Learning, Reflections & Innovation @ INASP Evidence use in June 2017 Strategic approaches to evidence at the of 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 , 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, 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, , 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 Visibility of information Visibility support units Information management and coordination

‘Guidelines and Good Practices for evaluating adult learning Practical learning Evidence-Informed Policy-Making in initiatives.7 The workshops were informs approach a Government Department’, which designed to make the most provided a useful starting point of adults’ existing expertise Our approach was informed by our for understanding an institutional and provide opportunities for practical learning from our work approach to evidence use, and immediate application as well in the VakaYiko programme, as also guided some of the activities as for participants to shape the well as by three key overarching in the workshops. Together these agenda itself. frameworks. The first of these three frameworks shaped our is ITAD’s ‘Four Dimensions of understanding of what institutional “VakaYiko was the beginning of Change’, which outlines a multi- capacity for evidence looks like: our real collaboration with other level approach to capacity that is, the formal and informal information support units and the development and which informed relationships and processes collaboration is now very strong.” our understanding of organizational within an institution enabling the Mohammed Nyagsi, Director, Ghana capacity and its links to other systematic use of a range of quality Parliament Research Department1 levels of capacity, in particular the evidence to inform decision making. importance of relationships.5 The - Work across the information second is the Politics & Ideas/INASP Key principles support system: Feedback ‘Context Matters’ framework, which from training conducted in the The following key principles also identifies key organizational factors first phase of our programme, as informed the approach: affecting evidence use and which well as from our work with other guided our background diagnostic - Emphasize adult learning: parliaments indicated that, in as well as some of the activities in INASP takes a thorough approach order to explore organizational our workshops.6 The third is ODI’s to designing, monitoring and barriers, it would be more effective

3 www.inasp.info @INASPinfo Learning, Reflections & Innovation @ INASP Evidence use in parliaments June 2017

roles of each information support department. The steps subsequently involve mapping the political, organizational and other factors affecting key evidence processes before identifying how each department can contribute to improving these processes. While acting primarily as a tool for collaboration across the information support departments, the strategic steps also therefore uncover wider organizational issues. Understanding Parliament’s information support system In our first workshop, we began by building a map of the information support system in Scientific research is one of the types of evidence scrutinized in Parliament, identifying what the key parliaments. Photo: Chris Dobson contributions of each department to bring together multiple units of strengthening: Learning from are and the strengths of the Parliament’s information support the VakaYiko programme had relationships between them. We system than to work only through pointed to the importance of then moved into a creative exercise the Research Department. These combining longer-term, more in which participants selected one diverse perspectives gave us institutional capacity development of several photographs that they greater understanding of the efforts with flexible, shorter felt best represented Parliament’s factors affecting evidence use interventions taking advantage of information support system and across the organization, as well as particular policy windows8 .With explained their interpretation to allowing the information support this in mind, we wanted to use their colleagues. This built a diverse units to strengthen working one policy issue as an entry point and at times contradictory picture relationships between each other, to uncover broader institutional of the organizational culture of which is itself a key element of issues. This helped us focus what evidence use within Parliament. For organizational capacity. could have otherwise been an instance, each of the information enormous task, as well as ensuring support departments identified - Go beyond the technical: We that discussions were grounded itself as the central ‘hub’ of the wanted to avoid taking a purely in practical realities such as system, giving rise to interesting technical approach to addressing timescales, politics and media reflections on the drivers and organizational factors, which coverage which are fundamental motivations of evidence use. we know are as much about to the way evidence is used in Common threads in the stories informal systems, organizational parliaments. included both the importance culture and power dynamics as and the difficulty of engaging they are about formal systems with MPs; the sense of formal and structures. We were keen What we did procedure in Parliament, which to explore an approach that We identified seven key elements of was viewed by some as orderly would focus on relationships and a strategic approach to evidence in and predictable and by others as try to be open about politics, a parliament. Overall, the steps aim cumbersome and obstructionist; considering how Parliament’s to support collaboration between and the collaborative, symbiotic information support units could information support units on both a relationships between the more strategically navigate this technical and strategic level to meet information support units. During landscape. evidence needs. They begin from these discussions we began to build - Use a policy issue as an a participatory reflective process a shared list of factors affecting entry point to institutional that considers the complementary evidence use in Parliament. 5 Punton (2014). 6 Weyrauch et al (2016). 7 See ‘INASP’s Face to Face Training Evolution’ (INASP, 2016).

