“State of capacities and needs for greater evidence-based policy making in developing Asian countries” presented by Suresh Babu, IFPRI at the ReSAKSS-Asia Conference, Nov 14-16, 2011, in Kathmandu, Nepal.

1. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Suresh C. Babu
State of Capacities and Needs for Greater
Evidence-Based Policy making in developing
Asia – Case of Bangladesh, India, and
Vietnam
International Food Policy Research Institute
November 15, 2011

2. Organization of Presentation
 Broad changing policy making scenario
 A conceptual framework
 Issues and challenges
• Case of Bangladesh
• Case of India
• Case of Vietnam
 Lessons for Discussions

3. Changing Policy Needs Scenario
 Countries moving towards high value
agriculture
 Need for strengthening policy process for
evidence-based policies
 Productivity related policies
 Climate change, environment and
sustainability policies
 Role of trade, market, and private sectors
 Safety nets policies

4. Capacity Issues and challenges in
Policy Process
 Policy agenda setting for the
government
 Setting policy research priorities
 Helping in policy design based on
evidence
 Policy implementation
 Policy monitoring and evaluation
 Policy revisions and refinements

5. A conceptual framework
 Policy research needs to be placed in the
context of policy process – Capacity Value
Chains
 What types of policy processes exist?
 What are the elements of the policy
process?
 How does research fit in the policy process?
 How researchers and policy makers
interact?
 Where are the capacity gaps?

6. Linear Model of Policy Process
Source: Adopted from Porter and Hicks (1995)

7. Interactive Model of Policy Process
Policy Issues
Policy Agendas
Decision Stages
Policy
Characteristics
Arena of Debates and Dialogues
Policy Managers
Assess and Mobilize
Resources to Sustain
Reform
Policy Impact
Policy Outcome
Multiple Potential Outcomes
Policy Makers Assess and
Mobilize Resources to
Sustain Reform
Reject/Implement
Public Opinion/ Discussion
Source: Porter and Hicks (1995)

8. The Policy Research Cycle
1.
Identification
of Problems
and Priorities
2.
Research
Program
Development
3.
Research
Study Design
4.
Data
Collection,
Processing,
and Analysis
5.
Preparation
of Research
Outputs and
Publications
6.
Dissemination
for Policy
Impact
Network of
collaborators in policy-
research and analysis
Linkages and alliances
with policy makers,
political leaders, and
parliamentarians
Collaboration with
stakeholders, NGOs,
CSOs, and media
Linkages with external
players, donor
community, and global
research community
Political, Organizational, Institutional, and Cultural Context

9. Broad Stages of Policy Process and the Role of PROs
Setting policy
agenda
Policy analysis/
formulation
Policy decision
making
Policy
implementation
Policy monitoring/
Impact assessment
Policy revision/
correction
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Stages
of
Policy
Cycle

10. 1
2
3
4
5
6
Global Agenda Setting
Regional Policy
Challenges
Country Level Policy
Priorities
Problem Identification
1
Content/
Ideas
Policy
Research/
Evidence
2
Political Process
Opportunities for
Policy Influence
External Factors
International and
Global, regional, national policy
networks
Policy learning and diffusion
3
4
Institutional and Capacity
Strengthening and
Understanding /
Rational Choice by Policy
makers? 5
Strengthening Advocacy
Coalition of Policy makers,
Donors, Administrations
Advocacy organizations, NGOs,
CSOs
Competition among these
subsystems
6
Strengthening and mobilizing policy
entrepreneurships of actors &
players
Identify opportunities for policy
change
Look out for policy windows
7
Policy Agenda
Setting/ Policy
Decision
making,
Implementation
8
Solution Feedback?
Political, Administrative, Cultural
Problem Feedback?
A Unifying Framework of Policy Process & the Role of
Research

11. , , , , , and are respectively the stages of Policy Research Cycle1 2 3 4 5 6
Intensity of policy communications
+ + Linear Stage Heuristic Model of Policy Process
+ + + Interactive Country Concentration Model
+ + + + Multiple Stream Model
+ + + + Institutional Development and Rational Choice Model
+ + + + Policy Learning and Diffusion Model
+ + + + Policy Entrepreneurship Model ( Context, Content, Connectivity
+ + + Advocacy Coalition Model
+ + + + + + + Unifying Model of Policy Influence
Unifying Model of Policy Influence: Further Discussion

12. State of capacities for evidence-
based policy making
 Wide-ranging levels of capacity
 Larger countries have more number
(not necessarily quality for policy
influence)
 Most research capacity is academic
 Policy capacity is limited
 Existing capacity is not connected
well to policy process
 Quality of capacity leaves much to
be desired.

