survey on cd efforts full report politics & ideas

7/27/2019 Survey on CD Efforts Full Report Politics & Ideas

1/5

1

Survey on Capacity Development Efforts - October 2013This survey was prepared by Vanesa Weyrauch and Toms Garzn de la Roza, and it was aimed at

informing Politics & Ideas and its partners in the process of formulating a new long-term capacity

development strategy that enables us to strategically focus our contribution to efforts by individuals

and organisations to better link politics and research.

As argued in the paper 'Lessons learned on promoting better links between research and policy in

Latin America', potential participants need to be part of the design of capacity building efforts to

ensure their usefulness and relevance. This was the explicit rationale behind this survey.

The survey was delivered both in English and Spanish. The English version was open for entries

between September 18th

and September 30th

2013, and it was publicized through Politics & Ideas

website and e-mail subscribers, in addition to other forums such as EBPDN. The Spanish version was

live from September 24th

to October 3rd

2013, and it was equally publicized via e-mail to a list of

interested parties as well as throughVIPPAL.

Sample: 38 respondents

Summary of responses(Spanish) 10 respondents

Summary of responses(English) 28 respondents

Survey at a glance quick facts

Most respondents participated in at least one CD activity in the past year (66%). A majority werealso satisfied (60%), and almost all would consider participating in the future.

Criticism of current materials is mostly focused on their not being locally relevant and on beingoften too theoretical.

Preferred activities are peer assistance, joint projects and face to face workshops There is no clear consensus on who are they best trainers. However, there is a preference for

practitioners, researchers and think tanks to provide those services over other types of

organizations.

Suggestions for trainers to improve their work are focused on considering or involving policymakers, prioritizing practice over theory, and knowing and involving participants.

Suggestions for future improvement include creating regional hubs and networks of specialists,improving access (better reach at low cost) and formalizing training processes.

Questions 13 and 14: About the respondents

In the English-language survey, the largest number of respondents works or is based in Africa (7),

followed by Latin America (6), Asia/Pacific1, South Asia and Eastern Europe2 (3 each), MENA and

1Including Australia.

2Including Azerbaijan.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/165394408/Lessons-Learned-on-promoting-better-links-between-research-and-policy-in-Latin-Americahttp://www.scribd.com/doc/165394408/Lessons-Learned-on-promoting-better-links-between-research-and-policy-in-Latin-Americahttp://www.scribd.com/doc/165394408/Lessons-Learned-on-promoting-better-links-between-research-and-policy-in-Latin-Americahttp://www.scribd.com/doc/165394408/Lessons-Learned-on-promoting-better-links-between-research-and-policy-in-Latin-Americahttp://www.vippal.cippec.org/http://www.vippal.cippec.org/http://www.vippal.cippec.org/https://docs.google.com/a/mendizabal.co.uk/forms/d/1wwLLif8cl3yfeCY-27sApRXmJ9Db2IgwwwpPSS6KYuA/viewanalytics#start=publishanalyticshttps://docs.google.com/a/mendizabal.co.uk/forms/d/1wwLLif8cl3yfeCY-27sApRXmJ9Db2IgwwwpPSS6KYuA/viewanalytics#start=publishanalyticshttps://docs.google.com/a/mendizabal.co.uk/forms/d/1Fgsoh6wfVB-xc9FPqeJ88infH_3FrhO1U2IOMrYfuKI/viewanalytics#start=publishanalyticshttps://docs.google.com/a/mendizabal.co.uk/forms/d/1Fgsoh6wfVB-xc9FPqeJ88infH_3FrhO1U2IOMrYfuKI/viewanalytics#start=publishanalyticshttps://docs.google.com/a/mendizabal.co.uk/forms/d/1Fgsoh6wfVB-xc9FPqeJ88infH_3FrhO1U2IOMrYfuKI/viewanalytics#start=publishanalyticshttps://docs.google.com/a/mendizabal.co.uk/forms/d/1wwLLif8cl3yfeCY-27sApRXmJ9Db2IgwwwpPSS6KYuA/viewanalytics#start=publishanalyticshttp://www.vippal.cippec.org/http://www.scribd.com/doc/165394408/Lessons-Learned-on-promoting-better-links-between-research-and-policy-in-Latin-Americahttp://www.scribd.com/doc/165394408/Lessons-Learned-on-promoting-better-links-between-research-and-policy-in-Latin-America


2/5

2

Western Europe (2 each) and the United States (1 respondent). There are 9 additional respondents

for the Spanish version of the survey, all of them from Latin America, which renders it the most

represented region with 15 respondents out of a total 38.

