Upload
guestcadff0c
View
3.771
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Policy briefs as communication tools for policy research.Presentation by Arnaldo Pellini and Jeff KnezovichOID RAPIDAugust 2008, Dar es Salaam (Tanzania)
Citation preview
Policy Briefs:a development research communication tool
Arnaldo Pellini, PhD‘Micro-level Perspectives of Growth’ projectAugust 2008, Dar es Salaam
Content
1) Why policy briefs?
2) Planning your policy brief
3) Designing your policy brief
4) Conclusion
The research/policy divide• Divergent needs & pressures
regarding information usage• Specialised research expertise vs.
democratised knowledge• Policy engagement vs. objectivity of
researchers• Researchers’ hypothesis driven
processes vs. policy-makers time constraints
• Multiple and competing influences upon policy decisions
Evidence
Experience & Expertise
Judgement
Resources
Policy Context
Habits, Values & Tradition
Lobbyists & Pressure Groups
Pragmatics & Contingencies
Factors influencing policy making
Source: Phil Davies Impact to Insight Meeting, ODI, 2005
Part 1: Why a policy brief?
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 1: Why a policy brief?
• A short document that presents the findings and recommendations of a research project to a non-specialist readership
• A medium for exploring an issue and distilling lessons learned from research
• A vehicle for providing policy advice
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
• Recent ODI/ Sci-DevNet survey with developed and developing country policy makers working in field of Science, Technology and Innovation found: – 50% of policy-makers and 65% of researchers thought
dissemination of research findings for policy uptake insufficient
– 79% respondents ranked policy briefs as valuable communications tool
– Confirmed by expert and stakeholder interviews as means of informing decision-making processes
Part 1: Why a policy brief?
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 2: Planning your policy brief
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 2: Planning your policy brief
A policy brief should be:• A stand alone document
• Focused on a single topic
• Approximately 1,500 words (2-4 pages)
• A mix of text and graphics/ illustrations
• Provides suggestions for follow up reading
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 2: Planning your policy brief
• Evidence Quality evidence Credible messenger
• ContextUnderstanding of political context
• Engagement (links)Fostering linkages between researchers & policy-
makersOngoing dialogue
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 2: Planning your policy brief
Evidence• “What value does this have for the reader?”
• Develop a persuasive argument line: Clear purpose Cohesive argument Quality of evidence Transparency of evidence underpinning policy
recommendations
• Describe the urgency of the situation
• Speak in terms of benefits, advantages
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 2: Planning your policy brief
Ask yourself…
• Who are your readers?
• Who am I writing this brief for?
• How knowledgeable are they about the subject?
• How open are they to the message?
• What are their interests & concerns?
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 2: Planning your policy brief
Context
• Policy makers are not a homogenous group• Needs differ by sector (economic vs social) • Level of position (national vs sub-national) • Role in policy-making process (policymaker, researcher,
intermediary) • Point in the policy/project cycle (agenda setting vs
implementation vs M&E)
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 2: Planning your policy brief
Context
Policy-makers using scientific information at various stages of the policy cycle
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 2: Planning your policy brief
Engagement• Recommendations relevant &
realistic in context
• Results clear• Time pressures of policy-
makers to deliver policies with rapid & visible impacts
“I often read policy briefs for both my official and non
official needs. I cannot think of going forward without consulting policy briefs. It
expands my knowledge as I get an opportunity to understand what is
happening around me.” (Policy-maker, India)
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
Present evidence-informed opinions• Not shying away from opinion
and value judgements (vs. objectivity)
• 80% policy-makers valued researchers’ opinions about the policy implications of research
• Demand for opinion highest in South
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
Use clear language
• Define your purpose
• Identify salient supporting points
• Distill the points down to essential info
• Clear language & jargon free
64% respondents thought low levels of scientific understanding by policy makers is a significant obstacle
to uptake
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
Structure:
• Executive statement
• Introduction
• Methodology
• Results: what did we learn?
• Conclusions: what does it mean?
