Strategic actors for the implementation of inclusive development
Download as PPTX, PDF1 like962 views
This document presents a draft concept note for a platform meeting focused on inclusive development. It aims to clarify concepts, identify strategic actors for effective implementation, and map existing research while addressing gaps in the relationship between policy formulation and implementation. The note emphasizes the importance of a political approach to researching the dynamics of social change and the need to explore new topics and the role of citizen action in fostering inclusive development.
Strategic actors for the implementation of inclusive development
- 1. Draft Concept Note for Discussion during the Platform meeting (Accra, 5 April 2013) Produced by a team composed of ECDPM staff, an ECDPM Programme Associate and two African experts Strategic Actors for the Implementation of Inclusive Development
- 2. • This is a “scoping paper”, not a “state of the art” analysis • Purpose: to clarify concepts, delineate the “domains”, map existing research, identify potential niches for future research • No pretention to cover all aspects (vast domain, many research programmes, time limitations) • No mapping of country level situations • Challenging job - Not much “framing” so far Some preliminary points ECDPM Page 2
- 3. 1) Focus on inclusive “development” (as opposed to inclusive “growth”) 2) Focus on “implementation” (as opposed to traditional focus on “policies”) 3) Focus on “strategic actors” (from state, society and business) that can “push” for effective implementation In many ways, the proposed theme seems a “gold mine”… ECDPM Page 3
- 4. • Growing consensus that failure to tackle inequality is bad for sustainability growth and social cohesion • “Severe economic disparity” number 1 global risk (World Econ. Forum 2013) • ID finding its way in African policy discourse, be it in a rather vague way 1) Inclusive development (ID) on the rise ECDPM Page 4
- 5. 2) The mystery of the “Bermuda triangle”: explaining the gap between policy formulation and implementation Page 5ECDPM
- 6. 6 Looking below the top of the iceberg
- 7. “Nudging unwilling actors into action…” Page 7ECDPM
- 8. What incentives for change?
- 9. • WHO are the “strategic actors” pushing for ID? • WHERE is there “traction” for social change” • HOW is that “traction” translated into effective “action” (how does change occur?) 3) Strategic actors: Moving beyond political economy analysis to understanding processes of social change ECDPM Page 9
- 10. INCLUSIVE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC ACTORS Clarifying key concepts ECDPM Page 10
- 11. Inclusive development: a concept “under construction” (no shortage of confusion…) Page 11ECDPM
- 12. What “animal” are we talking about? Page 12ECDPM
- 13. Policy domains where ID could be progressively fostered Equitable economic growth (productive and diversified economy , income distribution) Inclusive Governance (transparency, accountability, local governance, rights, horizontal inequalities, elections) Territorial development and spatial equity Access to basic services (education, health, finance, infrastructure) supported by equitable fiscal systems Productive and gainful employment (decent work)Policy triggers for making development inclusive Social protection of vulnerable populations
- 14. ID as a normative agenda Need to go beyond policy recommendations (there is no shortage of ideas on “what should be done”) and focus on the “politics” of implementing ID Don’t forget to look at linkages between these various policy domains ! Three traps to be avoided ECDPM Page 14
- 15. • Institutional perspective • Agency perspective Attention !!!!! Both perspectives matter Connections between actors matter When are actors “strategic”? Be aware of dynamic landscape of actors Focus on conditions that allow strategic actors to translate “traction” into “action” Two perspectives on “strategic actors” ECDPM Page 15
- 16. Mapping existing research ECDPM Page 16 GRAND THEORY RESEARCH MIDDLE LEVEL THEORY RESEARCH ACTION- ORIENTED RESEARCH
- 17. 1. Political nature of development (as opposed to “technocratic approaches”) 2. Need to focus of interests and incentives 3. Importance of “agency” 4. Need to move away from “donor orthodoxies” (e.g. “best practices”, “good governance”) 5. Failure is part of the game 6. Still limited knowledge on how change actually happens and on optimal donor support strategies The policy debate: points of convergence ECDPM Page 17
- 18. The black box of change processes Page 18ECDPM
- 19. 1. Different “theories of change” (or “routes” to inclusive development) 2. Results-driven (“amoral”) approach vs. “value-driven” approach 3. Top-down state driven transformation and/or societal transformation 4. Discordance on role of governance (APP programme) 5. Added value of “citizen action” for state accountability and donor support to civil society 6. The added value and effective use of political economy 7. The existence and quality of citizen demand (“the docile citizens”) 8. The power and use of social media 9. Desirable degree of donor interventionism The policy debate: points of controversy ECDPM Page 19
- 20. 1. How to avoid “conceptual trap” regarding ID as Northern (Anglo-Saxon’) donor concept? 2. How to avoid Western bias in agenda setting? 3. How to build on existing knowledge regarding the political economy of reforms/ID? 4. Does the Platform opt for a middle-level theory approach or an action-oriented research, or a combination of both? 5. How to avoid “development recipes” in the push to be “operational”? Critical questions regarding “research approach" ECDPM Page 20
- 21. 1. “More of the same” : deepening existing research themes identified in mapping 1. Focus on less traditional strategic actors 2. Accompany ongoing change processes with action- oriented research 3. Select cases based on “common interests” (local dynamics and donor concerns) 4. Integrate the “political approach” consistently in all research programmes (see par. 90) Possible options in terms of research focus ECDPM Page 21
- 22. 6 examples in Note (as illustration of the kind of the “new” topics to be considered) Discussions of last two days seem to support some of the proposals made See “hot” debates on the added value of “citizen action for inclusive development” Some examples of possible “cases” (reflecting shared agendas) ECDPM Page 22