http://www.hsrc.ac.za/Research_Publication-21525.phtml

The report from the Locating the Power of In-between conference held in Pretoria, South Africa, 2008, takes an in depth look at the role of intermediaries in supporting and enabling evidence based policy.  It builds on the rich discussion at the event and aims to raise awareness of the contributions that intermediaries can make in development processes.

The report identifies key issues from the conference and presents them for further analysis, discussion and action. The findings from the conference show that:

• the issue of how evidence can inform policy and practice is an important shared concern and that the contribution of intermediary actors within that picture is significant and worthy of further attention
• there are a wide range of areas in which intermediary actors have the potential to address barriers to evidence-based policy, particularly by facilitating information flows between development actors and helping to set agendas in research, policy and practice arenas
• intermediary roles are not currently being played as extensively as they might, and the intermediary sector needs to step up to fulfil its potential in the sector

Since the conference, a lot of work has been done analysing and responding to the ideas and issues that emerged from the conference.  The I-K-Mediary Network, a network of people actively involved in intermediary work, many of whom attended the conference, has continued to develop and grow and continues to champion the role of intermediaries in development. Last year the group undertook case study work to understand its influence in change processes in different contexts, and also recently met in the UK to reflect on the conference findings and discuss areas for future collaboration. The report from this meeting entitled ‘Intermediary understanding, impact and action’ and a summary of the case study work entitled ‘Intermediary Impact’ are both available at www.ids.ac.uk/go/knowledge-services/strategic-learning-initiative/i-k-mediary-group/publications

Please do share your reflections, thoughts and ideas on reading the conference report and related follow up work.

Being asked to speak about policy making processes on behalf on DFID, she says, felt like a “scary deal”.

Research is not consensual but we need to look at different knowledge and narratives.  Within DFID itself, there is belief in engaging with an evidence base to inform policy, but in practice they are unable to.

Megan outlines some of the disablers and enablers to engaging with an evidence base:

•    Policymaking is “messy and grubby” – there are lots of factors involved – negotiation, the art of politics, institutional capacity to capture from all the different evidence.

•    People are too busy responding to national imperatives and regional programmes of support to engage with an evidence base.

•    DFID frequently changes policy narratives (e.g. sustainable livelihoods, natural resource development, and climate change). These changing labels disable the outside world from understanding and engaging.

Evidence based policy, she says, ‘means different things to different people’. How do you get people to engage with an evidence base that is broad and disparate, when making difficult and on the fly decisions?

She advocates two approaches:
-    Make visible the invisible: A lot of knowledge already exists, we do not need to generate more – instead we should look to supporting institutions already generating new kinds of evidence to inform policy.
-    Strengthen the demand for and use of research: the recent DFID strategy promises £1 billion to spend on commissioning and getting research into use.

People need to recognise the constraints under which policies are developed; have a better ‘understanding about the impediments of why we [policymakers] are willing but not always able’.

The window of opportunity, she says, is when policy gets implemented. That is when putting things into operation on the ground makes the difference.

Megan Lloyd Laney is the Communications Advisor for the UK Department for International Development (DFID).

Listen to Megan Lloyd Laney’s 12 minute presentation
Read the blog of the session

76% of particpants who completed the evalaution questionnaire from the Power of In-between conference felt the conference met or exceeded their expectations.  Participants thought that in one way or another the conference had helped them to:

•    Debate and discuss the role of intermediaries: Helping to define, understand, broaden, clarify, value and explore the challenges relating to the role of the intermediary/research broker

“[My understanding of intermediary roles] has been blown up! There are horizontal roles, vertical roles, one-way, two-way, multi-way, 360°”

•    Share lessons and experiences with other intermediaries and learn from others:  Particularly in relation to gaining new ideas, comparing experiences and setting their work in a wider context.

“[There was] A sense of connection with other people facing the same issues.”

From the follow up activities people mentioned, it appears that the majority of participants:

•    Plan to co-operate with intermediaries in future
•    Identified opportunities for collaboration with other institutions and actors
•    Will apply new thinking, ideas and practical tools to their own work
•    Will share their learning with their colleagues and others in their organisation and networks

The main criticisms of the conference were that there was not enough time and that there was confusion over terminology and the hypothesis which could have been clarified and set in context at the beginning of the conference. There were also differing views on the focus that the conference should have taken with some participants suggesting it should have focussed on policy processes and others more on grassroots engagement.

The full evaluation report of the conference is available to download here

The workshop was the second meeting of the I-K-Mediary Group an emerging network of research intermediaries who work to increase access to and use of research in development contexts by providing portals, gateways or reporting services.   Key insights and outcomes from the workshop were as follows:

1. Information and knowledge intermediary work is a powerful force for social change
The conference and workshop illustrated the range of roles that intermediaries can play; the diversity of contexts in which the role is being played and the range of stakeholders affected. Intermediary work can enhance information flows between actors, stimulate demand for information and maintain access to information over time.

2. Different roles for knowledge and information intermediaries: ‘just in case’ and ‘just in time’
During the Power of In-between conference, some intermediaries identified the need to go beyond playing a “repository” role for information if they want to achieve their objectives around informing policy and practice processes. They argued that proactive communication and engagement with stakeholders are necessary. Exploration during the workshop found both roles were required; characterised as just in-case and just-in-time. In some cases one organisation can play both roles, in other cases collaboration between people with feet in different camps and skills to match is just as effective.

