While the discussions have brought up many important points, it would be good to go back to the original purpose of this forum: ie. identify approaches and strategies that worked in terms of reaching policy makers and perhaps even resulting in action.
Have a look at the list below and let us know if you have used any of them and what the outcome was. What were your lessons learned? What other approaches have you used that are not on the list?
Successful approaches mentioned in the discussion included:
1.Participatory workshops, writeshops and other inclusive approaches
Florence Egal gave an example of participatory nutrition workshops where both decision makers and different population groups agree on the causes of malnutrition and how to tackle them, providing policy makers with practice-based evidence they can act upon.
Denise Melvin mentioned Writeshops where policy makers (or other users of the information) prepare policy briefs together with the producers of information (for example, food security analysts). Together they look at the information at and jointly prepare recommendations.
2. Joining forces with other NGOs/CSOs and preparing a joint White Paper for an important conference
Subhash Mehta wrote about how several CSOs and NGOs prepared a white paper for the Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD) 1. He noted that “… I am happy that our effort has put the smallholder producer communities’ AR4D needs on top of the table…”
Indeed, joining forces with like minded organizations increases the chances your report will be read and used. While policy makers may or may not be at a technical conference, it is a good way of getting your key messages into the policy debate.
3. Leveraging larger initiatives such as the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) Initiative
Mohamed Ajuba Sheriff wrote that working together with SUN could help harmonize efforts of the different ministries and partners involved in FSN policy making.
Indeed, larger initiatives can serve as intermediaries to help you reach policy makers.
4. Reaching Policy Makers directly is only really possible if you are part of the same project or organization
Santosh Kumar Mishra comments that policy makers can communicate their information needs to information producers only if they are part of the same project or organization.
5. Round Table Approach: bringing together key stakeholders to assess the food security situation and decide on actions – especially in emergencies
Kodjo Dokodjio wrote that “In my country, during natural calamities where crops or harvest have been destroyed, causing food insecurity, a stakeholder’s round table is often organized including information producers, decision makers and donors. In these emergency cases, decision makers inform information producers of the type of indicators or information they need to address the situation. It is necessary to underline that in this case the FSN information produced and used by the decision makers influences policy making and remains clear.”
A few years ago FAO organized a series of workshops on “Producing Food Security Information Products that Result in Action”. The workshops brought together producers and users of food security information so that users/policy makers could give advice on how to improve existing food security information products. To learn more about these successful workshops see: http://www.foodsec.org/web/newsevents/training/trainingtopic/en/#18702
6. Education Programmes
Lal Manavado wrote that “perhaps, it is time to try an indirect approach, at least as an adjunct to the inclusive approach… Public education can play a role in having public put pressure on policy makers.”
However, we wonder who funds and decides on the key messages for these programmes. Does anyone have any experience in helping to influence policy change through public education? What role can the media play ?
Feedback by the facilitators
While the discussions have brought up many important points, it would be good to go back to the original purpose of this forum: ie. identify approaches and strategies that worked in terms of reaching policy makers and perhaps even resulting in action.
Have a look at the list below and let us know if you have used any of them and what the outcome was. What were your lessons learned? What other approaches have you used that are not on the list?
Successful approaches mentioned in the discussion included:
1.Participatory workshops, writeshops and other inclusive approaches
Florence Egal gave an example of participatory nutrition workshops where both decision makers and different population groups agree on the causes of malnutrition and how to tackle them, providing policy makers with practice-based evidence they can act upon.
Denise Melvin mentioned Writeshops where policy makers (or other users of the information) prepare policy briefs together with the producers of information (for example, food security analysts). Together they look at the information at and jointly prepare recommendations.
2. Joining forces with other NGOs/CSOs and preparing a joint White Paper for an important conference
Subhash Mehta wrote about how several CSOs and NGOs prepared a white paper for the Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD) 1. He noted that “… I am happy that our effort has put the smallholder producer communities’ AR4D needs on top of the table…”
Indeed, joining forces with like minded organizations increases the chances your report will be read and used. While policy makers may or may not be at a technical conference, it is a good way of getting your key messages into the policy debate.
3. Leveraging larger initiatives such as the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) Initiative
Mohamed Ajuba Sheriff wrote that working together with SUN could help harmonize efforts of the different ministries and partners involved in FSN policy making.
Indeed, larger initiatives can serve as intermediaries to help you reach policy makers.
4. Reaching Policy Makers directly is only really possible if you are part of the same project or organization
Santosh Kumar Mishra comments that policy makers can communicate their information needs to information producers only if they are part of the same project or organization.
5. Round Table Approach: bringing together key stakeholders to assess the food security situation and decide on actions – especially in emergencies
Kodjo Dokodjio wrote that “In my country, during natural calamities where crops or harvest have been destroyed, causing food insecurity, a stakeholder’s round table is often organized including information producers, decision makers and donors. In these emergency cases, decision makers inform information producers of the type of indicators or information they need to address the situation. It is necessary to underline that in this case the FSN information produced and used by the decision makers influences policy making and remains clear.”
A few years ago FAO organized a series of workshops on “Producing Food Security Information Products that Result in Action”. The workshops brought together producers and users of food security information so that users/policy makers could give advice on how to improve existing food security information products. To learn more about these successful workshops see: http://www.foodsec.org/web/newsevents/training/trainingtopic/en/#18702
6. Education Programmes
Lal Manavado wrote that “perhaps, it is time to try an indirect approach, at least as an adjunct to the inclusive approach… Public education can play a role in having public put pressure on policy makers.”
However, we wonder who funds and decides on the key messages for these programmes. Does anyone have any experience in helping to influence policy change through public education? What role can the media play ?
Denise, Renata and Cordelia