ODI Knowledge Policy and Power event presentation Harry Jones

Editor's Notes

• #2: Research on the policy process Talk about the approach we’re using ...useful for understanding
• #4: PEA is used to understand reform processes, p-m, national balance of power Incentives: e.g. A prevailing perspective that political parties engage in pp not to try and solve ‘policy problems’ but to capture resources and maximise their own power Institutions: e.g. Structure of CA and Ministries, gives certain spaces for influence on policy Structures: e.g. Historical patterns of wealth and deprivation in the country Point is: power battles, bargaining and negotiation and politics, NOT analysis and problem-solving
• #5: PEA is used to understand reform processes, p-m, national balance of power Incentives: e.g. A prevailing perspective that political parties engage in pp not to try and solve ‘policy problems’ but to capture resources and maximise their own power Institutions: e.g. Structure of CA and Ministries, gives certain spaces for influence on policy Structures: e.g. Historical patterns of wealth and deprivation in the country Point is: power battles, bargaining and negotiation and politics, NOT analysis and problem-solving
• #6: Dimensions which shape policy making on an issue, or in a country Actors: interests, values and beliefs, and credibility+capacities Political context: e.g. Level of competition, decentralisation shapes opps+cons’s for knowledge Knowledge: role of research-based, practical and citizen knowledge KI processes: how links between K and P are ‘wired’, dissemination, consulting, collaboration, CB etc
• #7: Dimensions which shape policy making on an issue, or in a country Actors: interests, values and beliefs, and credibility+capacities Political context: e.g. Level of competition, decentralisation shapes opps+cons’s for knowledge Knowledge: role of research-based, practical and citizen knowledge KI processes: how links between K and P are ‘wired’, dissemination, consulting, collaboration, CB etc
• #8: INTEREST GROUP: This involves the competition of well-organised rival groups. Policy making takes place largely behind the scenes, in informal meetings and networks, or in closed spaces. Decision makers being forced to take sides, with shifting alliances and bargaining, with incremental changes rather than major confrontations, won depending on the energy and strength of groups. CLIENT: Small groups benefit directly from policies where the general public is often the loser. Well-organised clients can secure political support largely in private; those who stand to lose out are often unaware of the issue, or hard to organise. politicians using government spending to reward their constituents ENTREPRENEURIAL: very broad groups in society, are pitted against concentrated special interests. This is likely to involve political entrepreneurs identifying opportunities and bringing together a large coalition of beneficiaries, framing issues to capture the public imagination. Examples : environmental standards on companies. MAJORITARIAN: policy making is more likely to play out in public fora such as legislative debates or policy debates around an election. The public debate often addresses questions of whether social benefits exceed the costs, and basic ideological beliefs and values may come into play, in potentially partisan dialogues.
• #9: INTEREST GROUP: This involves the competition of well-organised rival groups. Policy making takes place largely behind the scenes, in informal meetings and networks, or in closed spaces. Decision makers being forced to take sides, with shifting alliances and bargaining, with incremental changes rather than major confrontations, won depending on the energy and strength of groups. CLIENT: Small groups benefit directly from policies where the general public is often the loser. Well-organised clients can secure political support largely in private; those who stand to lose out are often unaware of the issue, or hard to organise. politicians using government spending to reward their constituents ENTREPRENEURIAL: very broad groups in society, are pitted against concentrated special interests. This is likely to involve political entrepreneurs identifying opportunities and bringing together a large coalition of beneficiaries, framing issues to capture the public imagination. Examples : environmental standards on companies. MAJORITARIAN: policy making is more likely to play out in public fora such as legislative debates or policy debates around an election. The public debate often addresses questions of whether social benefits exceed the costs, and basic ideological beliefs and values may come into play, in potentially partisan dialogues.
• #10: INTEREST GROUP: This involves the competition of well-organised rival groups. Policy making takes place largely behind the scenes, in informal meetings and networks, or in closed spaces. Decision makers being forced to take sides, with shifting alliances and bargaining, with incremental changes rather than major confrontations, won depending on the energy and strength of groups. CLIENT: Small groups benefit directly from policies where the general public is often the loser. Well-organised clients can secure political support largely in private; those who stand to lose out are often unaware of the issue, or hard to organise. politicians using government spending to reward their constituents ENTREPRENEURIAL: very broad groups in society, are pitted against concentrated special interests. This is likely to involve political entrepreneurs identifying opportunities and bringing together a large coalition of beneficiaries, framing issues to capture the public imagination. Examples : environmental standards on companies. MAJORITARIAN: policy making is more likely to play out in public fora such as legislative debates or policy debates around an election. The public debate often addresses questions of whether social benefits exceed the costs, and basic ideological beliefs and values may come into play, in potentially partisan dialogues.
• #11: Policy making different from issue to issue, Will help you engage in that issue, understand how to work towards preferred outcomes or to improve PM on it 2. Country-wide structures, landscape of the knowledge-policy interface, improve ‘governance’ and policy making