Advocacy Toolkit

Advocacy Toolkit

How to convince stakeholders to support

development education (DE)?A toolkit in three parts:

1 ArgumentsWhat is DE? Why is it important? Who are the actors?

2 MethodsPrinciples of and approaches to successful lobbying

3 ExamplesWho did it well? Spotlights on Spain, Poland and the European multi stakeholder process on DE

Examples (1/33)

v.10-2008

European examples for succesful DE advocacy

The following slides will put a spotlight on three successful examples on how to strengthen DE through advocacy processes:

1. The European DE Consensus process2. The way to a national DE strategy in Spain3. New government engagement through a multi stakeholder process in Poland

Advocacy processes have to be highly adapted to specific circumstances. Thus, these examples can‘t be transfered to other contexts as they are. However, they might provide inspiration. Don‘t hesitate to get in contact with the ressource persons in order to obtain more details!

Examples (2/33)

The advocacy process

1.Problem analysis

3. Stakeholders

4. Strategy

5.Action plan

6.Implementation &

Monitoring

2.Objectives

As explained in part 2 of this toolkit, the advocacy process is composed of six steps:

Let‘s see how these steps apply to the three examples!

Examples (3/33)

The European Development Education Consensus process

Examples (4/33)

Example 1:

The multi stakeholder approach towards the

European Development Education Consensus


Examples (5/33)

Back in 2001, the EU Council of Ministers adopted a resolution on development education, which was a nice political recognition of the sector, but which had important short comings: No clear definition of DE (including no distinction between PR and DE), no mention of coherent and co-ordinated DE strategies on national and European level, no mention of specific structures responsible for the commitments expressed: A vague and not binding general commitment.

On the other hand, the EC is through it‘s NSA/LA budget line by far the most important single donor for DE activities in Europe (29 Mio € in 2007), and this since 1979. However, there is no European strategy for DE. Such a strategic framework for DE could provide clear definition of what DE is (and what it is not), including its social and political role in a globalising world and be a reference for fostering national DE strategies.

In spite of a growing number of policial commitments and declarations for DE (e.g. in the European Consensus on Development), such an overarching European DE framework was still missing in the run-up to the July 2006 Helsinki Conference on development education.

Problem

confusion and missunderstanding on what DE actually is

lack of institutional political commitment

no European DE strategy framework

incoherence in natonal DE policies: some states have stronger DE policies, based on proper strategies, others don‘t

incoherence in EC policy and funding regarding DE

no clear demands from the DE community to different European actors such as EC, MS, EP and CS

potential of DE in fullfilling international commitments (e.g. MDG) is not properly used

no coherence in DE practise and policy in Europe

CORE PROBLEM

CA

US

ES

EF

FE

CT

S

no awareness on potential and importance of DE

no continuous multi-stakeholder dialogue on DE

DE is no political priority

no consolidation of previous DE commitments

no permanent forum to maintain exchange of committed institutional and CS actors on DE


Examples (6/33)

A problem tree analysis can help to map out the core problem and its causes and effects:

Problem


shared understanding and definition of DE among European stakeholders

more institutional political commitment

creation of a European DE strategy framework

increased coherence between natonal DE policies, establishment of national DE strategies

coherence in EC policy and funding regarding DE

clear demands from the DE community to different European actors such as EC, MS, EP and CS

potential of DE is properly used for fullfilling international commitments (e.g. MDG)

more coherence in DE practise and policy in Europe

OVERALLOBJECTIVE

SP

EC

IFIC

O

BJE

CT

IVS

TA

RG

ET

S

increased awareness on potential and importance of DE

establishment of a continuous multi-stakeholder dialogue on DE

DE becomes a political priority

consolidation of previous DE commitments

creation of a permanent forum to maintain exchange of committed institutional and CS actors on DE

Examples (7/33)

This leads to following objectives and targets:

Objectives


Examples (8/33)

loca

lin

tern

ati

on

al

Eu

rop

ean

nati

on

al

NGOs / civil society governmental / institutions

DE Centres

trade unions

churcheslocal ngos

fair trade shops

localauthorities

schools

universities

media

medianat. ngos

nat. platforms

European networks(Oxfam, Plan, GLEN etc.)

