Thomas S. Jayne POLICY SEMINAR Strengthening policy research and analysis capacity: The role of institutional development programs JUL 21, 2022 - 9:00 TO 10:30AM EDT

1. Building Locally Led Agricultural Policy Analysis
Capacity in Africa
Drawing from:
Food Security Policy Innovation Lab Synthesis Report IV, 2019
Thomas Jayne, Suresh Babu, Duncan Boughton, Sheryl Hendriks, Elizabeth Mkandawire, Ferdi Meyer,
John M. Staatz, Saweda Liverpool-Tasie, Eric Crawford, Paul Dorosh & Kimsey Savadogo
• https://www.canr.msu.edu/resources/synthesis_report_iv

2. Main message from report:
 Compared to 25 years ago, today many Africans possess
international quality analytical skills
 While individual capacity development activities remain
important, an increasingly important success factor for
African policy research institutes is institutional capacity
development to enable these institutes to thrive in a complex
ecosystem with many actors
 International partners (donors, CG, universities) can
provide the needed institutional capacity development
support but may require modifications in their mandate and
business model.

3. Four illustrative points that
highlight the salience of
institutional capacity
development

4. Point 1: Leadership and management are critical
determinants of the performance and
sustainability of local policy research units
• Navigating a fledgling research institute in a crowded ecosystem requires
unique skills and judgement
• Strategic and tactical guidance to leadership may influence an institute’s
success, perhaps even more so than the more common capacity building
activities that focus on developing technical skills of individual researchers

5. Point 2: The existing structure of incentives impedes (in
some respects) the development of independent APRIs in
Africa: Some personal reflections from my MSU experience
• International research groups are often motivated to create their own local offices,
gain trust and influence with local governments. Noticed resentment building from
African research units that could not compete because of limited resources
• African organizations often invited to proposal development at 11th hour, or hire
individuals as consultants rather than engage the local institution.
• Some donors unintentionally undermine locally-led policy institutes by creating
parallel policy channels to influence government, e.g.,
• embedding their own chosen experts within government offices
• creating new institutes accountable to donors rather than to national stakeholders

6. Point 3: Careful reflection is needed as to why there
appears to be limited demand for research evidence and
policy guidance by African governments
• Demand for policy guidance is MUCH greater than commonly
believed – but they are very choosy about who they approach
• Demand is influenced by
• Trust / who the institute is accountable to
• Established personal track record, which generally requires being stationed
for many years in the country / perception of “transience”
• Willingness to provide practical guidance, especially how to implement a
particular program or policy in the country (not the comparative advantage
of many international research groups)

7. Point 4: Evidenced-based policy guidance
requires data generation, a costly public good
• A few donors have shown willingness to invest in data generation, but others free-
ride on these investments (USAID/Kenya example  loss of support for Tegemeo)
• Institutes require core support that recognize the fixed costs of running a
sustainable institute. Some donors only willing to pay marginal cost of hiring a
consultant with access to the institute’s data to address their objectives
• A framework for pooling resources among donors/foundations to finance data
collection activities can
• strengthen the capacity of local research units to provide evidence-based analysis
• provide a basis for meaningful collaboration between local and international research units

8. Summary
• There is much that donors and international research teams could
do differently to more effectively build the capacities of national
agricultural research institutions
• There is also much that management of national agricultural
research institutions could do to enhance their own performance
and sustainability
• Most ag policy units are accountable to national universities or boards of
directors – how can they demand improved performance?