Q. de Roquefeuil & J. van Seters. 2013. Development of a methodology for country level assessments of PCD impacts on food security. (ECDPM Presentation).
Presentation made by Quentin de Roquefeuil and Jeske van Seters for the Working Group on Agricultural Policies and Markets Meeting, OECD Conference Centre, 23 May 2013
1. What, why and how – initial thoughts based on a literature review
Quentin de Roquefeuil & Jeske van Seters
23 May 2013, OECD Conference Centre
Working Group on Agricultural Policies and Markets Meeting
Development of a methodology for country-level assessments of PCD impacts on food security
2. Structure of the Presentation
1. What the methodology is about
2. Key lessons from the literature review
3. Initial ideas on the methodology
4. Questions for discussion
3. What the methodology is about
• Non-development policies of OECD member countries (e.g. agriculture, trade,investment, science) can have an impact on developing countries
• 2008 OECD Ministerial declaration confirmed commitment to promote Policy Coherence forDevelopment
• The declaration included the resolution to further invest in measuring the effects ofOECD members’ policies on international development objectives
5. Measuring PCD
= one of the key OECD PCD building blocks
6. Different ways to measure PCD
• PCD section in ex-ante impact assessments of OECD member countries’ policy proposals
• PCD section in OECD DAC Peer Reviews- assessing PCD commitments, institutional mechanisms, efforts to improve development financing beyond aid,…
• Ex-post assessments of OECD policy impact at developing country level
General objective: to develop a methodology for identifying and assessing the impacts of OECD policies on food security in individual developing countries
Specific objectives: 1. Help OECD DAC members in pursuing their PCD policy objectives through providing evidence for policy change domestically and for programme design at country level (e.g. more information to address trade-offs between internal goals & negative externalities on developing countries). 2. Enable partner countries and civil society advocate for improved PCD and to address the impacts of incoherencies.
8. OECD policies (domestic, aid, bilateral/international)
Developing country’s food system (e.g. prices, functioning of markets)
Developing country’s food security situation
International rules and regulations
Developing country’s policy priorities
Focus of the assessment
9. Steps to develop the methodology
10. The literature review
• Review of different studies attempting to determine effect of OECD policies on developing countries (NGOs, academia, etc).
• Focus on the methodology used in the studies.
• Assess general robustness of findings.
• See whether we could incorporate some aspects of their methodology into ours, and draw some general lessons.
12. Sample selection
How did we select the studies?
1. Assess impact at individual developing country level (not aggregate).
2. Focus on a clearly identifiable policy or instrument emanating from one or several OECD countries (no general concepts, e.g. “neoliberalism”,“protectionism”).
3. Sample should cover wide range of data collection methods and analytical approaches (try to get as many approaches as possible in the sample).
13. Overview of data collection methods & analytical frameworks
14. What did we learn?
1. Some studies tweak the methodology (e.g.selection of interviewees) to get to the results.
2. Need to define early what is it exactly that is being impacted on (deconstruct “food security”).
3. Deductive approach works well.
4. Country selection criteria?
5. Need to be clear about the period being covered by the analysis.
6. We can (and should) combine data collection methods (e.g. interviews/quantitative data) and analytical approaches (e.g. modeling/ value chain analysis) at different stages in the analysis/process.
15. What did we learn? (2)
7. Developing country policies and characteristics (net food import/export, social policies, governance) deserve to be at centre stage because they exert a large influence on impact.
8. Disaggregation between social groups poses data availability problems.
9. Local stakeholder involvement can go beyond interviews. But risk of “capture” needs to be managed.
16. Initial ideas on the methodology: guiding principles and main steps
17. Guiding principles
• Stakeholder involvement
• Deductive reasoning
• Disaggregation between social groups
• Triangulation (through use of mix of data collection methods and analytical approaches)
18. Main steps
1. Country selection
2. Clarify the ‘baseline’ (through internationally accepted quantitative and qualitative indicators of the food security system)
3. Identify OECD policies impacting on the food security system through desk review
4. In-country testing of hypotheses
5. Dissemination and use of the findings
19. Questions for discussion
20. Questions for discussion
1. How can the methodology be most effective for informing OECD countries’ policymaking?
2. What are your views on the key guiding principles and steps of the methodology?
3. How do we manage the tradeoff between user-friendliness and depth?
4. How to insure inclusiveness while avoiding interest group capture?
21. Thank you for your kind attention.
Quentin de Roquefeuil
Jeske van Seters