|
The first workshop of the CSPP South Asia Regional Consultation
was held in Colombo, Sri Lanka, on the 5th and 6th July 2005,
in collaboration with the Centre
for Poverty Analysis (CEPA). The day and a half long resource
persons' workshop on 'CSOs, Evidence and Policy Influence'
was attended by 28 researchers and others representing civil
society organisations, think tanks and the research community
in Sri Lanka and provided a forum to discuss the opportunities
and challenges for CSOs to use evidence to inform policy,
learn about the latest worldwide research and practice in
this area, share experiences about ongoing activities and
identify opportunities for collaborative work. See the Regional
Consultation index for more information on the consultation
process.
The workshop was opened and moderated by Ms. Priyanthi Fernando,
Executive Director, CEPA and John Young firstly gave an introduction
to ODI, the RAPID programme, the CSPP, and the Context, Evidence
Links (CEL) Framework. The working sessions began with the
presentation of four case studies where research/evidence
had influenced policy in the Sri Lankan context. The cases
were selected because they all illustrate positive instances,
on the premise that there would be more to learn from successful
cases of research influencing policy than the more common
phenomenon of failure. The four case studies were drawn from
trade policy, energy policy, agricultural policy and environment
policy and the research was produced by very different types
of organisations (see Case
Study Summaries).
Following analysis of the case studies, participants identified
several main themes about the evidence and the policy-making
context and process in Sri Lanka:
- there has to be an entry point for the evidence to enter
policy making process;
- the legitimacy and credibility of the CSO is important;
- the manner in which the evidence is presented is very
important, and different audiences should be addressed with
the evidence in different ways;
- policymakers are available at different levels, and because
some may be more accessible to CSOs than others, CSOs should
target several of these levels rather than focusing on only
one.
Two questions arose from the discussion; there is a gap between
policy and implementation in Sri Lanka and policy change does
not necessarily mean change on the ground. Is it easier to
effect change on the ground when implementers are convinced
by the evidence? Second, is it easier for evidence to influence
policy when addressing a gap in policy, rather than when trying
to reform policy?
A presentation of the CEL Framework was given on the second
day, following which the participants used and analysed the
CEL Framework by applying it to three policy questions in
Sri Lanka, namely, the PRSP I, proposed reform of the Land
Development Ordinance and the Government's policy to privatise
bus transport in Sri Lanka.
Suggestions on the ways in which ODI can support Sri Lankan
CSO to bridge the gap between evidence and policy influence
included:
- create a forum for further discussion of the ideas and
issues discussed at the workshop and to take these issues
to a wider audience;
- promote networks of CSOs on common sectors/policy issues,
to increase the visibility and influence of CSOs on these
sector/policy issues;
- promote a greater use of existing State capacities for
research/evidence creation;
- CSOs need to lobby for disclosure of Government policies.
The workshop was followed by a seminar
for a wider audience at which some of these issues were discussed
further.
Back to Regional Consultations index |
|
