Making policies work

Publications

Presentations

Promoting Policy Coherence for Development: Exploring new opportunities for measurement

09-02-2012

Keijzer, N. 2012. Promoting Policy Coherence for Development: Exploring new opportunities for measurement. (ECDPM Presentation).

Share Button

 
 
Photo By Benjamin Reed
  • 1. Promoting PolicyCoherence for Development Exploring new opportunities for measurement Niels Keijzer PCD focal points meeting OECD, 9 February 2012
  • 2. A blast from the past?• 2007: Joint-evaluation of EU mechanisms promoting Policy Coherence for Development• What impact of mechanisms? changed sector policies, improved reporting on PCD, increased levels of awareness…no common view• “In the absence of a clearly stated view of what type and level of impact is realistic to seek to achieve, it will be hard to formulate clear result-oriented action plans and progress will continue to be hard to measure.” 
  • 3. One can only measure progressto PCD objectives if one has…:• …PCD objectives.• Existing objectives are process- instead of result-oriented (i.e. “taking into account”, “creating mechanisms”, …)• What is needed is managing expectations:• Baseline: what are the effects of policy X on developing countries today?• Objectives: how should the effects of policy X have changed by year Y?• Next step: how to know whether this happens? (i.e. defining indicators and information needs) 
  • 4. Chickens and Eggs?• Setting PCD objectives and then measure effects?• Or measure first to be able to better define objectives?• … low investments in research and measurement partly explain the limited progress in clarifying objectives• Some issues worth further exploring for measurement relate to what is measured, how it is done, and who does it 
  • 5. What to measure?• Inputs (actions, opportunities): direct actions and inputs, e.g. a decision to review a policy, a new mechanism [e.g.: review of the EU’s fisheries policy]• Outputs (changes in policies): actual changes in policies, or changes at the policy implementation level [e.g.: stricter human rights conditions in fisheries agreements]• Outcomes (‘effects’ in developing countries): what has changed in developing countries and does it have anything to do with the policies? [e.g.: decreased overfishing in LDCs]Once objectives are set, indicators could be formulated at these levels 
  • 6. How to measure? Types and timing1. Before (Ex-ante): analysing economic, environmental and social effects of proposed policy, outlines potential synergies and trade-offs2. After (Ex-post): evaluations addressing PCD, either commissioned by the leading ministry or as part of development cooperation evaluation3. Continuous (programming and monitoring): Country Strategy Papers for development cooperation can identify key policies, monitoring can be done at HQ and/or field level 
  • 7. How to measure? (2)• Theory-based, or use existing data, or gather new data• Data can be quantitative or qualitative• Currently insufficient research, hence (?) discussions on PCD mainly stress the ‘mission impossible’ aspect• Causal chains are complex (a change in policy in an OECD country having something to do with well-being of farmers in country X), best use a mix of methods• Better operationalisation of development objectives also needed (what is ‘contributing to poverty reduction’?) Page 7
  • 8. Who does the measuring?• Ongoing: preparation of the OECD strategy on development, exploration of country case studies by the DAC, and attempts to make progress at national level (SE, NL, IE)• EC has made tentative progress in impact assessments looking at effects of policy options on developing countries (e.g. agriculture, fisheries)• The CDI has been active since 2003, NGOs like Fairpolitics EU invest in case studies• ECDPM is doing a study for BMZ and DGIS to explore next steps for PCD monitoring and comparisons between countries 
  • 9. Questions for discussion• Getting the overview: which countries have invested in specific studies or are trying to get a national monitoring process going?• Who (pays)? Line ministries (referee + player?), development ministry (PCD police?), independent evaluation body (e.g. UK or SE)?• Unclear PCD results: how do OECD members justify investments?• Can the DAC peer-reviews be improved to ensure a more detailed analysis of the results of PCD efforts (now process-oriented), e.g. in the field studies?• Busan outcome document: will the new Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation work on this?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Comments

European external affairsPolicy Coherence for DevelopmentPresentationsEuropean Union (EU)AfricaEurope