CONCORD

DEF

libraries ...

EuropeanCommission

EuropeanParliament

Councilof Europe

GENE

UN Millenium campaignGCAP+

other campaigns

nat. MFAs

nat. MoEs nat. developmentagencies (InWEnt etc.)

OECD DevCom

North-South Centre

CEMR

EuropeanYouthForum

media

To work towards the general objective, the creation of a widely accepted European DE strategy framenwork, we have to map and analyse different DE stakeholders in Europe:

What are relations between those actors? What are priorities and mandates of the actors?

Stakeholders

Privateschools


Examples (9/33)

The CONCORD DEF as initiator of the process has strong commitment to the achievement of a

European DE strategy. It also has a strong mandate through its members from all EU member states,

representing millions of European citizens.

Natural allies would come from the NGO/civil society side. However, to attain the objective, it was

crucial to concentrate on institutional and state actors.

Other European DE networks and organisations such as GENE or the North-South-Centre of the

Council of Europe are potentially competitors in the matter and had to be involved carefully to make

them allies.

Representatives of European institutions have restricted mandates, but are important allies to

assure the link with their institutions and to give legitimacy to the process.

Representatives of national governments are important allies as they have power at the European

level, and they can influence national DE policies. They can also give the example to their peers from

other, less involved countries.

National Ministries of Educations can be opponents, as they tend to have an aversion against the

Europeanisation of the educational agenda.

Stakeholders


Examples (10/33)

loca

lin

tern

ati

on

al

Eu

rop

ean

nati

on

al

NGOs / civil society governmental / institutions

DE Centres

trade unions

local ngos

fair tradeshops

localauthorities

schools

universities

media

medianat. ngos

nat. platforms

European networks(Oxfam, Plan, GLEN etc.)

CONCORD

DEF

libraries ...

EuropeanCommission

EuropeanParliament

Councilof Europe

GENE

UN Millenium campaignGCAP+

other campaigns

nat. MFAs

nat. MoEs nat. developmentagencies (InWEnt etc.)

OECD DevCom

North-South Centre

CEMR

EuropeanYouthForum

media

European DE multi stakeholdersteering group

The challange was to associate a wide range of actors to the process, in order to avoid a „we“ are lobbying „them“ situation, but to create common ownership for a common process, based on share convictions and priorities:

The European Development Education Multi Stakeholder process

Stakeholders

churches

Privateschools


Examples (11/33)

In July 2006, the European political context was favourable for the undertaking.

- The EU institutions stated in the 2005 „Consensus on Development“ that they will „pay particular attention to development education and awareness raising“ without being precise about how - the need to make this statement more concrete was obvious.

- Finland had just taken over the EU presidency and was open to DE questions while co-funding a major DE conference in Helsinki.

- Germany, Portugal and Slovenia, the three upcoming presidencies, made DE one of their priorities in their common 18-months-presidency programm.

The Helsinki conference should give a clear mandate for drafting a DE strategy framework paper to a multi stakeholder group steering group, including representatives from European Institutions, international organisations, member states and civil society.

Once the final work was approved by the whole multi stakeholder group, policial support should be sought to make the strategy a reference point for DE in Europe.

