The document discusses the challenges of policy communication in Ukraine, highlighting the disconnect between government and civil society, and the limitations of current public consultation processes. It contrasts Ukrainian practices with European standards, noting the need for more structured and effective consultation with stakeholders. Additionally, it emphasizes the necessity for think-tanks to engage meaningfully with advocacy groups and to provide quality analysis that addresses the needs of various sectors in Ukraine's evolving political landscape.

1. The Art of Effectively
Communicating Policy Solutions
or
Swimming in an Empty Pool
Vira Nanivska, ICPS
TTF Workshop
13.05.2011, Kyiv, Ukraine

2. ICPS Policy Communication Concept
All policy decisions affect people’s interests.
The success or failure of any policy depends on
how fully the policy in question matches group
interests.
Communication, that is, analysis and
consultations, is the core of effective public
policy.
The methodology for public consultations is
adapted from European Commission, US and
Canadian models.

3. Factors that define
Think-Tank policy impact in Ukraine
Prevailing concept of public policy in
Ukraine.
Comparison with EU guidelines on public
consultations.
Government capacity to digest TT product.
The quality of the TT product.
Public need for this policy product.
Donor policies on who/what to support.
3

4. Prevailing Concept of
Public Policy Communication in Ukraine
NGO side
The Ukrainian concept of civil society communication with the government is
very different from European practice. It is not structured, but rather based on
moral (the Government is bad) and not technical (what and how to do it)
principles.
Most NGOs set up through international aid follow 25 year-old principles:
– Dissident struggle with the government;
– No concept of “Informed decisions;”
– The quality of TT products, i.e. their lack of policy analysis, does not make them
indispensable.
– Huge efforts to undertake policy consultation came down to civic councils established
in every government institution across Ukraine after the Orange Revolution. These
councils neither represent communities or interest groups, nor do they take part in
government decision-making processes.
4

5. Prevailing Concept of Public Policy
Communication in Ukraine
Government side
The Government’s formal consultation protocol relies on
engaging exclusively with government institutions.
Research is commissioned by the Government exclusively
from academic institutions.
There is no place in Government procedures for
consultations with non-government interest groups.
The Government does not work with the concepts of
stakeholder positions or mobilizing a constituency for
reforms.
5

6. Public consultations in the EU
In 2002 the EC issued the final Communication COM 704 “Towards a
reinforced culture of consultation and dialog - General principles and
minimum standards for consultation with interested parties by the
Commission.”
It identifies the forms of interaction between European Institutions and
society. The aim is to make administration and policy-making understandable
and credible in the eyes of voters.
 through the European  through institutionalized  through direct contact
Parliament as the advisory bodies of the EU with interested parties
elected representative (Economic and Social
of the citizens of Committee and the
Europe Committee of the Regions),
based on their role
according to the Treaties
6

7. Public consultations in the EU
The Economic and Social Committee established a set of
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA for “civil dialog” to ensure that relevant
parties are given the opportunity to express their views.
European organizations must:
be permanently established at the community level;
provide direct access to member expertise and hence rapid
and constructive consultation;
represent general concerns that correspond with the interests
of European society;
be comprised of bodies that are recognised at the Member
State level as representatives of particular interests.
(et cetera. see White Paper on European Governance)
7

8. Public consultations in the EU
CONTENT CRITERIA
The consultation process must make clear:
what issues are being developed;
what mechanisms are being used for consultation;
who is being consulted and why;
what influences decisions in policy formulation;
which interests the consulted groups represent;
how inclusive that representation is.
8

9. Ukrainian Government Capacity to Digest
There is no working democratic procedure in the Government
for preparing informed decisions.
There is a policy analysis template for submitting documents,
but no quality control over how this template is used.
There are no procedures for consultations with stakeholders;
only Government institutions are consulted.
Only academic institutes are hired by the government to do
research and analysis. Unlike the West, academic institutions,
and not think-tanks, prepare arguments.
9

10. The Quality of Think-Tank Products
What should be in the TT product but never or rarely is
Understanding
– of the government political situation concerning the
policy issue in question.
– of how this position is connected to ratings and to
future elections.
Identification
– of the interests and positions of major stakeholders.
– of the most realistic constituency for the policy in
question.
10

