PPWNov13- Day 1 Keynote- J.Thompson- IDS

Analysing and Understanding

Agricultural Policy Processes in Africa

John Thompson

Future Agricultures Consortium,Regional Coordinator for Europe and Research Fellow,

Institute of Development Studies, [email protected]

www.future-agricultures.org

Workshop on Approaches and Methods forPolicy Processes Research

IFPRI, Washington DC

18-20 November 2013

Focus• Future Agricultures Consortium – a focus on

agricultural policy processes in Africa

• Changing views on policy & policy processes

• Overview 1: FAC Policy Processes approach

• Study 1: Political Economy of Cereal Seed Systems

• Overview 2: FAC Political Economy of Agricultural Policy in Africa (PEAPA) approach

• Study 2: Democratisation and the Political Economy of Agricultural Policy in Africa

• Summary

Future Agricultures Consortium

Established in 2005… to encourage dialogue and the sharing of good practice by policy makers and opinion formers in Africa on the role of agriculture in broad based growth

Why FAC?... the lack of attention to the political economy of policy processes is leading to inappropriate policy formulation and implementation failures in African agriculture

Core Focus = Agricultural Policy Processes in Africa

1. Policy processes2. Commercialisations3. Social protection4. Science, technology &

innovation5. Land6. Climate change7. Pastoralism8. Young people & agri-food

systems9. Gender & social difference10. Brazil & China in African

agriculture

Policy: Clearly central to development,

but difficult to pin down...‘Policy is rather like the elephant - you know it

when you see it, but you cannot easily define it’ (G. Cunningham, 1963: 229; cited in M. Hill, 1997: 6)

Policy: A Textbook Definition

• Policy comes from the Middle English word ‘policie’, meaning ‘art of government’, ‘civil organisation’

• Standard definition of policy is: ‘a plan or course of action, as of a government, political party, or business, intended to influence and determine decisions, actions, and other matters’ – West’s Dictionary of American Law

Conventional View of Policy• Series of well-defined steps:

Determining the policy issue or problem Exploring possible options for resolving the problem

Weighing up the costs and benefits of each option Making a rational choice about ‘best option’

Implementing the policy Evaluating the outcome

• Bureaucratic approach separation of ‘value’ and ‘fact’• The political nature of the policy is hidden by the use of

technical language ‘Evidence-based policy-making’

An Alternative View of Policy

• “...policies appear to be mere instruments for promoting efficiency and effectiveness. This masking of the political under the cloak of neutrality is a feature of modern power.” C. Shore and S. Wright, Anthropology of Policy: Critical Perspectives on Governance and Power. London: Routledge; 1997: 8.

• Policies = Political phenomena/processes

The Politics of Policy Processes: Incremental, Complex and Messy

• Competing agendas and interests (poli sci) • ‘Disjointed incrementalism’, ‘muddling through’

(public admin)• Implementation involves discretion, negotiation,

trade-offs by ‘street-level bureaucrats’ (public admin)

• Decisions are not discrete or technical facts and values are intertwined (socio-anthro)

• Technical experts and policymakers ‘mutually construct’ policy (sci & tech studies)

Value of a Policy Process Approach

• What is a political economist?

‘Someone who comes and explains why your programme hasn’t worked’ – Alex Duncan, OPM

But a PP approach doesn’t just help explain why a policy or programme hasn’t worked, it can also identify possible ways forward i.e. what is both technically viable and politically feasible

How Does Policy Change? Three Broad Perspectives

1. Negotiating knowledges, discourses, narratives• Policies as narratives, stories (Emory Roe, Raymond Apthorpe)• Discourse coalitions (Maarten Hajer)• Policy as political technology (Michel Foucault)

2. Interaction between actors, networks and practices• epistemic communities (Peter Haas)• policy networks (Paul Sabatier)• policy entrepreneurs (John Kingdon)• actors and encounters at the interface (Norman Long)• actor network theory (Bruno Latour, Michel Callon)

3. Competition and bargaining between different interests • pluralist, society-centred accounts (Robert Dahl)• state-centred accounts (Theda Skocpol)• bureaucratic politics (Graham Allison; Michael Lipsky)

Politics/Interests

Actors/ Networks/Practices

Discourses/Narratives

A Simplified Framework

J. Keeley and I. Scoones, Understanding Environmental Policy Processes: Cases from Africa. London: Earthscan, 2003.

Understanding policy processes comes as a result of looking at the intersection of

these 3 overlapping elements.

