Andrew BartlettAgricultural Policy Adviser, NUDP

More Questions About Policy

The main point

Anyone can bea policy maker

Structure of this presentation A few reminders Who is responsible? Does policy research help? Do better policies help? New thinking about policy Everybody is responsible! The challenge for NUDP Meeting the challenge Conclusions

A few reminders In November last year I made a presentation

called ‘Questioning Policy’ The main point was that we can we can improve

the policy making process by …

asking more

questions

Asking questions is the key to achieving a ‘break-though in thinking’ as proposed by the Party

The bigger and bolder the question, the more likely we are to achieve a breakthrough

But there are things we can do to support the breakthrough…

A few reminders

Barriers to critical thinking include respect and fear

A few reminders1. Those in power can show their subordinates that

it is safe to ask questions 2. We can engage with actors at the Provincial level

and below3. We can also create spaces where critical thinking

is encouraged 4. Plus produce materials that are stimulating, not

sending people to sleep5. And promote new analytical concepts and

techniques such as scenarios, trade-offs and narratives

Who is responsible? A major constraint to making this breakthrough is

the widespread belief that policy making is the responsibility of someone else.

Who is responsible? At meeting after meeting we hear that an issue

must be brought to the attention of policy makers In most cased it is not clear who those policy

makers are, other than ‘the Government’ The Government is always someone else Someone else should study the issue Someone else should make a decision!

Someone should study the issue! There is a persisent belief that policy problems

cannot be solved without policy research Is this true? Or is it just an excuse for inaction? Does policy research actually lead to better

policies? And do better polices lead to more effective

efforts to alleviate poverty?

Let’s look take a closer look at these questions…

Does policy research help? We have plenty of

studies, hundreds of reports…

This is the main output of many of the foreigners who work in Laos!

But how often does this research shape Government policy?

What about shifting cultivation?

What about shifting cultivation? Research shows that upland rice fields, and the

secondary forest that grows during the fallow period, are a major source of food

... and a major reservoir of biodiversity ... and a major form of carbon sequestration So why are Government officials working to

eliminate this form of agriculture?

What about shifting cultivation? I realise that the Forest Sector Strategy has

distinguished between 2 types of shifting cultivation

But it appears that this distinction is not applied outside of a small technical circle

The latest 5-year plan repeats earlier policies to ‘stop shifting cultivation completely’

And this policy is being forcibly implemented

What about shifting cultivation?

In other words…. research has not shaped the GoL policy on shifting cultivation

Not all research is being ignored. Sometimes this leads to better policy…

…but there is a large gap between policy and implementation

Do better policies help?

What about land concessions?

Recognise this picture?

What about land concessions? In my earlier presentation I noted that MAF had

announced a cap on rubber plantations But new agreements continue to be signed A national moratorium on land concessions has

been announced… … not once but two or three times A recent article in the press suggested that there

was a lack of agreement between different Ministries involved in land management and investment

And what about Nutrition? Lack of cooperation among Ministries is also

hindering the implementation of the National Nutrition Policy

The NNP was approved by the PM in 2008, after a comprehensive study by WFP

This was followed by a National Nutrition Strategy and a Action Plan in 2009

But the mechanisms to implement this policy have still not been put in place

What can we conclude? These examples show that more research does

NOT necessarily lead to better policy And better policy does NOT necessarily lead to

better implementation Programme like NUDP want to promote

‘evidence-based policy making’

But the evidence suggest that this is not always possible in Laos

Perhaps it is time to stop thinking of policy making as a linear logical process

Like a vending machine, where we insert information and out pops a policy!

This is not a breakthrough

This is not a breakthrough On the other hand, we

should not think that policy making is an esoteric art

Like a religion, where supplicants make appeals to powerful beings who work in mysterious ways

But this could be it! Maybe it is time

to start thinking of policy-making as a dialogue, a discussion, a debate, a discourse

Policy making as negotiation

Policy making as negotiation Once we understand policy-making as a

negotiation, we start to see why research doesn’t always produce better policy, and why policy doesn’t always lead to implementation

Because the negotiations involve competing interests

And the participants in these negotiations have different types and amounts of influence

New thinking about policy New ideas

about policy making have been discussed, documented and applied for many years

New thinking about policy Lots of tools and techniques are available

Example from http://www.policy-powertools.org

New thinking in Laos? “Any process of policy change is inherently

political, and can include or exclude the interests and perspectives of poor people.

This is clearly a key concern when thinking about policy processes for sustainable livelihoods”.

James Keeley, ODI 2001

Does the GoL and development partners want to include the perspectives of poor people in policy making?

We must assume that the answer is yes

Everybody is responsible

In a democratic country…. … everybody is a policy maker!

This is the Lao People’s Democratic Republic

Everybody is responsible Citizens participate in policy-making every time

they vote…

Everybody is responsible … every time they share experience and

opinions…

Everybody is responsible …every time time they speak out in public…

Everybody is responsible …every time they protest

The challenge The challenge for a programme like NUDP is not

to carry out more policy research … … but to stimulate more policy dialogue To make better use of what we already know And to recognise that what we know – or need to

know - is not just facts and figures, but also the perspectives of different stakeholders…

… including the perspectives of the rural poor

Meeting the challenge Firstly, facilitating dialogue to the local level In practice…

meetings of the SSWG Upland are capitalising on the operational experience of a wide range of stake-holders at Province and District levels

Meeting the challenge Secondly, bringing the voices of farmers into the

negotiating process In practice… using ‘video loops’ to bring

questions and suggestions from rural people to officials, and feedback from officials to farmers

Thirdly, funding studies by Lao researchers and students, designed to encourage critical thinking (rather than sub-contract research to foreigners)

In practice… ‘AgriNet’ is the framework developed by NUDP for supporting Lao-owned studies

Meeting the challenge

NUDP has made a start with these activities … … but it hasn’t been easy! Stakeholders from outside of Government –

including private sector and farmers – have welcomed the opportunity to contribute ideas

But some stakeholders within Government have been reluctant to contribute…

… and others have been reluctant to listen

Meeting the challenge

Looking ahead, NUDP could have greater success in stimulating dialogue by collaborating with new partners

Meeting the challenge

Discussions have been taking place with the Coalition for Lao Information, Communication and Knowledge

And the NGO Land Issues Working Group

Policy development is not just about hiring experts to write reports

It is also about making sure the voices of all stakeholders are heard

Facilitating discussion and encouraging critical thinking are key requirements

Everybody has a role to play!

To conclude

Andrew BartlettAgricultural Policy Adviser, NUDP

Any Questions?