www.inasp.info @INASPinfo 4 Learning, Reflections & Innovation @ INASP Evidence use in parliaments June 2017

Maize seeds: an agricultural bill was the subject of scrutiny in the workshops

look in practice. The Bill had been Bill, which concerns protection of Selecting a policy issue stalled since its second reading, breeders’ rights to secure control Staff then selected Ghana’s Plant as a result of intense controversy of the commercialisation of new Breeders’ Bill as an entry point for and contested evidence, but was varieties, is part of a series of their strategic discussion, in order expected to arise for consideration pieces of legislation that will shape to consider how the process could again in the new parliament. The Ghana’s future use of GMOs. Staff categorized Parliament’s approach to evidence on the Bill as ‘emerging’, meaning that while some evidence is being demanded and used, Parliament could not yet be described as functioning in an ‘informed’ way on the issue. Although the Bill has been a topic of high interest within Parliament, with MPs frequently requesting information about the issue and an active and engaged Committee on Agriculture scrutinizing it, the information support departments face a number of challenges in gathering complete and reliable evidence on GMOs and communicating it to MPs in a way that meaningfully informs the debate. They felt there was still some way to go before Parliament could be said to have an ‘informed’ approach to GMOs.

Using the example of the Plant Breeders’ Bill, we worked through each of the seven steps in the 1The forthcoming paper on Evidence and Parliaments from ACEPA (2017) 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). 3 See INASP Evidence-Informed Policy Making Toolkit (2015) for full course materials. 8 On the whole, VakaYiko tended to take institutional-based approaches rather than issue-based approaches when working with parliaments. However, a successful issue-based approach in Kenya demonstrated the value of using narrow ‘windows of opportunity’ (Asiti and Ochieng 2015). For more on issue-based approaches vs institution based approaches in parliamentary strengthening, see Cheeseman and Dodsworth, Navigating Trade-Offs in Parliamentary Strengtening.

5 www.inasp.info @INASPinfo Learning, Reflections & Innovation @ INASP Evidence use in parliaments June 2017 strategic process. The first step involved identifying broad priority areas for improvement. In the case of the Plant Breeders’ Bill, this focused on better citizen consultation, stronger links with experts and researchers to gather evidence, and more politically astute communication to decision makers. Next, participants used the list of factors they had built in the opening session and conducted ‘force field analysis’ to identify how they worked in practice, in this particular policy issue, as constraints or enablers. They then moved on to map the stakeholders affecting the debate, before returning to the information support system map they had created to consider which departments were best placed to take up which emerging opportunities and engage with which stakeholders. They produced a collaborative action plan outlining how they could work together to support a more robust approach to evidence on the Plant Breeders’ Bill, from strengthening internal processes for synthesizing citizen evidence submissions, to making research products more Cocoa beans are an important crop in Ghana accessible through the website, expanding links with research organizational issues that had bill, or as part of the budget. institutions and raising awareness featured as ‘common threads’ among MPs about the services throughout our discussion. These Testing the approach on a different offered by the information support included planning and scheduling, type of policy issue enabled departments. visibility of information support us to build a more nuanced departments and their recognition understanding of how strategic Reviewing and at strategic level within Parliament. approaches would differ depending on the issue; for instance, in the validating case of the Plant Breeders’ Bill, We opened the second workshop Testing the approach where evidence was feeding in to with a similar creative exercise on a new issue scrutiny of a bill, the relationship to the first workshop. This time, between the research and participants were asked to select a When we had agreed on the Committees departments was picture that they felt best captured components of the strategic fundamental, as well as with Public the new Parliament’s approach approach, participants tested it on Affairs, which would be convening to evidence. Next we conducted a second policy issue. This time the public dialogues around the Bill a participatory review of the issue chosen was not a bill but a as part of a standard process. process and of the draft ‘Strategic key campaign promise in the recent However, if the Free Senior High Approaches’ document that had election: free senior high school. School proposal appears as an emerged from the first workshop. Participants felt certain it would amendment or as part of the As part of this we discussed the come before Parliament, although budget, the main ‘user’ of evidence sequencing, content and purpose opinion was divided as to whether shifts from the Committee to the of each of the steps and revised our this would be in the form of a new individual MPs, requiring a shift in model together. We also identified bill, an amendment to an existing approach from information support a series of emerging overarching departments.

