Strategic Approaches to Evidence at the Parliament of Ghana Strengthening Institutional-Level Use of Evidence in Decision Making
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Learning, Reflections & Innovation @ INASP Evidence use in parliaments June 2017 Strategic approaches to evidence at the Parliament of Ghana Strengthening institutional-level use of evidence in decision making Systematic use of quality, In order to help address these independent evidence is challenges, over the course of three essential for a parliament and a half years (2013-2017) the to effectively scrutinize the INASP-led VakaYiko Consortium2 executive and represent the worked with the Parliament of citizens of their country. Ghana in strengthening research However, parliaments are and information systems to support complex, dynamic and highly evidence use in decision making. political institutions, with many different stakeholders In its first three years, the VakaYiko providing and using evidence programme sought mainly to through myriad formal and increase capacity at an individual informal channels. A constantly level, targeting research and shifting web of external information support staff in five and internal factors shape key departments and seeking to how this evidence is used, strengthen their skills in accessing, ranging from the macro-level appraising, and communicating social, economic and political evidence for policymakers3. These environment to a parliament’s training workshops took a learner- legal relationship with the centred approach to adult learning, executive, its internal capacity emphasizing exploration and self- and organizational culture, reflection through practical and and issues of resources, participatory group work including management processes and techniques such as stakeholder The Parliament of Ghana. Photo 1 leadership . mapping, case studies and credit: Jonathan Ernst / World Bank The Parliament of Ghana Since Ghana’s return to multi-party democracy with the adoption of the 1992 Constitution, Parliament has evolved from a House with one-party representation to a 275-member House with an almost equal ratio of majority and minority parties. Its staff strength and departments have also increased since 1993. The Parliamentary Service, which is headed by the Clerk, is now organized along three divisions, namely: i) the Legislative Management Division ii) Information, Publications and Research Division and iii) the Finance, Human Resource and General Services Division.13 Restructuring has been ongoing since 2012, and in the context of the pending strategic plan and updated organogram, there is some lack of clarity around these delineations. Research, Library, ICT, Hansard and Committees Departments all play an active role in the gathering and supply of evidence within Parliament14. The Research Department has 10 Research Officers and a host of support staff assisting with secretarial and administrative duties, serving 40 committees and 275 MPs. The Library has a staff strength of five and ICT, four. The Committees have on average three to four people (two clerks and support staff) serving each Committee. Hansard, which produces the official publications of the House and Committee debates, is comprised of 62 staff. This text is based on our Evidence in African Parliaments paper www.inasp.info/evidenceinparliaments 13 See GINKS Review of Information Support Systems at Parliament of Ghana (2015) and ACEPA: Evidence in Parliaments (forthcoming, 2017). 14 See GINKS Review of Information Support Systems at Parliament of Ghana (2015). 1Evidence and Parliaments (www.inasp.info/evidenceinparliaments) explores these factors in more detail. 2 VakaYiko was one of five consortia supported by DFID’s Building Capacity to Use Research Evidence (BCURE) programme. Headed by INASP and active in four African countries, the Consortium’s work in Ghana was led by the Ghana Information Network for Knowledge Sharing (GINKS) and the African Centre for Parliamentary Affairs (ACEPA). www.inasp.info @INASPinfo Learning, Reflections & Innovation @ INASP Evidence use in parliaments June 2017 scenarios, critical interviews and reflects on one approach we tested a reactive and responsive mode peer learning as well as individual to respond to these factors in a of information support to a more action plans. Staff members deeper way. In addition to the strategic, anticipatory approach from five departments across the experience from the main research which proactively identifies Parliament of Ghana’s information conducted by ACEPA as part of evidence needs and devises support system were trained: the VakaYiko extension in 2016 to methods of meeting them within Hansard, Research, Committees, ICT inform our approach time, political and other constraints. and Library. It would also involve more active Navigating collaboration between information In its later stages, partly in response support departments, strengthening to the wealth of insights and ideas organizational factors: the relationships between them that emerged from these workshops reflecting on our and aiming to foster a holistic and the action plans, the VakaYiko information support system that programme began to explore more approach can respond to needs across deeply the internal and external In the six-month extension phase of Parliament’s multiple evidence contextual factors shaping how VakaYiko, INASP, ACEPA and GINKS channels. evidence is used in Parliament. This worked with information support includes both formal structures, staff at the Parliament of Ghana ‘Evidence strategy’ approaches such as internal management and through two workshops to consider have in the past been very long administrative procedures, as well how Parliament could take a more term and intensive processes as ‘softer’ or more informal factors strategic approach to navigating undertaken in ministries4 . While related to leadership, organizational factors affecting evidence at the it was far beyond our scope in culture and the external social and organizational level. This would our timeframe to complete an political landscape. This article involve beginning to shift from ‘evidence strategy’ process, our short six-month window did What does evidence-informed policy mean in give us an opportunity to begin to consider what the first steps the context of parliaments? towards a strategic approach to Systematic use of quality, independent evidence is essential for evidence in a parliament might a parliament to effectively scrutinize the executive and represent look like. Given the dynamic the citizens. When working on evidence-informed policy making and highly politicized nature of in parliaments, it is important to take an approach that engages parliaments, we developed a with politics, takes a broad view of evidence, and pays attention to flexible approach around a core institutional processes. series of elements that could be applied to any emerging policy As parliaments are inherently political institutions, evidence must be issue, or institutionalized within seen as one of many factors that feed in to policy making, alongside existing management processes political realities, budget constraints, and societal and cultural and systems. issues. Policy making is non-linear, involving multiple different actors including the executive, legislature, civil society, international Our aims were: agencies and others. Evidence is intertwined with this political - To test and refine key elements of landscape. a strategic approach to evidence Policymakers need a wide range of different kinds of evidence to with Parliament of Ghana’s inform decision making, from citizen knowledge gathered through information support staff stakeholder consultations to expert practice-informed knowledge, - To provide a step-by-step ‘How to administrative statistics, to research. Parliaments have many To’ to enable staff implement the different evidence mechanisms and actors at their disposal, from strategic process conducted in the public hearings to commissioning internal and external research. workshops for future policy issues The process which evidence goes through, from the point of - To identify key emerging principles gathering to the presentation to the decision maker, is as important for strategic approaches to as the evidence itself. Even the best evidence, if not provided evidence in parliaments which at the right time, interpreted in a rigorous way, or appropriately Parliament of Ghana may matched to the policy question, will not be of use to policymakers. want to consider as part of its Parliamentary information support units are at the forefront of this organizational and strategic process, operating within the complex environment described here. restructuring. 3 See INASP Evidence-Informed Policy Making Toolkit (2015) for full course materials. 4 See examples from the Department of Environmental Affairs in South Africa (Wills et al 2016) and the Department of Food, Agriculture and Rural Affairs in the UK (Shaxson 2014) www.inasp.info @INASPinfo 2 Learning, Reflections & Innovation @ INASP Evidence use in parliaments June 2017 What key factors affect evidence use at the Parliament of Ghana? While it is beyond the scope of this article to provide an exhaustive list of all the factors in relation to the Parliament of Ghana, several that were fundamental to the design of our approach merit mentioning here. Strategy and leadership Research Information capacity management producers external evidence Relationships with Visibility of Visibility information support units and coordination Executive dominance Executive dominance Strategy and leadership capacity Research Relationships with external evidence producers