Strategy


Examples (12/33)

INITIAL TIMELINE

2006 2007

3-4 July 26.02.2007 22.05.2007 21.09.2007 7-9 November (TBC)

Plenary meeting 0: Helsinki Conference

1st Steering Group meeting, Brussels

2nd Steering Group meeting, Luxembourg

(hosted by Luxembourg MFA)

3rd Steering Group meeting, Brussels (hosted

by EC)

Plenary meeting 1: EU Development Days,

Lisbon - public presentation of main

components of Vision and interim process results

Finnish Presidency Germany Presidency Portugal Presidencykick off

create ownershipgive mandate to SG

Agreement on process, content and division of labour

Drafting of document, input from parallel processes, hiring of independent consultant

2008 2009

February June September December June

3rd Steering Group meeting Plenary 2 4th Steering Group Plenary 3: Final sign-off EP elections

Slovenia Presidency France Presidency Czech PresidencyDrafting of document, input from parallel processes Editing and translation Dissemination

advocacy actions

Action Plan


Examples (13/33)

During implementation, it turned out that the initial action plan could be modified significantly. Also new, unforeseeable opportunities showed up:

- The title of the final document refers explicitely to the European Development Consensus, to which it is positioned as a compliment: „The European Development Consensus: The contribution of Development Education and Awarenes Raising“ (short: DE Consensus)

- The process was much quicker than expected. Three steering group meetings took place in 2007 (at CONCORD, Lux MFA and EC DG Dev) before the presentation of the final document at the European Development Days in Lisbon.

- Despite its character as an expert paper (it has not been officially adopted by the organisations present in the multi stakeholder group), it gets increasing political recognition, thanks to the multi stakeholder approach on which it is based: Louis Michel was present at its uinveiling, EP refers to it explicitely in a report on development policy in new member states, the EC will provide translations in all 23 official EU languages.

- At a fourth steering group meeting in the EP (February 2008), participants insisted on the importance of advocacy actions to assure diffusion and implementation of the Consensus

- Thus, the group will seek a new mandate from the multi stakeholder plenary at the Slovene DE conference (June 2008) for an implementation phase up to and beyond the European Elections.

Monitoring


Examples (14/33)

Strengths of the process:

- The multi stakeholder approach created common ownership for the process. It allowed access to resources of the parties involved (InWEnt, co-chairing the process, contributed financially to hire a consultant; the EC did the translations) and to give strong legitimacy to the document

- The strong momentum created by the process on different levels (national and European, NGO and institutional) opened new opportunities (e.g. creation of national DE strategies)

Weaknesses:

- Official recognition by EU institutions is still weak: The advocacy efforts have to continue

- CONCORD/DEF is the strongest driving force (also by providing the secretariat through DEEEP). This might lead to the impression that the whole undertaking is rather an NGO lobbying action than a commonly owned process, based on shared convictions and priorities. NGO actors (DEF) have to be careful not to appear to be imposing their views over and above the multi-stakeholder consensus.

More information?Please contact DEEEP: [email protected]

Conclusion

mailto:[email protected]

15

National DE Strategy Spain

Examples (15/33)

Example 2:

The way to a national DE strategy in Spain

16

Ignorance or confusing interpretations about what DE is among organisations that work on it

lack of institutional political commitment

no Spanish DE strategy framework

incoherence in DE policies, depending on the Ministry (Foreign Affairs, Labour, Education, etc.).

Limited support from public donors, due to lack of knowledge on DE

Lack of evaluation of DE projects and programmes

potential of DE in fullfilling international commitments (e.g. MDG) is not properly used

no coherence in DE practice and policy in Spain

CORE PROBLEM

CA

US

ES

EF

FE

CT

S

no awareness on potential and importance of DE

no continuous multi-stakeholder dialogue on DE

DE is no political priority

no consolidation of previous DE commitments

Lack of coordination among different state actors (Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Education, regions)


Examples (16/33)

Back in 2004, the situation in Spain was marked by incoherence and low political support for DE:

Problem

Many DE actors working on DE (formal, non formal, informal education) without knowing each other

