BOND Advocacy and Capacity Building Group Meeting Minutes

BOND Advocacy and Capacity Building Group Meeting Minutes

BOND Advocacy and Capacity Building Group Meeting Minutes

2 June 2008 – BOND Offices

Present

Naved Chowdhury, Oxfam International

Mary O'Connell, WaterAid

John Young, ODI

Alberto Tavares, WWF Office in Western Amazon, Acre State, Brazil

Gweneth Barry, CAFOD

Archana Patel, Sightsavers International

Joanna Watson, Tearfund

Sinead Walsh, Concern Worldwide

Mary Dawson, Link Community Development

Hilary Coulby

Amy Gray, Sense International

María Baños Smith, WOMANKIND Worldwide

Eliza Jones, Lepra

Kate Studd, WWF-UK

Jane Scobie, HelpAge International

Rachel Noble, Tourism Concern

Jessica Faleiro, Tearfund

Tara Brace-John, One World Action

Menka Jah, Methodist Relief & Development Fund

Jo Khinmaung, Tearfund

Graciela Romero, SCIAF

Sophie Harding, Tearfund

Scott McLew, BOND

Rebecca Evans, BOND

1. Introduction

Mary O’Connell welcomed everyone to the meeting and explained an overview and purpose of the new merged group and the outline for the meeting.

2. Presentations

John Young, from the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) made a presentation entitled Making the case: Using research-based evidence for policy advocacy.

This was followed by Alberto Tavares from the WWF Office in Western Amazon, Acre State, Brazil who presented on Success and Challenges in the Amazon Rainforest.

3. Advocacy for Change: Stories and Impressions

Naved Chowdhury facilitated a group discussion on advocacy experiences.

Jessica Faleiro asked the question of whether researchers at the ODI were working on horizon scanning as a way of looking forward?

  • John Young replied that the ODI does very little on horizon scanning, due to the fact that no one pays for horizon scanning research to be undertaken, however a bit of work has been done on scenario planning.

Mary O’Connell put the question to the group about how international organisations with UK offices support the development of country level advocacy from a Northern Office.

Discussion

  • It is dependant on the context. Advocacy happens on a local level which impacts on the global level. In the case of Oxfam, Oxfam International builds the capacity of its partners to engage in advocacy, whereas Oxfam GB leads more in the advocacy process.
  • Advocacy at the local level can look very different to international advocacy. It depends on who understands the policy context.
  • The issue of community development organisations who are neither advocacy nor research organisations. Where do they fit in?
  • Programme staff need easy conversations with partner organisations to be effective.

The World Vision report on local-level advocacy (in 40 countries) by Nigel Simister was highlighted and the group requested Nigel to present his findings to the September meeting.

ACTION: Request Nigel Simister to present his findings at the next meeting

Jessica Faleiroraised the issue of consortium work. Does a group of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) coming together actually work? Is it recommended to work with Consortia from an advocacy point of view?

Discussion

  • Networks work quite well if you engage properly with them, however in many cases a network platform may be competing with its partners.
  • It can be difficult to engage with networks if they are competing for the same resources.
  • Advocacy networks work well if the people within the network actually want something done. When the project is complete, the relationships that organisations have formed can then be reactivated on something else down the line.
  • Organisations such as environmental organisations may not have the legitimacy nor skills to work in development, so it is important to form partnerships with CSOs.
  • If a Secretariat doesn’t represent its members, an organisation can step in and act as the link between the national network and the local level organisations. Concern Worldwide have done this in areas such as Kenya.
  • Coalitions can be cumbersome so choose your alliances carefully.

Tara Brace-John posed the question of how effective is advocacy as a strategy if you are not a well resourced organisation? How do we ensure that organisations that are not well resourced are part of the advocacy system?

Discussion

  • If you want to do the advocacy bits better, then you have to do less of other things. All organisations need to balance their resources with their strategic priorities. Organisations need to put in place ways of orienting their work towards strengthening the organisations advocacy capacity and its ways of working within this capacity.
  • Networks and organisations need clear governance structures and clarity around thepurpose of the organisation so everyone, both internal and external, know where advocacy fits within an organisation and the capacity an organisation has to engage in advocacy
  • Need to think about at what level you are doing, or want to engage in advocacy work. National advocacy means resources will go to favoured provinces. Local advocacy efforts can pull in resources from elsewhere.

Discussion then turned to the scale of advocacy efforts. The point was raised that all too often we think too much about grand changes at the policy level and not enough about how these changes will affect poor people. Grassroots advocacy is often overlooked. It was highlighted that many successful advocacy stories are led by grassroots organisations and that in-country experiences is also often overlooked. Advocacy efforts and programmes need to be integrated and not act as separate entities.

A point was raised that it might not be so much about capacity building.There may be advocacy advantages in broadening horizons and helping people think through what they want to do in-country. Different advocacy strategies work in different contexts and we must be aware of that.

The overall function of the Group is to support, facilitate and develop capacity for advocacy.

4. Organising the Advocacy Capacity Building Group

This session looked at the running of the group and issues around its governance.

Naved highlighted that it is important to remember that the Group’s purpose is around building capacity for advocacy rather than capacity building as a whole.

A further purpose is to learn from North/South relationships and learning from each other. It is important to get the input of people living and working in the South and not to take support from Southern Organisations as a given. The question was asked of what the mechanism for supporting Southern Partners would be. It was also asked how the group is going to take into account the whole range of influences on advocacy efforts. This could lead to a real issue of representation.

Main topics around the governance and running of the Group that need discussion were highlighted. It was agreed that the steering committee can organise via teleconferencing.

5.Items for discussion during the coming year

  • Impact assessment
  • The use of media for capacity building and advocacy
  • Campaigning
  • Communication tools
  • Monitoring and Evaluation

6. Steering Committee

The following persons volunteered to make up the Steering Committee:

  • Nadine Lusi, CBM
  • Mary O'Connell, WaterAid (Co-Chair)
  • Joanna Watson, Tearfund
  • Naved Chowdhury, Oxfam International (Co-Chair)
  • Gwen Barry, CAFOD
  • Maria Baros Smith, Womankind Worldwide

6. AOB

Date of next meeting.4th September 2008at the WaterAid Offices (2 – 5pm)

Top View