Macro Social AnalysisIntegrating Socio-economic and Political Factors into Policy Progress Report Making Macro Social Analysis Work for Policy Dialogue Conference May 16 - 19, 2006, Washington DC
Objectives and Structure of the Presentation • Objectives • Share results of the Country Social Analysis (CSA) Case Studies; • Stimulate discussion on how to improve the quality of macro-level social and political analysis, and how to enhance its impact on policy dialogue and reform. • Structure • Background (CSA Approach) • CSA Cases • Lessons Learned • Future Challenges
The CSA analyses macro socio-political factors as a basis for policy dialogue and reform on social development issues • Objectives: • Inform the Bank's management of key macro socio-political issues; • Inform in-country policy makers, donors and members of aid groups; • Provide analytical and policy inputs for CASs, TSSs/ISs, PRSPs, CEMs, PAs and DPLs; • Serve as basis for policy dialogue and reforms to support more equitable, inclusive development, and better governance.
The CSA framework focuses on the interaction between two dimensions • Social diversity, assets, and livelihoods • What is the existing distribution of and access to assets and services across different social groups? What is the impact of that distribution in the livelihoods and coping strategies of the poor? • Power, institutions, and governance • What are the institutions that mediate access of the poor to assets and services? How do these institutions impact policy making and resource reallocation ?
CSA Recommendations should address some of the following issues • What type of policy reforms and other actions can be taken to increase access to assets that are instrumental to greater equity and social mobility for the poor and vulnerable? • What actions can be taken to increase the accountability of institutions that build assets and determine access to resources and services? • What institutional reforms can be taken to remove social and cultural discriminatory practices that generate unequal opportunities? • What actions can be taken to increase the voice and political opportunities of disfranchised groups in order to avoid the perpetuation of systemic inequalities? • What actions can be taken to strengthen institutional mechanisms for managing conflict and to increase the country’s resilience to escalation of conflict into open violence? • What actions can be taken to prevent, mitigate and manage the impacts of structural and development induced risks?
CSA Process • The scope and specific emphasis of a CSA are defined by country context and existing and planned policy interventions in the Bank’s portfolio • The framework seeks to simplify and guide. Rather than presenting a range of possible analytical themes, it provides a core framework, on which additional, country-specific themes may build. • Combines different tools and data sources to answer the questions identified • From review of secondary data and interviews with key informants to household surveys and participatory rapid appraisals. • Conducting the CSA Process • Stand alone CSAs • Inputs to other reports (Poverty Assessment/ CEM / CAS/ ESW) • Integrated with other (Poverty Assessment / Conflict/ Gender)
Systematization • Based on a review of 14 initial pilot studies based on: • Review of CSA reports • Interviews with CSA team members • Process mapping conducted in several cases • Interviews with users of CSA reports (Country Team members) • Five in depth case studies focused on policy recommendations and impact (Angola, Guinea Bissau, Haiti, Nepal, Yemen). • Case studies selected to represent different types of CSAs (stand alone, inputs to core diagnostics, integrated with core diagnostics, CSA with several outputs, long term study) • Comparison with other donor approaches based on interviews and review of sample studies and existing evaluations
PilotsFrom the initial 6 pilots we had 18 months ago now we have 24 cases © Completed * Planned
Lessons learned: Analytical Framework • Framework • Should be simple to communicate effectively its core components & a set of policy recommendations • Flexible but with clear standards: County Staff needs to know what they are getting
Data sources • Depending on data availability, it may be possible to conduct a CSA based on existing data and key informant interviews / consultations • Mixed methods have generally been applied in conducting the CSAs • Quantitative data has generally been derived from existing surveys (with several exceptions) Lessons learned: Data Sources
Policy impact is determined by the management of the process • Policy dialogue / areas of policy recommendations must be identified from the start • Country Team must be involved at every stage • Timing: CSA impact is larger when coordinated with CMU cycle (CSA/CEM/DPR/Poverty Assessment) Lessons learned: Process
Lessons Learned: Engaging in-country stakeholders • Government • The role of the government differs from case to case, depending on the objectives of the study • Building a cooperative relationship with the government can help facilitate a smooth process • Civil society • Involving civil society and local academia through workshops or advisory groups can enhance the legitimacy of the CSA’s findings
Lessons learned: Partnerships • Partnerships with other donors • Coordination with other donors enhances the impact of the CSA • Joint analysis contributes to donor harmonization • Partnerships within the Bank • Working with the Poverty and Economic Management Department’s (PREM) Poverty (PO) and Public Sector (PS) units, as well as with Fragile States (LICUS) facilitates mainstreaming
Lessons learned: Recommendations • Recommendations • Recommendations have generally informed country or sector level policies • Most effective when developed in cooperation with the Country Team over the course of the CSA process • Some CSAs have provided more specific inputs to other Economic and Sector Work • Recommendations have been particularly effective when directly integrated with other core diagnostics
Lessons learned: Dissemination • Audience: • Primary audience and relationship with government should be determined at outset in cooperation with the Country Team • Reporting: • Need to have a basic template to define the product but different outlets • Stand alone report to highlight specific issues • Integrated reports to facilitate mainstreaming • Policy notes for targeted audience • Internal and external documents?
Macro Socio –Political Analysis: Commonalities • Objectives • Better understanding (identifying and prioritizing) causes and consequences of key social factors influencing social change, in order to design more effective strategies and interventions. • Promoting more equitable development, inclusive institutions and better governance. • Analytical Framework • Focus on institutions, power relations and economic opportunities. • Interplay between the economic, socio-cultural, institutional, and political structures of a country. • Mainstreaming • Existing experiences reveal the importance of the process and timing of the analysis in influencing policy dialogue. • Specifying the policy recommendations: operational relevance.
Future Challenges • Strengthening Policy Recommendations • Defining the policy areas and • Linking the analysis to specific recommendations • Mainstreaming • Process and feedback (policy dialogue) • Most appropriate format and timing • Clear indicators and a well established monitoring process • Strengthening Partnerships • The analysis should reflect in-country policy making processes as much as possible. • Strengthen donor coordination and joined implementation