In terms of the types of organizations for which they work, the sample is quite diverse. They work

primarily in NGOs (31%), Universities (21%) and Think Tanks (18%). Also, some respondents work forthe State/Government (13%), as consultants/independently (8%) and have other kinds of jobs

(8%).

Questions 1, 2, 3 and 5: Participation in CD activities & Satisfaction

Most respondents have participated in at least one CD activity in the past year (66%), out of which

26% did so at least three times. Interestingly, only 1 respondent in the Spanish-based survey claimed

not to have participated in any activities, which may imply that this region is better provided than

others.

A majority of those who participated in CD activities are at least satisfiedwith them (60%), with 24%

claiming they are very satisfied. These results suggest that there might be room for improvement,

since there are also 18% of respondents who are not too satisfied.

Those who reported on reasons for not having participated in CD activities mostly claimed they

could not find / did not come across any of them (4 respondents) and also pointed at lack of time or

related constraints (3 respondents).

A full 92% claim to be interested in participating in CD activities on the topic of better linking

research and policy, 81% of them being definitely interested.

Question 4: Describing existing materials

The responses are quite mixed, and negative remarks tend to be more elaborate than positive ones.

The main positive point is that there exists a diversity of formats and themes in existing materials,

whilst the main negative point is that they are generally inaccessible and produced by organizations

in developed countries (and therefore inapplicable in other contexts). The main points are

summarized in the following table:

What is good about them What is wrong about them

They are regarded useful, good and evenexcellent

There is wealth of information

Diversity of formats and themes Web-based activities and case-studies were

mentioned as particularly useful formats

Specific work mentioned: ODI, CIPPEC,CommsConsult, FAO (UN)

They are too theoretical and lack practicalorientation.

They are developed in Europe or the UnitedStates, which is not helpful in other regions. Many

locally produced materials are just a copy.

They are either superficial or too context-specific They are generally inaccessible or not targeted

enough

They are generally in English, which is not helpfulin non-English speaking countries.

Its difficult to actually pick up and use what isavailable

This topic cannot be taught, so materials cannotbe helpful


3/5

3

Their quality is inconsistent

Question 6: Topics on which to focus Capacity Building Activities

The responses show a very wide variety of topics, many of which are policy issues unrelated to thescope of this survey. There are also some suggestions that are pertinent to better linking research

and policy but that are too general in the way they are phrased. The most insightful or interesting

suggestions are summarized below:

Cases ofsuccess and failure in influencing or informing policy making Advocacy, negotiation Conducting research-action projects (investigacin-accin) How research can inform citizen engagement and mobilization, including use of new media Community participation in policy making and social auditing of policy

Communications & dissemination of policy research, including social media How research outputs can be effectively translatedfor the poor as end users of policy3 Understanding policy makers mindset Engaging legislatures in policy-making Region-specific (and country-specific) models to link research and policy (e.g. Asia) Impact evaluation, impact pathway analysis Monitoring & evaluating government transparency, accountability and use of public resources Organizational and inter-organizational development (i.e. coalition-building) Funding: mobilizing resources, finding donor sources and organizing successful funding activities How to influence international donors How to integrate donor development, communications and research strategies with each other

and with the overall organizational strategy

Question 7: Preferred activities

This question permitted selecting multiple responses, and indeed respondents chose an average of

3.5 types of activities as their preferred ones. Accordingly, the responses are quite evenly distributed

through the six categories:

Mentoring/Peer assistance 22%

Online extended courses 14%

Face to face brief workshops 21%

Webinars 8%

Joint projects/labs between researchers and

policymakers

20%

Technical assistance 13%

3This is suggested as a potential module, aimed at strengthening the prospect of participatory policy planning

at local (i.e. village) levels.