www.inasp.info @INASPinfo 6 Learning, Reflections & Innovation @ INASP Evidence use in parliaments June 2017

We also discussed at length the confident doing this. Some political implications of providing Emerging effects mentioned that additional support, evidence on an issue that is a key Here we outline some of the effects either in the form of the practical part of the Executive’s platform, of the process which are starting ‘Strategic Approaches’ tool or in the context of an Executive- to become visible. These are otherwise, would assist them. dominated system, and reflected based on a participatory review “I feel confident implementing on possible angles and entry points. session conducted as part of the the approach in future especially This confirmed the importance last workshop, as well as daily Exit as the strategic document is now of the first step in the process: Cards and final feedback forms. In available, it can always guide us identifying the stage and type of addition, we draw on impressions through the process.” issue. The route by which it will from follow-up meetings with key Participant, arrive at Parliament has important stakeholders. via feedback form implications for which information Institutional adoption of approach: support departments are involved, Strengthened relationships At a follow-up meeting in March who the ‘users’ are and how the between information support 2017 with five directors from issue is framed. departments: Many participants commented that they found the relevant departments, it was agreed Recommendations emerging from inter-departmental approach useful that the ‘Strategic Approaches to the workshop centred on the and enlightening, as they were Evidence’ document emerging from following themes: able to work with colleagues they the workshops should be adopted had not engaged with before. In as a policy within Parliament. - Strengthening inter-departmental the participatory review session, Discussions are ongoing at senior collaboration and dialogue participants agreed that they leadership level about how to between information support units had met new colleagues they operationalize this encouraging had not worked with before, and development. - Planning for evidence needs in pointed to the principle of sharing advance “Very useful – it should be the key resources and expertise as an to delivering information to MPs.” important learning. The experience - Raising the visibility and profile Participant, via feedback form of evidence issues, and the of jointly exploring the strategy information support departments, and producing the report is itself within parliament an example of interdepartmental Lessons learned collaboration. - Investing in the capacity of Here, we offer some key lessons information support units “In group activity sessions to inform future efforts to support participants could interact and strategic approaches to evidence in share ideas. Useful in building parliaments, including areas where ‘Strategic Approaches strong relationships.” participant via further exploration/research could to Evidence’ guideline feedback form help: Timing is a key consideration document Learning about the strategic when working on evidence in The final seven steps, along with approach: In our review session parliaments9, and we felt this was the emerging organizational issues and feedback forms, many the main constraint of our approach. and recommendations to address participants told us they had Our six-month initiative fell between them, were combined into a found learning about the idea and parliaments , which meant we were ‘Strategic Approaches to Evidence’ components of a strategic approach not able to engage directly with document for internal use within itself useful. In particular, they the Committees and MPs. While Parliament. This document aimed identified specific aspects such as the change of government and the to provide a practical guide for stakeholder mapping and force new Parliament halfway through the staff to implement the approach field analysis which allowed greater process led to interesting reflections in future, and for management consideration of political issues, as on shifting evidence culture in the to begin to address some of the most useful. institution, we felt that the process institutional areas for improvement. would have benefited from a closer The document was reviewed and Capacity to implement the relationship with committees and validated by the staff, and at the strategic approach in future: MPs For future initiatives, flexibility time of writing was beginning the Participants expressed a high from donors and implementing process of being presented to senior degree of confidence in their partners will be crucial in order leadership. ability to implement the approach themselves in future, with none to initiate and implement such reporting that would not feel strategic discussions in response to