3. We need a greater understanding of the actors we serve and their role in policy processes
A deep understanding of the actors we seek to reach and the changes we seek to bring for them is necessary if we are to contribute effectively to greater use of evidence in policy and practice. This understanding should drive all of our work, from strategy level thinking, to website design, editorial policy and monitoring and evaluation.

4. Collaboration between people undertaking intermediary work is a central means of achieving our objectives
At both the workshop and conference there was an emerging sense of a sector; one that would be stronger with greater common identity, shared understandings, values and standards, and one whose members collaborate to realise their objectives. From benchmarking our work in comparison to each other, joint investigations into impact to content sharing; collaboration between intermediaries in different spheres was an ongoing theme.

5. Willingness to work together to create structures for shared learning and collaboration
At the end of the workshop, participants affirmed their commitment to continue working together and to creating the means for doing so. We agreed to develop the I-K-Mediary Group from an informal network towards a formal I-K-Mediary Programme. Individuals from 10 organisations volunteered to be part of a Core Group to develop a vision and mission, design a programme that will meet the needs of the broader group and to seek the funding to make it a reality.

The full report of the workshop containing discussions on conceptual, technical, editorial and monitoring and evaluation aspects of intermediary work is at: Between Ourselves: Report from the second meeting of the I-K-Mediary Group  July 2008, Centurion, South Africa

The evaluation of the workshop is also available to download here

Knowledge intermediaries, he suggests, “possess much power to shape development discourse” by constant scanning, sifting and aggregation of perspectives. He asks what more can be done to promote the strength of knowledge intermediaries in Africa?

You can read the full article commissioned by Inter Press Service (IPS) here.

Also check out Richard Humphries blog which highlights issues in the African knowledge and networking field.

Dr Temba Masilela speaks on the opening panel at the Power of In-Between conference

Taking an example of xenophobic attacks in South Africa, he asks what are the issues and imperatives underlying what happened – migration, crime, poverty, competition for resources? People see different narratives and framings and we need to analyse policy based on this.

Temba outlines a definition of the public policy process: “it’s a narrative about the authoritative allocation of values and resources”. It’s a narrative because it’s a story with many questions and answers:

• It has particular context, actors, relationships, plot and perspectives
• It is a story about why, who benefits, how should it be done, who bears the consequences and costs?
• It has an ending, happy or sad
• It is interactive, iterative and about engagement
• It has a history to it, a present and a future
• It requires some suspension of disbelief as well as trust that it is beneficial and will result in desired outcome

Temba explains how this definition highlights issues of power, decision-making, problem-solving, politics, trust and legitimation. Often external eyes do not appreciate that policy is about making tough decisions and timeliness. The story of politics and contestation behind policy is also left out. People struggle with the outputs of policy processes as they are often dry and bland, they do not give you a picture of the intrigue behind the scenes, the different scenarios interrogated and the extent to which it is fought over.

Dr Temba Masilela, is Executive Director at the Policy Analysis and Capacity Enhancement Unit, HSRC.

Listen to Dr Temba Masilela’s 10 minute presentation
Read the blog of the session

Speaking openly and frankly Dr Sadan argued that there has definitely been a shift towards wanting to engage and utilise research more, but acknowledged that there is uneven use of research evidence across different departments. Dr Sadan cited the Department of a Social Development as a positive example of a department that engages with evidence, motivated she argued by their need to defend their decisions to the Treasury Department. However in other parts of the government system often people use research that supports their position, that might come down to basing decisions on one research paper.

Dr Sadan identified problems as lying with both researchers and policy makers: she questioned the communication style of some researchers, saying that within government circles some research reports are known as “doorstoppers” as they are so heavy and impenetrable; on the other hand she questioned the assumption that policy makers are actually able to assess and interpret information and apply it effectively. She then went on to identify some practical approaches to addressing these challenges.

Listen to Dr Sadan’s 10 minute presentation.
Read the blog of the session.

Adriana Forero, LAC Regional Coordinator, GDNet
I personally found the workshop/conference very helpful in providing an input for both the day-to-day work and for the long term planning of our institutions. The possibility to get to know other IK-Mediaries and share with them work experiences was really constructive, among others, to start thinking on different ways to measure the effectiveness and impact of our work.

The discussion definitely raised a lot of issues to reflect on and enriched the process of formalizing the concept of “IK-Mediaries”. Since nowadays almost everything builds on networks the workshop/conference was a very good occasion build an effective network of ours. With regards to the internet tools we have to get familiar with, I feel that the cyberworld is changing too fast and for some of us that still have to learn more on them the network might be a very good instrument to provide support for our activities.

Finally, to me the most interesting lesson to draw from the workshop/conference was that despite the differences in nature and aims of our organizations, in the end we share a common challenge: to effectively communicate a message that contributes to the development of our countries of regions. In how we successfully support each other in fulfilling that difficult task, lies the key of our network.

Ingy Magdi, GDNet
I really enjoyed attending the workshop/conference and found it to be very helpful. For the first time I can sit with a group and discuss issues related to my job without having to explain first what is nature of my work. And this is because all of us understand what is the role of a knowledge intermediary. Also bringing together all those knowledge intermediaries in one place, sharing and discussing mutual concerns and trying to find solutions and effective ways to reach our target was very constructive. Despite the differences in nature and aims of our organizations, in the end we all share a common challenge which is how to effectively communicate with our target audience and how to provide them with the services they are looking for. The workshop discussions raised a lot of issues to enhance the concept of IK Mediaries. The conference also gave us a golden opportunity to familiarize ourselves with the new internet tools which we should eventually use in our organizations in order to enhance and upgrade our organizations website to match with this constantly growing cyberworld.