4/5

4

The most popular activities seem to be the more practical and horizontal ones, like peer assistance

andjoint projects. Surprisingly, online activities (both extended courses and webinars) seem to be

relatively less popular than other types of activities, like face to face workshops (even if brief).

Question 8: Best Trainers

The responses for this question are not too comprehensive. Many respondents declare not to know

them or state who should ideally deliver these activities (e.g. academics, practitioners).

Organizations and people that were mentioned are listed below:

CIPPEC: 4 mentions GDNet: 2 mentions World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, ARU Foundation, CIDE (Mexico), CDI4, Enrique

Mendizabal, Leandro Echt, Zeinab Sabet, SNV Netherlands and FLACSO (Bolivia): 1 mention

each.

Question 10: Who should ideally deliver capacity building activities?For this question, respondents were asked to select up to two preferred choices. The two most

popular choices were researchers and practitioners themselves, and think tanks and similar

organizations, each with 29% of answers. Local universities was the third most preferred trainer

(19%), whilst there seems to be less preference for consultancies and individual experts/advisors,

each scoring 5% of answers. In line with subsequent questions, there seems to be a consensus

towards trainers that can presumably provide more experience- and practice-based activities, rather

than theoretical ones.

Question 9: How can trainers improve their work?

Three broad themes were identified in the suggestions provided by respondents. Some quotes

referring to these themes are included below:

a) Considering / Involving policy makers and politicsBe sensitive to the pragmatic concerns of policy makers. Training programs must not only cover the

technical aspect of policy work but also the political aspectsas well; Collaborating with policy-

makers or specialists in policy studies.

b) Practice over theoryWork with people who are actually influencing policy - not consider it an academic subject ()

There is no need to reinvent the wheel. There are organisations and social movements working on

changing policy on a day to day basis; Focusing on practicalrather than theoretical aspects.

Trainers should also be involved in activism; They should do the things they teach/train.

c) Knowing and involving participantsBuild the content of their training from consultations with the intended learners so that they

prioritize the most relevant. Effective feedbackmechanisms from those they train.Spending

more time in selection and follow-upof participants; Getting to know participants and their

needs; Getting to know the organization they work for;Trainers can have individual

4Not clear which organization this refers to.


5/5

5

appointments with each participant;Using the participants skills and experience in benefit of the

workshop.

Question 11: How can Capacity Building evolve in the future?

Many responses to this question are very closely linked with question 4. However, there are some

interesting new suggestions, mostly centred on the following topics: improving access to CD

activities, their local relevance, increasing their practice-orientation, formalizing what has already

been learned, and creating networks.

Continuing to innovate and reaching a wider public bysharing resources at a low cost Formalizing training processes useful for organizations to implement early on when hiring a new

researcher

Strengthening organizations ability to learn from experience Including senior members of organizations (in addition to junior members) so that the skills

learned are valued and can be implemented.

Creating and strengthening regional hubs and networks of specialists Reaching places away from main cities Making participation more affordable, especially for organizations that are project-funded Striking a better balance between classroom-type activities and practical mentoringQuestion 12: Other suggestions

There is no apparent link in the replies to this last question. However, some comments might be

worth highlighting:

Much of the work in this area operates in a theoretical vacuum regarding the nature of policy and

how policy is made. Political scientists have much to offer in this area, particularly those thatspecialise in the discipline of policy studies.

I follow EBPDN and Outcome Mapping because I feel I should (). But these communities are good

for insiders, who do this work all the time. People like me, who are activists and need to link

research with advocacy, might have a hard time following all the discussion, which is technical, and

keeping up with the debates.

The search for a link between research and policy is not new, but with the term influencing policy

coming into fashion, it looks like it was new, which in turns leads to ignoring many past experiences

that were not labelled as such.

survey on cd efforts full report politics & ideas

Documents