7 www.inasp.info @INASPinfo Learning, Reflections & Innovation @ INASP Evidence use in parliaments June 2017 a ‘live’ issue and in partnership with with : • Parliament’s information support a specific committee. We aimed to units are required to provide mitigate this by building an element • Parliament’s formal structures evidence across a very wide of capacity development into the and procedures are highly range of sectors. This means that workshop, as well as providing the influential in the way evidence is the importance of networks with practical ‘How To’ note, to help staff used, and the different channels external evidence providers in the feel confident in implementing the by which an issue reaches local research community cannot approach in future. Parliament have important be overstated when discussing implications. There is no shortage gathering and synthesis of Moving from a responsive to of channels and procedures for evidence, as Parliament simply a proactive approach is a key engagement as Parliament is a does not have the capacity to consideration for parliamentary very outward-facing institution meet all of its information needs information support departments and is constantly in dialogue internally. across the world. A variety of with multiple stakeholders. different factors influence the Rather, the challenge is in • Information support staff degree to which a parliamentary developing an agile, robust and in Parliaments need strong information support service is able streamlined information system strategic and technical skills in to move through the scale from a that can effectively synthesize communications, as they provide ‘reference’ function, in which they the evidence flowing from evidence directly to MPs, engaging provide facts in response to queries, multiple channels in this sprawling with multiple different political to perform more in-depth synthesis institution. actors from various parties on a and ‘horizon-scanning’ in which they daily basis. This means that the also proactively identify evidence • Politics is potent in Parliament well-known principles and skills of needs in advance and conduct in- as in a government department, strong communications such as depth research10. An unanswered but the sense of deliberation understanding audience needs, question from our approach was and scrutiny in Parliament selecting the appropriate channel to what degree Parliament of means that Parliament’s culture and providing the information Ghana’s information support units and philosophy of evidence at the right format and time are can be expected to make this is different. The fact that particularly crucial in parliaments. transition in their current staff and parliamentary information support operational configuration. While services provide evidence to A holistic approach to programming: inter-departmental collaboration multiple different parties for the Our approach to capacity and dialogue is welcomed and can purpose of informing their debates development emphasizes a support this shift, one cannot ignore and/or holding the government multi-dimensional view in which the fact that with just 10 research to account means that they are individual, organizational-, network- officers for 275 MPs, the Parliament constantly navigating delicate and systemic-level capacities are of Ghana’s information support political . This reinforces all interrelated, overlapping and system may not at present be well the need to develop a trusted complementary. Most of the staff enough resourced to perform both reputation for high-quality who participated in our strategic the reactive and the proactive nonpartisan evidence which is workshops had already been function. both bipartisan and nonpartisan. through an intensive VakaYiko training course in evidence- • Streamlining evidence within Reflections on ‘evidence informed policy making, and some planning procedures is as strategies’ in parliaments: The were also participating in a peer important within Parliament as ‘Guidelines and Good Practices’ learning exchange with staff from within ministries. In Parliament, 12 produced by ODI to inform other African parliaments . They the Table Office is a key partner strategic approaches to evidence were familiar both with the key to engage to plan evidence in a government department were concepts involved in EIPM, and with effectively. However, Parliament fundamental to our design of this the action-oriented, participatory is a dynamic institution that approach11. In exploring and testing learning techniques employed in is constantly shifting. A key with the Parliament of Ghana, the programme. They also had part of the information support several issues emerged which, while an existing relationship of trust departments’ role remains to be not at odds with the overarching with some of the lead facilitators. responsive and flexible according principles presented by ODI, merit Future strategic approaches that to emerging needs. particular attention when working do not build on previous training or