Policy Narratives

• Policy narratives ‘frame’ a problem; explain how it comes about; and show what needs to be done to put it right

• These narratives – storylines – frequently simplify complex issues– Many are ‘crisis narratives’, demanding

urgent policy action– Others are ‘success stories’, suggesting a clear

way forward

Discourses/Narratives

• Some narratives are very ‘sticky’ – i.e. persistent making it very difficult to challenge them (e.g. ‘tragedy of the commons’, desertification...)

• Why?– they suit certain political interests– are easily communicated ‘sound bites’– become embedded in bureaucratic cultures

reducing space for alternatives– are perpetuated through everyday practice

Policy Narratives Discourses/Narratives

Actors, Networks, Practices• Actors and networks define and perpetuate

policy narratives

• These are coalitions and alliances of people with shared beliefs, visions and patterns of behaviour

• They often link state institutions with private sector, donors and civil society, spanning local-global levels

• Diverse stakeholders engage in negotiation that can reinforce – or sometimes challenge – the prevailing narratives

Actors/Networks/Practices

Politics and Interests

• Politics shape policy processes in several ways:– The political context is moulded by the interests

of particular authorities who seek to remain in power

– Competition also exists between groups in society, based on their differing interests (e.g. allocation of resources; economic vs. social priorities)

– A range of interest groups attempt to exert power over every stage of the policy process

Politics/Interests

Policy Spaces

• ‘Policy spaces’ define the policy-maker's scope of action ‘room to manoeuvre’

• Strong pressures to adopt a particular policy position can limit this space ‘closing down’

• Reduction of such pressure may provide opportunities to develop consensus among stakeholders involves negotiating trade-offs

• But consensus needs to be negotiated genuinely; otherwise, the policy process may fall apart during implementation ‘implementation failure’

Politics/Interests

Policy Spaces

• Invited spaces consultations led by government

• Popular spaces protests, demonstrations

• Practical spaces pilot field-based projects

• Bureaucratic spaces formal spaces within government

• Electoral/political spaces formal participation in electoral system

• Discursive spaces where new ‘framings’ are introduced into the policy debate

Politics/Interests

Political Economy of Cereal Seed Systems in Africa

• Focus: Particular configurations of powerful public and private actor-networks are shaping the way cereal seed systems operate in Africa, which is influencing the way the ‘new Green Revolution’ agenda is playing out in different countries

• Framing: ‘market-led technology adoption’

J. Thompson and I. Scoones, ‘The Political Economy of Cereal Seed Systems in Africa’s Green Revolution’, FAC Policy Brief 44, 2012.

L. Sperling et al 2008. JDS

Planting breeding, PBR, priority setting

Seed aid and relief

Regulation and certification

Governance of seed/

innovation systems

Economics of seed production and distribution

Politics and policy processes

Politics of national and

global agri-food systems

Seed systems

Seeds and livelihoods:

social-cultural dimensions

Research Questions• How do seed policies get created, and by

whom? • How do narratives about what makes a

‘good seed policy’ change over time?• How are seed problems and solutions

‘framed’ – and how does this affect policy processes?

• Whose voices are taken into account in the seed policy process – and whose are excluded?

• What spaces exist for new ideas, actors and networks? How can these be opened up?

Country Studies1. Ethiopia (Dawit Alemu)– liberalisation under state control:

the politics of the emergent private sector seed industry

2. Ghana (Kojo Amanor) – Green Revolution narratives and local-level realities: how a technocratic approach overwhelms alternative perspectives on breeds and seeds

3. Kenya (Hannington Odame and Elijah Muange) – agro-dealers and the market solution: politics, interests and who wins and loses from the new Green Revolution?

4. Malawi (Blessings Chinsinga) – the politics of maize and input subsidy programmes: how diverse interests converge around a particular technical-economic trajectory

5. Zimbabwe (Charity Mutonodzo and Douglas Magunda) – rebuilding the seed system post ‘collapse’: why top-down government/aid programmes may make things worse

Mapping the Actor-Networks

Key Lessons• Avoid generalised diagnoses to complex seed system

problems• Question the dominant narratives that lead to

technological ‘lock in’• Highlight normative issues (narratives, values and

interests) to open up policy debate• Identify ‘policy spaces’ in seed sector to increase

room to manoeuvre negotiate trade-offs, create synergies

• Explore opportunities for ‘Integrated Seed Sector Development’ bridging ‘formal’ and ‘informal’