17


shared understanding and definition of DE among Spanishstakeholders

more institutional political commitment

creation of a Spanish DE strategy framework

coherence and coordination between DE policies of gouvernmental stakeholders

Continuous support of donors, increase in funding for DE

Improved quality management (evaluation, monitoring) of DE projects and programmes

potential of DE is properly used for fullfilling international commitments (e.g. MDG)

more coherence in DE practise and policy

OVERALLOBJECTIVE

SP

EC

IFIC

O

BJE

CT

IVS

TA

RG

ET

S

increased awareness on potential and importance of DE

establishment of a continuous multi-stakeholder dialogue on DE

DE becomes a political priority

consolidation of previous DE commitments

Improved coordination among different state actors (MFA, MoE, regions)

Examples (17/33)

This led to following objectives and targets:

Objectives

Exchange and cooperation of different DE actors

18Examples (18/33)


Stakeholders

The different stakeholders are:

- Ministries:a) Foreign Affairs, through the SECI (International Cooperation State Secretary), which includes AECID and DGPOLDE (General Direction of Policies)It is in charge of the international cooperation policy.b) Science and Education, which is in charge of the creation of the Education for Global Citizenship subject.c) Others: Labour and Social Affairs, Health.

- Cooperation CouncilIt participates in the definition of international cooperation field; this is to say, DE as well.

- NGOs at regional (autonomous platforms), national (CONGDE) and European Level (DE Forum)

- Others: Universities, Mass Media.

19Examples (19/33)


Strategy

The CONGDE DE working group decided to promote the following elements:

- DE should be recognised as a strategic priority in cooperation and education areas.

- A coordinator at AECID (Spanish International Cooperation and Development Agency) should assure coherence of DE as a complex area with various actors and working levels.

- Coordination mechanisms among public administrations at all levels: local, regional and national. It is important to underline that the educative competencies are responsibility of regional governments, so there should be a person in charge of DE in each Autonomous Community (Spanish regions).

- Collaboration with other institutions from education, research and information fields, such as educative institutions, universities, mass media, etc., taking into account the potential that can emerge from alliances and consortiums among different actors.

- Cohesion between European polices and Spanish policy regarding DE

- Increased DE funding, with a 5% fixed percentage in public funds budget lines, with specific evaluations tools for DE projects.

20Examples (20/33)


Following steps were done by CONGDE to promote the creation of a DE strategy:

a) Guide of Resources of Education for Development (2004)Useful tool to look up different materials and resources that NGOs from CONGDE were using, (http://directorio-guia.congde.org/guiaderecursos/info.php)

b) Creation of a CONGDE position paper on DE, based on a deep, common reflection:

Education for Development: an essential development strategy Chapters on the evolution of DE, DE definition, actors, areas (formal, non formal and informal) and recommendations.The document underlined in a very positive way the new approach of creating a subject in the formal school curriculum about Education for Citizenship, from a global perspective.

c) A DE seminar in Madrid (27/28 February 2006), organized among the CONGDE and ACSUR-las Segovias, in order to make a public presentation of the position paper and share points of views about DE.

Action Plan

http://directorio-guia.congde.org/guiaderecursos/info.php

21Examples (21/33)


Action Plan

d) As a result, the DE CONGDE Group has been participating in a working group created by the Ministry of Education for two years to think about the best ways of creating and implementing the new subject Education for Citizenship, that has begun to be implemented in 2008.

e) Furthermore, DE CONGDE Group has taken part in the elaboration of the first Spanish DE Strategy, carried out by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Contacts among DE Group and AECID have been very intense and close. AECID has taken into account very much the first position paper and, from them on, has looked for the participation of DE Group in different actions, such as the creation of the Strategy.

