Enhancing evidence-based policy making through Country-Led M&E Systems*

1. Marco Segone, Regional Chief, Monitoring and Evaluation, UNICEF CEE/CIS, and former Vice President, IOCE E-mail: msegone@unicef.org Enhancing evidence-based policy making throughCountry-Led M&E Systems* *: The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policies or views of UNICEF. The text has not been edited to official publication standards and UNICEF accepts no responsibility for errors.

2. Based on book published by UNICEF in partnership with key international institutions • Authors: 21 global evaluation leaders • Partnership: IDEAS, IOCE, DevInfo, WB, UNECE, and MICS Available for free download at: http://www.unicef.org/ceecis/resources_10597.html

3. 1. M&E should be instrumental in ensuring effective decision making , by providing strong evidence. Then: • Why is M&E not playing its role to its full potential? • What are the factors, in addition to the quality and adequacy of evidence, influencing the decision-making process in organizations and societies? • How can the uptake of evidence in decision-making be increased?

4. What is Evidence-based Policy making? An approach that helps people make well informed decisions about policies, programmes and projects by putting the best available evidence at the heart of policy development and implementation.

5. Putting the best available evidence at the heart of policy making? Systematic review evidence Evaluation evidence High Qualitative research evidence Technical quality and trustworthiness Experimental and quasi-experimental evidence Low Survey and Administrative evidence Consultative techniques Low High Enabling policy environment

6. Practice of PoliticalLife Putting the best available evidence at the heart of policy making? High Technical quality and trustworthiness Low Low High Enabling policy environment Lobby system ►Think-tank ► Opinion leaders ► Media ► Civil Society Timing of the analysis Judgement Experience Resources

7. Practice of PoliticalLife Putting the best available evidence at the heart of policy making? Systematic review evidence Evaluation evidence Qualitative research evidence Technical quality and trustworthiness Vicious circle countries Experimental and quasi-experimental evidence Low Survey and Administrative evidence Opinion-based Consultative techniques Low Enabling policy environment Lobby system ►Think-tank ► Opinion leaders ► Media ► Civil Society Timing of the analysis Judgement Experience Resources

8. Practice of PoliticalLife Putting the best available evidence at the heart of policy making? Systematic review evidence Evidence demand-constrained countries Evaluation evidence High Qualitative research evidence Evidence-influenced Technical quality and trustworthiness Experimental and quasi-experimental evidence Survey and Administrative evidence Consultative techniques Low Enabling policy environment Lobby system ►Think-tank ► Opinion leaders ► Media ► Civil Society Timing of the analysis Judgement Experience Resources

9. Practice of PoliticalLife Putting the best available evidence at the heart of policy making? Systematic review evidence Evaluation evidence Qualitative research evidence Technical quality and trustworthiness Evidence supply-constrained countries Experimental and quasi-experimental evidence Low Survey and Administrative evidence Evidence-influenced Consultative techniques High Enabling policy environment Lobby system ►Think-tank ► Opinion leaders ► Media ► Civil Society Timing of the analysis Judgement Experience Resources

10. Practice of PoliticalLife Putting the best available evidence at the heart of policy making? Systematic review evidence Virtuous circle countries Evaluation evidence High Qualitative research evidence Evidence-based Technical quality and trustworthiness Experimental and quasi-experimental evidence Survey and Administrative evidence Consultative techniques High Enabling policy environment Lobby system ►Think-tank ► Opinion leaders ► Media ► Civil Society Timing of the analysis Judgement Experience Resources

11. Evidence into practice: Increasing the uptake of evidence in policy making Data Users (Policy Makers) Data Providers (Statisticians, Evaluators, Researchers) Need to improve dialogue How? What ? Why? When? Getting appropriate Buy-in Incentives to use evidence Reliable and trustworthy evidence Improving “usability” of evidence Effective dissemination Wide Access

12. The “quality” challenge: How to match technical rigour and policy relevance? Technical rigour but no policy relevance Policy relevance but no technical rigour Better evidence, technically rigorous and policy relevant.

13. Country-led M&E systems(CLES):a strategy to matchtechnical rigour with policy relevance Technical rigour but no policy relevance Better Policies Better Development Results Policy relevance but no technical rigour Better evidence, technically rigorous and policy relevant

14. Country-led M&E systems: what? • Country (and not donors) leads and owns the evaluation process by determining: • what policy or programme will be evaluated (including donors coordination and alignment) • what evaluation questions will be asked • what methods will be used • what analytical approach will be undertaken • how findings will be communicated • how findings will be used

15. “Country” led? International Organisation for Cooperation in Evaluation – IOCE (Organisational membership) International Development Evaluation Association – IDEAS (Individual membership) 11 Source: Quesnel, 2006 • Not exclusively the Government • Also civil society, including Professional evaluation organizations (from 15 to 70 in a decade)

16. From Evaluation of aid effectiveness To Evaluation of national development Towards Evaluation of global governance Country-led M&E systems: implications Asymmetrical approach: Developed countries evaluating developing countries Neutral approach: Developing countries evaluating national development policies Symmetrical approach: Developed and developing countries evaluating global governance

17. Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness National ownership and capacity development: the key ingredients to CLES Managing for results Mutual accounta bility Harmoni zation Alignment Ownership

18. Partner countries exercise effective leadership over their development policies and strategies Paris Declaration Commitment • Partner countries exercise leadership in developing and implementing their national development strategies • Donorsrespect partner country leadership and help strengthen their capacity to exercise it. Implications to the M&E Function • Strengthen and use country M&E systems • M&E capacity development

19. What are the challenges and way-forward? • On you view and experience: • What are the challenges to implement country-led M&E systems? What are the perceived risks by partner countries and by donors ? • What are the way forward? What’s the role of national, regional and international evaluation organizations such as IDEAS, and International agencies?

20. CLES: Challenges • drive towards ownership is partly supply-driven • longer time frame • perceived risk by partner countries that independent evaluations of donor support may have political and financial consequences • perceived risk by donors of weak national capacities and, in some cases, of weak independence of national M&E systems

21. CLES: way forward • Middle income, transition and developing countries cooperation to share good practices and lessons learned • National evaluation organizations fostering endogenous demand (and supply) for monitoring & evaluation • International organizations strengthening national capacities to design and implement national M&E systems