13. State of capacities for evidence-
based policy making - 2
 Typology possible?
 China, India
 Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Kazakhstan
 Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Vietnam,
Philippines, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan
 Nepal, Cambodia, Laos, Timor-Leste,
Bhutan, Tajikistan
 Afghanistan

14. What skills are needed to be effective
in the policy process?
 Thematic skills
 Analytical skills
 Research skills
 Policy communication skills
 Policy advocacy skills
 Policy process skills

15. Organizational Structure of Bangladesh Institute of
Development Studies, Bangladesh
Director
General
Board of
Academic
Advisors
Policy
Consultative
Committee
Deputy
Director
Policy Research
Program 1
Agricultural
R&D and
Production
Policy Research
Program 2
Natural Resource
and Environment
Policy Research
Program 3
Integrated Rural-
Urban
Development
Policy Research
Program 4
Rural
Development &
Decision Support

16. NCAAP
Director General
Board of
Directors
Governing
Council
Publication,
Knowledge
Management
Media and
Public Affairs
Growth,
Trade,
and
Economic
Management
Investment
Climate, Physical
and Economic
Infrastructure
Agriculture,
Rural
Development,
and Resource
Management
Household
Behavior,
Poverty, and
Human
Development
Organizational Structure of National Council for
Applied Economic Research (NCAAP), India

17. Board of
Directors
Management
Divisions
Research
Divisions
Independent
Centers
Personneland
Administration
FinanceDivision
ScienceManagement
Division
StrategyandPolicy
ResearchDivision
NaturalResourcesand
Environment
Centerfor
AgriculturePolicy
CenterforRural
Development
InformationCenterfor
AgricultureandRural
Development
AgriculturalPolicyand
Strategy
MarketandCommodity
ResearchDivision
RuralInstitutionResearch
Division
Organizational Structure of Institute of Policy and Strategy for
Agriculture and Rural Development (IPSARD), Vietnam

18. What capacity needed for evidence based
food policy making - Bangladesh
 Thematic capacity exists at all levels – high level of
interaction with global systems
 Some research capacity in think tanks and academic
institutions
 Analytical capacity needs improvement – Ministry of Food,
Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of health and Family
Welfare
 Project based capacity strengthening – at all levels – does
not add up
 Academic institutions – Dhaka university, Agricultural
universities, need capacity to build capacity
 Limited connection of researchers to policy makers – policy
communications and advocacy need strengthening

19. What capacities needed for evidence based
food policy making - India
 Adequate thematic capacity in several Research in think
tanks and academic institutions
 Analytical capacity is fairly developed but not effectively
used – Ministry of Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Rural
Development, ICAR; weak at the state level
 Few well developed think tanks for research based capacity
strengthening – many average institutions
 Academic institutions – Agricultural universities – declining
in quality -- need capacity to build capacity
 Weak connection of researchers to policy makers – need
strengthening – few researchers tend to dominate policy
process
 State levels capacity needs strengthening where
agricultural policy is implemented

20. What capacities needed for evidence based
policy making - Vietnam
 Thematic capacity is improving but still weak – eg: Climate
change
 Research capacity in think tanks not well developed but
improving with international collaboration
 Academic institutions have low capacity
 Analytical capacity is still weak – Ministry of Agriculture
and Rural Development
 Scattered project based capacity strengthening
 Academic institutions – Agricultural universities, need
capacity to connect them to policy making
 Tight connection of selected researchers in policy process
– but not highly transparent

21. Research – Policy - Capacity
Interactions
 How do researchers understand the policy and political
context?
 How do researchers get to know the policy makers and
actors?
 How do researchers respond to demand?
 Are they practical in their recommendations?
 What is their strategy to establish their credibility?
 What are the communications strategies?
 How does the researcher and policy makers network to
bring evidence to policy making?

22. Concluding Thoughts
 Translation of evidence into action?
 Capacity Value Chain approach to set prioritize
capacity strengthening for evidence based policy
making
 Research and analytical capacity need to be placed
in the context of policy process
 Understanding the various roles of institutions in
the capacity building process
 Understanding and address the disconnect between
the policy research and policy making through
capacity strengthening

23. Thank you