• Implications and Recommendations
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
Executive statement:• Distill the essence of the brief• Provide an overview to busy
readers• Interest the reader to read further• Appear on the cover, or top of the
first page• Be written last so that author is
clear about the over-arching message conveyed
Many in Congress and theadministration have called for newinvestments in education in orderto make the United States morecompetitive, with President Bushstressing the importance ofeducation in preparing youngAmericans to “fill the jobs of the21st century.” Yet advocates ofearly childhood education haveonly recently stressed theeconomic benefits of preschool programs, and it has been difficult to win support forthese short-term investments given the long-term nature of the benefits to theEconomy.The Brookings Institution, Policy Brief N. 153: http://www.brookings.edu/comm/policybriefs/pb153.pdf
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
Introduction:• Answers the question why is
this important or urgent?• Describes the research
objective• Acts as an overview of the
findings and conclusions• Creates curiosity about the rest of the brief
The increased fear of a pandemic atthe current time is due to the fact that theH5N1 strain causing the outbreak is capable of mutating rapidly and acquiring genes from viruses infecting other animal species, including humans. If the new virus contained sufficient human influenza virus genes, direct transmission from one person to another (human-to-human) could occur, heralding a possible influenza pandemic. The current H5N1 strain causes high mortality among humans, with mortality rates exceeding 50 per cent in most countries.AN EFFECTIVE REGIONAL RESPONSE TO THE THREAT OF A PANDEMIC UN ESCAP Issue N.1 2005
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
Methodology:• Describes relevant background• Describes issue and context of the investigation• Describes research and analysis activities
o What methods were used to conduct the study? o Who undertook the data collection and analysis?o Important to provide transparency of research process
but should not be overly technical• Opportunity to highlight strengths/ value-added of study
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
Results: What did we learn?• Provide a summary of the facts• Make content easy to follow,
understand• Start by painting a general picture• Move from general to specific • Base conclusions on results• Express ideas using strong
assertions• Make sure ideas are balanced,
defensible
Do The Electric Fences Work?
Overall, it was found that although the electric fencing does help…it is not capable of completely eliminating conflict. In each …area…technical as well as socioeconomic factors affect…success. Technical failures mainly affected the early fences…Other problems resulted from failure to take into account elephant behavior and distribution patterns.Elephants and Electric Fences: A Study From Sri Lanka. EEPSEA 2005-PB11
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
• Implications - what policy changes or actions do the results point to?
• Supported by evidence• Must be actionable• Less direct than
recommendations • Useful when advice not
requested or not welcome
Implications and recommendations
• Recommendations – what does the researcher think should happen?
• Supported by evidence• Must be actionable• Describe clearly what
should happen next• State as precise steps
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
Engage with audiences visually• Visually as well as conceptually
engaging • Would you be interested by the
document?• Often just 30-60 minutes spent by
policy makers reading information on an issue
• Over 80% respondents found graphs & explanatory diagrams helpful
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Why? Planning Design
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
• Sidebar or textbox – a short insert that examines a specific aspect of the research
• Additional to the main discussion• Aim to ‘hook’ a reader’s attention,
often through additional qualitative information or case studies
• Aim to make sidebars or textboxes:– Short, Descriptive– Stimulating (ask questions, provide
answers
Conclusions
Key ingredients of effective policy briefs
Evidence Persuasive Argument Clear purpose; cohesive argument; quality of evidence; transparency of evidence underpinning policy recommendations (e.g. a single study, a review of available evidence, etc.)
Authority Messenger (individual or organisation) has credibility in eyes of policy-maker
Policy context
Audience context specificity
Written to address specific context and needs of target audience;
Actionable Recommendations
Information linked to specific policy processes, clear and feasible recommendations on policy steps to be taken
Engagement Presentation of evidence-informed opinions
Presentation of author’s own views about policy implications of research findings; but clear identification of argument components that are opinion based
Clear Language/ Writing Style
Understandable by educated, non-specialist
Appearance/Design Visually engaging, presentation of information through charts, graphs, photos
Part 4: Conclusions
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Thank you
Group work: Session 1
Read the 2 pg policy brief entitled: “Challenges for Sustainable Development in the Mekong Delta”
Use the checklist and score the brief out of 5 (0 is for very poor, 5 for excellent) on each category. Be sure to note your reasons for your scores
Form 4 groups:• i) Trade liberalisation and employment, • 2) Private sector competitiveness, • 3) Value chain analysis, • 4) Migration and off-farm employment
Based on the presentations from the Sapa workshop identify: – Your audience? – Your value-added findings in 3 key points, 15 words each – 4 key policy implications stemming from your findings– 2 key policy recommendations to
• National government bureaucrats; • Provincial government bureaucrats; • Committee on Economic Affairs in the National Assembly; • Donors; • NGOs
– A topic and text for a textbox or sidebar
Group work: Session 2
RAPID FrameworkExternal Influences political context
evidencelinks
Politics and Policymaking
Media, Advocacy, Networking
Research, learning & thinking
Scientific information exchange & validation
Policy analysis, & research
Campaigning, Lobbying
Part 3: Designing your policy brief
Results: What does it mean?• Use this section to interpret your
data• Aim for concrete conclusions• Express ideas using strong
assertions• Make sure ideas are balanced,
defensible
One problem is the destruction of fences by illegal timber fellers and illicit liquor producers. Such activities can be policed by well-organized community-based groups.
Elephants and Electric Fences: A Study From Sri Lanka EEPSEA 2005-PB11
Why? Planning Design Conclusions
Group PlanningWeek 125 Aug
Week 2 1 Sept
Week 3 8 Sept
Week 4 15 Sept
Week 5 22 Sept
Week 6 29 Sept
Week 7 6 Oct
Other commitmentsResearch paper
Research papers sent (26 Sept)
Policy paper