11. The Quality of Think-Tank Products
The relationship between TT & advocacy groups
There is no or little interaction between
advocacy groups and think-tanks in the
effort to influence government policy.
Think-tanks are not able to organize
pressure, while advocacy groups have no
content.
11

12. The Quality of Think-Tank Products
Global Context for Ukrainian Policy Content
Ukraine’s think-tanks all operate in the same
convoluted, controversial reality:
Russia, on one side, tireless in its economic
expansion and sparing no effort to prevent
Ukraine’s rapprochement to EU.
Fatigué Europe, on the other side, mortally
worried about irritating Russia.
Inside Ukraine, a ruthless revolution of
desovietization, wherein state property is
transferred into private hands.
12

13. The Quality of Think-Tank Products
Global Context for Ukrainian Policy Content
The Challenges for Ukrainian Think-Tanks (Russia)
How can a way be found to work with Russia
and not be swallowed?
European-minded NGOs maintain that, because
relations with Russia cannot be equal and useful,
Ukraine should only work with the EU. They hope
that ignoring Russia will do away with the Russian
threat to Ukraine.
Instead of avoiding, we need to face this challenge
and develop a Ukrainian plan.
13

14. The Quality of Think-Tank Products
Global Context for Ukrainian Policy Content
The Challenges for Ukrainian Think-Tanks (Europe)
However irritated and jaded Europe may have
become with Ukraine, Ukraine has no choice but to
change Europe’s mind on the need for expansion
and the importance of forward thinking.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian European-minded NGOs do
not dare to work with European governments. The
most we can do is to berate the Ukrainian
government when talking to Europe.
14

15. Public need for a policy product
Today in Ukraine, the government, business and civil
society interest groups all have a need for quality analysis,
diagnoses, and recommendations.
– The Government: because of failing reforms, it
needs to learn how to mobilize support.
– Small business: because of the threat of being
annihilated as a class, it needs to learn how to
influence policy, not just specific private interest.
– Big business: because they are losing a qualified
workforce, they need to influence government
policy.
15

16. The Quality of Think-Tank Products
Global Context for Ukrainian Policy Content
The Challenges for Ukrainian Think-Tanks
(inside Ukraine)
The challenge for independent think-tanks is to understand the
transition process, to diagnose the problems of transition, and
to work ceaselessly to explain and provide the missing parts of
the new social system.
The transfer of property from state to private hands cannot
possibly be just or fair. The strongest get the most. People who
are in a rush to grab property cannot possibly think about the
governmental institution or the state regulation of this process.
They can only rush. Think-tanks have a role to play here.
NGO rhetoric is mostly about protesting and criticizing, without
knowing what needs to be really done.
16

17. Public need for a policy product
The Bermuda Triangle
Think-tanks in Ukraine find themselves in an unprecedented
policy space and get lost in a Bermuda triangle of:
The government,
which doesn’t “see”
them
Advocacy/pressure Stakeholders who
groups, who aren’t don’t know about
connected to them them
17

18. International Aid Policy
Aid projects are disconnected and not strategic.
Project outcomes are not used as an asset for other
projects.
Donors are immersed in content and not interested
in a policy analysis format.
Except OSI TTF, no donor is interested in the specific
professional qualifications needed to conduct policy
analysis.
18

19. International Aid Policy
Projects to develop an influential civil society have
not focused on reforming the government or helping
it establish the structures, procedures, standards
and skills needed to work with civil society.
The treasure of over 20 years of aid projects has
been lost to Ukraine because there are no databases
of projects, of people trained, or of training
materials.
19

20. Looking Ahead
Programs need to switch from funding consultations
with an undifferentiated civil society to funding
consultations with defined interest groups.
Consultations with interest groups should follow
established procedures.
Every NGO working in European integration and civil
society should have a very clearly established role and
specialization.
TA beneficiaries should not concentrate on a specific
sector (e.g. agriculture or the arts) but on bringing
about transformational reforms in the country (e.g.
government capacity for democratic market
regulation).
20