180 likes | 203 Views
FANRPAN. Adding Value in Agricultural and Natural Resources Policies and Processes in Southern Africa. Does Southern Africa Need FANRPAN?. Contextual Overview. Old problems, new dimensions Knowledge of technical solutions not enough -need to be translated into policy
E N D
FANRPAN Adding Value in Agricultural and Natural Resources Policies and Processes in Southern Africa
Contextual Overview • Old problems, • new dimensions • Knowledge of technical • solutions not enough • -need to be translated into policy • Policy needs drivers for implementation • Policy cannot be static Food insecurity & Climate change Urgent action required Actions need to be effective on a large scale Single country actions Regional level actions The Need Context for FANRPAN The enabling factors Growing guidance on network development and management Technology Wealth of experience among members in region & Increased focus on regional approaches Urgency of issues -greater accessibility Of decision-makers Models of accountability strategies
The FANRPAN value proposition A vehicle for citizens’ engagement in policy processes An information exchange platform A source of legitimacy for policy positions A values development platform for national and regional level policy processes A sharing platform for competencies A capacity building vehicle
The Value of Networks 1+1>2 • Eliminates overlap and duplication • Unique in that it assembles capacities of individual members • Has a greater prospect of achieving an ambitious set of goals
Understanding the expectations on the NetworkTypes of problems and options for solutions Region Country A Country B Country C Weakest link Best shot Summation
FANRPAN and Regional Work • 2 Types of problems • Common problems • Transboundary problems • 3 Reasons for non-investment in solutions • Lack of coordination • Risk aversion • Free-rider syndrome • 3 Types of solutions • Best Shot • Summation • Weakest Link • FANRPAN Projects • Largely best shot • Some Weakest link • No summation • Persistent Organising Problems • Low intensity of activity • Inadequate financial resources • Weak investment in network development • Policy change vs network development
The FANRPAN Structure • Multi-tiered network with coordinating hubs • 1 Regional secretariat, 12 country nodes, 240+ member organisations
Network Typology and FANRPAN Connectivity Alignment Production • Easy flow • and access • to information • Collective values/ • Positions • development • Joint action • including • policy changes • Need all three elements • Easier to work on connectivity, • Current funding emphasises alignment, • No real investments in meaningful ‘production’ capacity
Expectations on networks vs investments Investments Expectations • Evidence for agenda setting • Links between stakeholders • Information exchange • Policy recommendations • Policy changes at national level • Emergence of regional policies • Contribution to regional integration Connectivity & Alignment! Production Missing! Investment in Underlying capacities for production
Moving beyond what we know • Recognising that action requires more than knowing what to do • How to get policy makers to act • Getting them to act • Checking on implementation • Recommending improvements • Exerting pressure to ensure improvements are adopted and implemented Policy advocacy Policy recommendations
Capacity Requirements at each Hub (Secretariat and Node Coordination) Level Weaving – linking actors Vibrant & Effective Network Facilitating – Eliminating barriers Coordinating – Keeping processes moving Operating – administration & management Monitoring and Evaluating – Taking pulse The Front-End Ability to fund early stage organising Wide participation and influence Ability to organise & manage national/regional dialogues and actions Ability to develop work through all stages of policy processes
Multiple Leadership Roles for Effective Networks Organiser Funder Steward Weaver Coach Coordinator Facilitator
FANRPAN Efforts to Address Capacity Requirements • Two Part Business Plan • Programme • Institutional development • Developed funding proposals for the • institutional development component Not popular! Used the programme work to carry some aspects of institutional development Thin, No continuity, Weak connection with policy makers!
Summary • There is value in policy networks • FANRPAN has been doing good work but could do more • The key limitation has been the limited investment in network development • Investment in ‘products’ without investment in processes undermines quality of process and follow-through on use of products. Products tend to be policy recommendations rather than policy change. • The regional and country level secretariats have multiple complex roles to perform and the capacities to perform such roles need to be developed to realise the benefits of the network