22Examples (22/33)


Monitoring

• Contribution to the master plan for Development Cooperation 2005-08, which already recognises DE

• Close cooperation of MFA and CONGE in elaboration of a national DE strategy:‣ definition of institutional framework‣ „Development Education and Global Citizenship“

‣ coordination & systematisation between DE actors (state, non-state)‣ promotion of global solidarity through educational processes‣ research and evaluation of DE‣ dissemination strategy

• New school subject „Education for Citizenship“ from 2008

Result: The national DE strategy

specific objective 1

DE as strategic areain cooperation

specific objective 2

Promotion of DE for solidarity and global citizenship

English executive summary: http://www.maec.es/es/MenuPpal/Cooperacion%20Internacional/Publicaciones%20y%20documentacin/Documents/DES%20Educación%20para%20el%20Desarrollo%20RE%20Inglés.pdf

23Examples (23/33)


Monitoring

Due to the fact that the DE Strategy is still very new (2008), it has not been possible to get real results about its effective implementation.

However, the DE Group of CONGDE will closely look at the implementation of the strategy in order to support it, as well as to underline the positive and the negative aspects of it.

More information?Please contact DEEEP: [email protected]


DE Multi Stakeholder Process in Poland

Examples (24/33)

Example 3:

New government commitment to DE in Poland


Examples (25/33)Problem

DE status in Poland in January 2008

Problems- DE recognized and financed only by MFA- No contact with Ministry of Education (MoE)- There's no cooperation between MFA and MoE- Lack of coherent DE strategy - No DE recognition in school environment- Lack of funds to lead DE actions

Achievements:- DE working group active- Strong support from national NGO platform- Good contact and support from MFA- CONCORD and DEF support- DE is more important for formal education

Opportunities- New persons in charge of MoE- School curriculum reform planned- Growing experience of DE working group members- Support from stakeholders - Good contact with CONCORD/DEF and other actors

> The situation is characterised by a unsatisfying collaboration with and between certain stakeholders (esp. MoE), due to the recent years of right-conservative ruling of the ministry.

> The change in government end 2007 provides a window of opportunity to change this.

Examples (26/33)


Objectives

General objective:

Involve new stakeholders, esp. Ministry of Education and related institutions (national teacher training agency, schools, universities) in the elaboration and implementation of a national development education strategy.

Specific objectives:

1. Enhance funding possibilities for DE activities2. Integrate DE in school curricula and teachers’ training

Examples (27/33)


Stakeholders

Situation end 2007 Situation June 2008

Missing, weak and often one-way communication between different stakeholders evolved within six months into a complex network, the triangle MFA-NGOs-MoE being the focal point.

This was possible because of two elements:- A central and facilitating role of the NGO-platform- A change of staff and political approach in the MoE after the change in government in October 2007

Examples (28/33)


Strategy

The change in the political situation after the October 2007 elections (end of the national-conservative coalition and important defeat of the far-right clerical “League of Polish families”, whose president was Minister of Education) provided an opportunity to reshape relations between different state and non-state actors in terms of development education.

Especially the crucial integration of the MoE in the dialogue with the MFA and civil society seemed now possible. This was a central element to attain the objectives (creation of a national, multi-stakeholder DE strategy, integration of DE in school curricula and teachers’ training, improved DE funding).

The national NGDO platform Zagranica and its DE working group had a central role to play as a facilitator to bring the two most concerned ministries (MFA and MoE) at one table and to make meaningful propositions, on the basis of its members’ experience in DE and anchored in pan-European DE processes through the CONCORD DEF and the European multi-stakeholder process on DE.

Examples (29/33)


Lobby actions

Mails & informal meetings to pressure MFA & MoE to organise a first meeting with NGOs on DE

January 2008 End of January 28th February 14th March

Action Plan

Preparations

Elaboration of a NGO position paper with 12 statements for future collaboration with MoE

Problems: few NGOs involved

First meeting with MoE

Two hours meeting between NGOs and MoE/MFA officials. Presentation of NGO position paper.

