POLITICAL RESEARCH IS GOOD FOR YOU!

(...in the end)

I’ve been commissioning applied* political analysis & research in big development sectors since the '00s.

*applied = practical, actionable, plain language.

Pol science, Pol economy, Pol research.

1/22

I preach to the converted @hamarquette @mushtaqkhan100 @fp2p @Jimnosredna @Fromagehomme @GoodfellowTom @pmheywood @Brianlevy387 @alanhudson1 @GlobalDevInst @nomhossain @ICTDTax @cblatts

but this thread is really for Big Sector friends (health, growth, educ, livelihoods)
2/22

Way back when....

The first proper political study I commissioned examined a proposal to mitigate arsenic contamination in water supplies.

It concluded that the planned institutional reforms were politically unfeasible.

The report was unpopular. So was I.

3/22

Such early work was by consultants – examining knotty institutional problems in big spend sectors.

Ground rules:

i. analytical framework clear up front (i.e. not freestyle political description)

ii. by bona fide political researchers (not sector experts moonlighting)

4/22

When we appointed a consultant/researcher, sector experts often complained ‘but (s)he doesn’t know anything about this sector!’.

But governance gut feeling was that fresh eyes & strong pol skills were more important, & the pol ppl would anyway draw on sector specialists.
5/22

Feathers were ruffled, but these studies could have big impacts on plans, such as when they advised that expected technical or institutional reforms were politically unfeasible (e.g. required turkeys to be pretty chilled about the Christmas menu).
6/22

But outputs were rarely public, helping some players <feel> smarter, but remaining private, uncontested, not spurring open debate. This felt odd.

Commissioning pol analysis & sharing it can lose you friends. But so can commissioning & acting on it, but not sharing it.
7/22

In time I moved to commissioning 'Big R Research', including practical political research on growth, health, education, urban, & sub-sectors in between.

Research is by nature public (so everyone can love it, hate it, but at least debate it).
8/22

Political Research is commissioned thru competition (so less tendency to only work with pet experts) & quality assured through peer review throughout process (drive up rigor & quality). This feels better.

But not if the only ppl who read it are other pol researchers.

9/22

Of course, not all political research is good. Pol researchers may struggle to communicate in ways that sector players (health, educ, growth, skills) can understand, or act on (that is why I call it ‘applied’). But the best research can have big, real world impact.
10/22

£ #1
..and it does not cost much, particularly when compared with the sector budgets at stake– regardless of whether they are funded through taxation or via aid.
11/22

£ #2
The cost of commissioning political research is usually a fraction of sector programme investments.

Live example: £130,000 political economy research (with data collection) identified serious pol corruption constraint in sector with >$1Bn investment.

Q: worth it ?

12/22

Low demand, low supply:

But there is still too little of it about, with areas of policy & development spending untroubled by decent, practical pol research. Supply of good research is constrained... and demand (from sectors) may be lower.

An awkward optional extra?

13/22

Looking back, trying to commission new political research in big sectors can follow a standard pattern…

with echoes... <<yawn! not again!>> ...of the Kübler-Ross model of 5 stages of grief:

1.denial 2.anger 3.bargaining 4.depression 5.acceptance.

14/22

Bright Idea!

We political types suggest commissioning political research in key sector ‘X’ because years of investment do not seem to deliver change at the pace or scale intended (or something more sinister).

Could something political be getting in the way?

15/22

Sector experts may refer to our old friend ‘lack of political will’. <LoPW>

as @hamarquette has said, we prefer to think of

<active political won't>

16/22

KR1: Denial: Sector technocrats may tell us

"Political research? No time for that / we don't need it.
We are experts - it is REALLY technically complicated.
I am sure that someone is doing this already.
No, I can’t name a particular study. Or a researcher”.

17/22

We commission political research by people who may not have deep knowledge of <that> sector, but are good applied political researchers. They ask some awkward questions about areas/processes/relationships that are critical, but stuck.
18/22

KR2: Anger: There may be annoyance that the political research exposes some over-simplistic technical approaches that are directly contradicted by real political incentives, & have been unsuccessful – as well as expensive to try and implement.
19/22

KR3: Bargaining: But political problems have broken cover- the rsrch creates debate. Experts may say 'we knew about this, but couldn't mention it'

There is acceptance that <some> pol constraints are real, though rejection of others that make things look too broken.
20/22

KR4: Depression: new insights about how politically stuck the sector really is, make previous plans look a bit simplistic.

KR5: Acceptance: the political research is mentioned in the next sector plan.

<custom emoji: smug pol-sci genie w/ head sticking out of bottle>

21/22

A year on:

Sector experts: “please can you buy us some more of that politics stuff?”.

Political research has broken through. Further research builds on this. Political researchers (& those commissioning it), get invited to more meetings (and even parties).

22/22

And no-one parties like a serious political researcher.

Luckily*.

23/22

*only joking.

ps briefcase was freebie at arsenic mitigation conference.

Scissors added as ppl tend to think political research is to dissect, for post mortem.

Yet it shld be preventative, & positive: understand obstacles, identify politically feasible reform, make things work, & better.

pps I drafted this Thread in February then shelved it.

But I think that political research in #globaldev is always important - particularly in a crisis.

If your <big sector> in <your context> does not have applied political research - time to get some?