Political Economy ofAgricultural Policy in Africa (PEAPA)

• Focus: To understand the role for the state in stimulating agricultural development we need to assess the capacity and willingness of state actors to implement particular policies in particular contexts

• Starting point:1. It is a country’s political system that generates the

incentives (strong or weak) for the state to take action to invest in agricultural development

2. This political system also influences the type of agricultural development promoted (e.g. smallholder vs. large farm based)

PEAPA Model

C. Poulton, Democratisation and the Political Economy of Agricultural Policy in Africa. FAC Working Paper 43, 2012.

PoliticalSystem

PolicyOutcomes

AgriculturalPerformance

Incentives forState Action

Pro-Poor Agricultural Policy

• Investment in infrastructural and institutional public goods to support smallholder producers– Rural roads– Irrigation– Agricultural research– Extension services– Capacity for policy design and evaluation– Coordination capacity for market development

• Medium-term impact

Democratisation

• Competitive elections ++

• Majority population is still rural, poor and dependent on agriculture – Vote for better agricultural policies?– Challenge previous ‘urban bias’ in national policy?

• Basic answer = this is not happening yet– Rural votes are rarely exchanged for policies

• Where better agricultural policy is observed, what are the key factors behind this?

Country Studies1. Burkina Faso (Augustin Loada)

2. Ethiopia (Kassahun Berhanu)

3. Ghana (Kojo Aidoo)

4. Kenya (Karuti Kanyinga)

5. Malawi (Blessings Chinsinga)

6. Mozambique (Domingos Rosario & Lidia Cabral)

7. Rwanda (David Booth & Fred Golooba-Mutebi)

8. Tanzania (Brian Cooksey)

Scenarios in a Neo-Patrimonial WorldTechnocratic Support

No Yes

Political Backing

No

Yes

C. Poulton, Democratisation and the Political Economy of Agricultural Policy in Africa. FAC Working Paper 43, 2012.

N. van de Walle, African Economies and the Politics of Permanent Crisis, 1979-1999. New York, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2001.

Scenarios in a Neo-Patrimonial World

1. Good technocratic policies with no ‘appeal’ in patronage politics terms simply don't make it

2. Policies driven by the exigencies of patronage politics, but which make no plausible contribution to stated public policy goals, are adopted

3. ‘Success stories’: some alignment between technocratic policies and the exigencies of patronage politics

4. Partial alignment: patronage politics distort well-intentioned technocratic policies, undermining pro-poor impact

Technocratic Support

No Yes

Political Backing

No X 1. Inertia

Yes 2. Anti-poor policy

3. Success stories

4. Distorted policy

Examples from PEAPA Studies

• Malawi Fertiliser Subsidy (4 – distorted)– Window of opportunity for broad-based policy– Transfer (immediate, tangible): at the expense of

other public goods– Emphasis shifted towards political control

• Kenya Ag Sector Revitalisation (1 – inertia) – Strategy for Revitalising Agriculture vs. regional

commodity-based interventions (ethnic links)– Collective action issue?

More Positive Agricultural Policy(3 – success stories, with caveats)

• Rwanda (since 2007) – Terracing + marshland development– Cooperative development: coordination for market

access?– One cow per family– Extension?– Outcome-based management + learning

• Ethiopia– Sustained investment in agricultural extension (with

evaluation and adaptation)– Growth + political control …

PEAPA Lessons• ‘Pro-poor’ agricultural policy is not an automatic

outcome of democratisation, even where the median voter is poor and rural

• Need to align interests of (urban-based) elites and rural populations

• Dependence on agriculture for economic growth key– Burkina, Ethiopia, Malawi, Rwanda– c/w Mozambique, Tanzania

• Threats to regime survival – have to deliver!– Ethiopia: fall of two previous regimes, minority

government with multiple enemies– Rwanda: supporters of previous regime?

FAC Policy Processes - Summary• Policy-making must be understood as a political

process, as much as an analytical or technical one• Policy processes = complex interplay of narratives +

actor-networks + political interests• Policy change requires understanding these

interactions:– exploring spaces for opening up debate – identifying incentives for getting political

commitment to delivering public goods• Future Agricultures’ PP and PEAPA approaches can

help in analysing and understanding these complex processes

Thank You

John ThompsonFuture Agricultures Consortium

www.future-agricultures.org

http://www.future-agricultures.org/events/policy-processes-conference