The document discusses the policy-making process in Ethiopia, highlighting the government's predominant role and the lack of participation from various stakeholders. It identifies constraints such as insufficient data, analytical skills, and roles of external influences, while also emphasizing the importance of effective communication and building networks to enhance policy relevance and credibility. The authors propose strategies to engage with policymakers and improve the flow of research evidence to support evidence-based decision-making.

1. Contributing to evidence-based Policy making Ranjitha Puskur, ILRIBerhanu Adenew, Ethiopian Economic AssociationNile Basin Development ChallengeScience and Reflection WorkshopAddis Ababa, 4-6 May 2011

2. Policy making process in Ethiopia Policy priorities are led by the government’s visionsagriculture and rural centred development (ADLI)Poverty reduction and food securityCommercialization, export promotionThe Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (MoFED) formulates macro policies while line ministries formulate sectoral policies. Policy making in Ethiopia is a government’s domain (less space for private sector, CSOs/ NGOs, farmers institutions);Participation has been largely lacking, but gradually emerging

3. Policy making process and constraints Policy making process is less known for taking evidence from grassroots or research and (through M&E)Lack of adequate and current datasetsLack of adequate analytical skills, models and knowledgeLack of independence in policy analysis, i.e., bias towards promoting only government or donors’ interest Lack of informed debate among the various stakeholdersWeak networking between the different stakeholders

4. Relevant policies …..policies have been adopted , adapted and under implementation over the last two decades government intervenes in the areas of its comparative advantagepolicy elements/components relevant to RMS and water management spread over a number of policies

5. The ODI RAPID Framework(Court and Young 2003)The Context – political, social and economic structures, political processes, institutional pressures, incremental vs radical change etc.External Influences Geopolitical, economic and cultural influences; donor policies, etcThe Links between policyand research communities – networks, relationships, power, competing discourses, trust, knowledge etc.The Evidence – credibility, the degree it challenges received wisdom, research approaches and methodology, simplicity of the message, how it is packaged etc

6. Political Context: Key AreasThe macro political context (democracy, governance, media freedom; academic freedom) The sector / issue process (Policy uptake = demand – contestation) [NB Demand: political and societal]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)(Court and Young 2003)

7. Evidence: Relevance and credibilityKey factor – did it provide a solution to a problem? Relevance:Topical relevance – What to do? Operational usefulness – How to do it? :Credibility: Research approachOf researcher > of evidence itselfStrenuous advocacy efforts are often neededCommunication(Court and Young 2003)

8. Links: Feedback and NetworksFeedback processes often prominent in successful casesTrust & legitimacyNetworks:Epistemic communities – knowledge-based experts and claim possession of policy relevant knowledgePolicy networks – few actors, close working relations, development and delivery of policiesAdvocacy coalitions – develop stronger public image, bring together diverse resources and ideasThe role of individuals: connectors, mavens and salesmen(Court and Young 2003)

9. Policy EntrepreneursSimon Maxwell - ODIStorytellersNetworkersEngineersFixers

10. So what do we need to do? Get to know the policymakers.

11. Identify friends and foes.

12. Prepare for policy opportunities.

13. Look out for policy windows.

14. Work with them – seek commissions

15. Strategic opportunism – prepare for known events + resources for others

16. Who are the policymakers?

17. Is there demand for ideas?

18. What is the policy process?

19. Establish credibility

20. Provide practical solutions

21. Establish legitimacy.

22. Present clear options

23. Use familiar narratives.

24. Build a reputation

25. Action-research

26. Pilot projects to generate legitimacy

27. Good communication

28. What is the current theory?

29. What are the narratives?

30. How divergent is it?

31. Get to know the others

32. Work through existing networks.

33. Build coalitions.

34. Build new policy networks.

35. Build partnerships.

36. Identify key networkers, mavens and salesmen.

37. Use informal contacts

38. Who are the stakeholders?

39. What networks exist?

40. Who are the connectors, mavens and salesmen?(Court and Young 2003)

41. CommunicationScience often explains the familiar in terms of the unfamiliar – Lewis Wolpertresearchers are often not good at communicating what they know, and what they think should happen, to the people who make the decisions speak naively of policy issues, demonstrate little or no awareness of current policyover-technical, and often need drastic editing to make the outputs readable and understandable to key players

42. CommunicationResearch can only affect policy in a significant way if it is appropriately communicatedResearch results need to be well understood by key stakeholders and have to reach them before decisions have been takenMultiple approaches need to be pursuedCommunications to be pursued as a continuous activity between key stakeholder groups and researchers

43. CommunicationClear strategyIntensive efforts - resourcesPackagingInteractiveMultiple approachesSeeing is believing

44. Know your messagesContext, location and time specific messagesSome broad-themed messagesKnow your audiencePrimary - organizations with which the project deals directly and presumably will have mandates to scale-up and scale-out the outcomes of the projectSecondary - entities and communities the project usually reaches through the facilitation of the primary audience members

45. A continual dialogue through a variety of communications vehicles – stickiness factorPersonal dialogues with national policy makersEngagement with mass media to influence policy making via public opinion and its shapers

46. Communications spectrumPrinted materialProject BrochureProject NewsletterWorking Paper SeriesSuccess Stories SeriesCommodities SheetsRegular articles (a weekly or monthly column) in local newspapers

47. Communications spectrumElectronic MediaProject websitee-NewsletterSuccess clips - video productionRegular program on national or regional radioPublic service announcements (Regular 1, 2, or 3 minute radio or TV spots that communicate a single message repeatedly – something like an advert with a twist)

48. Communications spectrumEventsStakeholder ConferencesAgricultural Technology WorkshopsBoard MeetingsExecutive Group MeetingsResearch Management GroupSponsorship of Annual Awards for Best Performing Woredas, Farmers, Private SectorSponsoring a permanent showcase (Agricultural Hall of Fame)

49. Communications spectrumGovernment RelationsInformal One-to-one MeetingsSponsorship of portions of targeted government events, meetings

50. How do we ensure our evidence is credible, relevant. practical and operationally useful?How and what kind of feedback processes and networks should we develop to communicate our messages?What kind of communication vehicles would be most appropriate for communicating research to policy makers in the Ethiopian NBDC context?How do we go about understanding policy better? Are we aware of key decision moments?

51. Thank you