Problems: Board range of NGOs (culture, development, ecology) present at the meeting

DE working group meeting

Follow-up on meeting with ministries. Discussion on three main fields of cooperation with MoE. Preparation of national platform DE position paper (definitions, objectives, values)

DE working group meeting with MoE representatives

Consensus with MoE on three main points for cooperation:

1. Curriculum reform2. Global Education Week3. Teachers’ training

Examples (30/33)


Action Plan

4/5th April 9th April 25/26th April 16/17 May 2nd July

1st curriculum reform meeting

On invitation of MoE, DE working group participates in an expert group on curriculum reform. Lobbying on DE presence in new curriculum.

Problems: Lots of different actors outside DE involved in process, DE is new subject to almost all of them. Lack of good will from some experts.

DE working group meeting

Internal follow-up on curriculum reform meeting. Preparation of teachers’ training (conference) and Global Education Week.

Problems: Few NGOs actively involved

2nd and 3rd curriculum reform meeting

Continuation of lobbying for DE integration in new curriculum within the expert group.

Problems: Unknown outcome until official publication of the curriculum. Changes can be made without NGOs knowledge.

DE Working group meeting

Summary and evaluation of last 6 months and planning of further steps for the upcoming six months.

E v a l u a t I o n

Examples (31/33)


Monitoring

Global Education Week: MoE agreed to promote the GEW, to inform schools about activities and to sponsor the prizes for national DE competitions. Next year financing of the week may go (partly) through MoE. GEW as a recognised, international happening shown to be a good tool to promote DE within the government bodies. The DE working group should- improve communication with MoE- engage MoE representatives as much as possible into DE working group work

School curriculum reform is going on until end 2008 and shall be implemented in 2009/10. After the 3rd expert meeting, platform representatives take part only through Internet. The DE working group should- keep close contact with the expert group and MoE to track and influence the reform preparation process.- be prepared to propose own methodology and materials once the new school program starts

National DE strategy: All key actors, but local authorities, are now united around the topic. However, MoE is much behind the MFA in establishing mechanism of supporting DE.The DE WG should- improve cooperation between different actors in order to facilitate the elaboration of a national, multi stakeholder DE strategy- engage underrepresented actors like local authorities

Teachers’ training: MoE agreed that the Central Teachers Training Centre (CTTC) organises, together with the national platform, a conference on DE within formal education for teachers and staff of all Polish teacher training centres – a first step in integrating DE in formal teachers’ training. MoE commissioned the conference and will finance it entirely. The DE WG should- support and encourage CTTC on the conference preparation process (planning)- prepare methodology proposals as follow up- keep contacts active after the conference

Four key issues to follow up

Examples (32/33)


Conclusion

The Polish success is essentially based on two factors: Timing and relations with stakeholders. The DE working group of the national platform managed to take advantage of the change in government to position itself in a central, facilitating position between the key actors, especially the MFA (on the basis of existing good relations) and the MoE (which adopted new, more DE friendly approach).

This is leading to very positive results:- The DE working group is growing and plays a key role in DE field in Poland. The position in the national NGDO platform is strengthened.- Collaboration with and support from MFA (strengthened) and MoE (initiated and growing).- Integration of DE in school curriculum reform.- Collaboration with MoE (and potential financial support) for Global Education Week- Integration of DE in teachers’ training. Key position for DE working group in providing that.

Seizing a window of opportunity can demand flexibility instead of long-term planning – the “strategy” as outlined here evolved over time, as opportunities showed up.

Advocacy is sometimes more art than science.

Please contact the DE working group of the polish NGDO platform for more information:Piotr Oledzki [email protected]


Advocacy Toolkit

Thank you for using the DEEEP Advocacy Toolkit

For any questions, feedback or remarks, please write an email to

[email protected]

Also check out the rest! The toolkit comes in three parts:

1 ArgumentsWhat is DE? Why is it important? Who are the actors?

2 MethodsPrinciples of and approaches to successful lobbying

3 ExamplesWho did it well? Spotlights on Spain, Poland and the European multi stakeholder process on DE

v.10-2008


Advocacy Toolkit

Documents

Transcript of Advocacy Toolkit