implementation of the strategy - e.g. individuals within the State apparatus? Researchers?


Analysing a Budget: Some Tips
There are two simple questions to be answered in analysing a budget which will give you good analysis:
1) Have allocations to programmes or sectors actually increased since the previous year, and
2) How do they compare to expenditures in other programmes or sectors?
This is easier to do with sectors (e.g. Health) than with programmes (eg. Primary Health Care) as information is often not disaggregated in a budget in such a way as to make this possible. (For example, Primary Health Care could be made up of 40 separate budget lines and would itself be undefined as a budget category).
To calculate real increases or decreases there is a need to deflate the proposed figures to last years prices. To do this the following steps need to be followed:
1. First take the approved figures for last year (not the revised figures as these are unreliable although you can still highlight huge differences between approved and revised where they exist).
2. Then take the comparable figure for this year’s proposed figures.
3. Find the agreed average inflation figure for last year (called the ‘deflator’ and available from the World Bank/ IMF and the National Statistics Office in most cases).
4. Reduce the proposed figure for this year to make it comparable in real terms to last year. This will enable you to demonstrate the real change. To do this take the official deflator figure (say it is 30%) and subtract that from the proposed amount. So if for instance the Government is proposing to spend $100 million on education this year, up from $80 million last year but the deflator is 30% then in real terms education spending is $70 million which is actually a decrease.
Once you have these real figures you can then make comparisons not simply with last year but also with other expenditures. For example it can be useful to do the calculations for social sectors and also ‘accountability agencies’ such as Audit Offices, Human Rights Commissions and Ombudsmen and then compare these to ‘non poverty reducing expenditures’ such as State Residences, Defence and Debt Service.
If data is available at a programme level, you can do the same thing for intra-sectoral expenditures. For example how does the amount spent at the Health Ministry Headquarters compare with the amount spent on Primary Health Care?
These simple calculations can often give you very powerful conclusions and points to make either through Parliament or through the Media. However, make sure you check your figures very carefully and use the same source documents for all of them.
Lastly, always try to make concrete suggestions for alternative allocation of resources that would be more pro-poor.


Source: Oxfam, Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Guide

1 Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)/Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA)
2 Participatory Poverty Assessment (PPA)
3 Further information on the IDT can be found at www.developmentgoals.org
4 World Bank World Development Report 2000-2001: Attacking Poverty.
5 See for example ‘Ignoring the Experts’ Christian Aid October 2001 (available on the internet- see links in annex two)
6 For commitments from the Bank and the Fund see ‘Poverty Reduction Papers: Progress in Implementation’ Development Committee Communique April 18th 2001