1. Centro Latinoamericano para el Desarrollo Rural –RIMISP Encuentro 2010 - Territorios Rurales en Movimiento Relaciones entre investigación e incidencia: Oportunidades y Desafíos Norma Correa Aste Overseas Development Institute (ODI) Bogotá, 16 de marzo 2010
2.
3. I. La complejidad de los procesos de incidencia
4.
5.
6. El modelo lineal… Evaluar los resultados Identificar el problema Encargar investigación Analizar resultados Elegir la mejor opción Establecer la politíca Implementar la política
7.
8.
9. Actores Monitoring and Evaluation Agenda Setting Decision Making Policy Implementation Policy Formulation Civil Society Donors Cabinet Parliament Ministries Private Sector
10. Un Modelo Analítico Influencias externas Influencias socio-económicas y culturales, Políticas de donantes etc El contexto político – estructuras y procesos políticos y económicos, cultura, presiones institucionales, cambio incremental vs radical etc. La evidencia – credibilidad, el grado con el que cambia el conocimiento, métodos de investigación y modelos, la simplicidad del mensaje, como es presentado etc Los vínculos entre comunidades de política e investigación – redes, relaciones, poder, discursos, confianza, conocimiento, etc.
17. Existen muchos vínculos Investigación Política Redes tecnocráticas Ejecutivo Think tanks privados Think tanks UN Think tanks públicos Partidos políticos Lobbies ONGs Corporaciones Universidades Entidades regulatorias
18. Pero depende de quién eres Partidos políticos Centros de investigación aplicada universitarios TT internos, centros ideológicos, grupos de interés, ONGs, lobbies Expertos temáticos, líderes de opinión, asesores “ Oxbridge ” Consultoras “ Think tanks Independientes” MMCC Mensaje basado en Modalidades de W Ideología, valores e intereses Investigación aplicada, empírica o sintetizada Investigación teórica o académica Investigador independiente Consultoría Influencia / Abogacía
19. Y también de lo que quieras lograr (I) Cambios discursivos Cambios procedimentales Cambios de contenidos Cambios actitudinales Cambios de comportamiento
20.
21.
22. ¿Qué no debemos olvidar de mirar? Institutos de Investigación en Políticas Políticas Gente Existe información y métodos Nos solemos enfocar en este pedazo ????????????????????????????????????
25. ¿Visibilidad o sustancia? Visibilidad Sustancia Investigación de corto plazo relevante Investigación de largo plazo Enfocarse en la solución de problemas “consensuados” Involucrarse en la definición del problema Exposición mediática Lobby, network Piezas de opinión, Briefing Papers Estimados, propuestas concretas y presupuestadas, opciones de política desarrolladas Website, Blogs, Facebook, etc. Publicaciones académicas, reportes largos Comunidades virtuales con muchos hits Comunidades con la gente adecuada Delegaciones en conferencias de alto nivel Reuniones privadas (partidos) Influencia basada en eventos Influencia basada en el problema Global Go-To-Survey Prospect magazine- Think Tank of the year
26.
27. Lo fundamental es enfocarnos en los cambios de políticas Otros actores Insumos Actividades Outputs Equipo de proyecto Outcomes Impact Resultado Impacto Cambios de política
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36. 3. Demostrando la contribución de la investigación en los diálogos de políticas.
37.
38.
39.
40. Otras opciones … ¿Qué?, ¿Para qué? ¿Cómo? Relaciones y alianzas Análisis de Redes Social Cambios de comportamiento en audiencias prioritarias Mapeo de Alcances Cambios en la posición de actores de políticas claves Alignment, Interest, Influence Matrix and RAPID Outcome Mapping Approach Contribución de un proyecto a un cambio de largo plazo RAPID Outcome Assessment (ex-post mapeo de alcances) Entender por qué el cambio sucede o nunca sucede Análisis desde la economía política Argumentar a favor de la investigacion vinculada al desarrollo Historias de cambio, estudios de episodios Campañas de abogacía Encuestas, hits en medios interactivos Uso de investigación Bibliometrics, búsqueda semática, impact logs Aprendizaje Herramientas de la gestión de conocimiento
41.
42.
43.
Hinweis der Redaktion
BvLF Workshop. the Hague. Nov 2007
Ex: COPLA agenda, CIES Diálogos Alan BvLF Workshop. the Hague. Nov 2007
The outline of my presentation is as follows: First, I want to ask if there is, in fact, a gap that needs to be bridged Second, I will address what this lack of a gap means to us Third, I’ll consider what might we want to do to promote our own research in this context. BvLF Workshop. the Hague. Nov 2007
… and that this divide needs to be bridged BvLF Workshop. the Hague. Nov 2007
Casos SEA y LA BvLF Workshop. the Hague. Nov 2007
BvLF Workshop. the Hague. Nov 2007
Discursive changes: These refer to changes in the labels or narratives of policy actors. They reflect a new or improved understanding of a subject -- even if it does not imply an effective change of policy or practice. Procedural changes: These refer to changes in the way certain processes are undertaken. For example, the incorporation of consultations to otherwise closed processes, or small changes in the way that national policies are implemented in the field. Content changes: These refer to changes in the content of policies including strategy papers, legislation and budgets. These are formal changes in the policy framework. Attitudinal changes: These refer to changes in the way policy actors think about a given issue. This might be an important change to target in the event that key stakeholders have high influence but lack interest in a policy area or are not necessarily aligned with the policy objectives of the programme. Behavioural changes: These refer to more durable changes in the way that policy actors behave (act or relate to others) as a consequence of formal and informal changes in discourse, process and content.
Is there a gap? My answer is no. There is no gap; maybe just a distance between researchers and policymakers. I think that the obsession with the ‘gap’ comes from the focus on the individuals involved rather than on their outputs or roles. Most researchers do not have an influence on policymakers – since they are not well connected, they do not have the capacity to communicate effectively. But this doesn’t matter, what matters is that research is used not that researchers become famous I think that most policy is based on at least some research. There is an issue of density, the amount of evidence available on a topic in a given space will have an effect on the likelihood of research being used to inform policies. E.g. it is unlikely that economic policymakers will be able to get away with policies that are detached from economic policy research. but when it comes to policies in more niche areas, the chances are there will be a few stories in the media and that the only source of knowledge will be specialised academic journals and the odd expert somewhere in a local university We are argue the use of knowledge is closely aligned with political interests, and so research centres themselves are political actors. Currently ODI are looking at the relationship between think tanks and political interests. we define think tanks broadly as organisations whose primary function is to feed ideas into the policy process – these can include NGOs, consultancies, government think tanks, party affiliated think tanks,etc .We have looked at think tanks (broadly defined) from the perspective of the political systems of Latin America. This new lens offered some interesting findings: First, research centres appear as political actors Second, the centres and the experts play by the rules of the system Third, those who want to be independent (really independent) have to invest a great deal of effort to look independent. Their natural state is, in fact, one of dependence (often a positive relationship with other political actors). BvLF Workshop. the Hague. Nov 2007