9 We have reflected elsewhere on the challenges of working adaptively in political environments under DfID’s Payment by Results model (see INASP, Approaches to Developing Capacity for the Use of Evidence in Policy Making 2016). 11 Wills et al (2016) Guidelines and Good Practices for Evidence Informed Policy Making in a Government Department.

www.inasp.info @INASPinfo 8 Learning, Reflections & Innovation @ INASP Evidence use in parliaments June 2017

programme activities may need to INASP (2015) Evidence-Informed Policy plan for more or longer workshops Bibliography Making Toolkit. Oxford: INASP www.inasp.info/ vytoolkit than our two two-day sessions. A 2013 assessment of civil society conducted Even with this background, we by the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition INASP (2016) Approaches to Developing felt we could have benefited from (GACC), in collaboration with the West Africa Capacity for the Use of Evidence in Policy Making. Oxford: INASP www.inasp.info/en/ more time for in-depth discussions. Civil Society Institute (WACSI) publications/details/244 Also, while an integrated approach Asiti, W., and Ochieng, C. (2015) Kenyan is valuable, it leads to challenges Roundtables support cross-sectoral climate INASP (2016) INASP’s Face to Face Training Evolution. Oxford: INASP www.inasp.info/en/ in coordination and delivery to change work. Oxford: INASP www.inasp.info/ publications/details/214 ensure partner parliaments are not en/publications/details/199 overburdened and activities are Cheeseman, N and Dodsworth, S. Navigating Menocal, Alina Rocha, and Tam O’Neil. (2012) Mind the Gap: Lessons Learnt and Remaining streamlined. Trade-Offs in Parliamentary Strengthening. Westminster Foundation for Democracy and Challenges in Parliamentary Development Assistance. Stockholm: Sida. www.odi. Reflecting from multiple Department of Politics and Internaitonal Relations, University of Oxford. www.wfd. org/publications/6971-parliamentary- perspectives: The nuanced picture org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/WFD_A4_ development-assistance-sida-donor- of the information support system Navigating-Trade_Offs_v5.1.pdf approaches that was produced through sharing CIVICUS, Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition, Punton, M., (2014) Viewing Capacity multiple perspectives, particularly and West Africa Civil Society Institute (2013) Development Through Four Dimensions through a creative process such The State of Civil Society in Ghana: An of Change. Blog, ITAD www.itad.com/ as storytelling, captured valuable Assessment viewing-capacity-development-through-four- dimensions-of-change insights that could not have been African Centre for Parliamentary Affairs achieved through working only (ACEPA) and INASP (forthcoming, 2017) Shaxson, L. (2014) Investing in Evidence: with one or two departments. Parliaments and Evidence-Informed Policy Lessons from the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. However, it became clear that the Making Australian Aid: Knowledge Sector Library, Research and Committees Ghana Information Network for Knowledge Initiative http://www.ksi-indonesia.org/ departments are the key players in Sharing (GINKS) (2015): Review of files/1421384737$1$QBTM0U$.pdf shaping evidence use in Parliament, Information Support Systems at Parliament Weyrauch, V., Echt, L and Suliman, S (2016) because together they link evidence of Ghana, July 2015. www.inasp.info/en/ publications/details/180 Starting from Context: How to Make Strategic producers to users. In order to more Decisions to promote a Better Interaction effectively identify and plan for MPs’ Hudson, A and Tsekpo, A. (2009) Between Knowledge and Policy. Buenos Aires: information needs in advance, these Parliamentary Strengthening and the Paris Politics and Ideas. www.politicsandideas. Principles. ODI and the Parliamentary Centre. org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Going- departments will be particularly www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/ beyond-context-matters-Practical-paper_ crucial publications-opinion-files/4420.pdf PI.compressed.pdf Wills, A., Tshangela, M., Shaxson, L., Datta, A., and Matomela, B. (2016) Guidelines and good practices for evidence-informed policymaking in a government department. Conclusion Pretoria: Department of Environmental By building on the trust and existing relationships established Affairs; and London: Overseas Development Institute. www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/ under the main VakaYiko programme, INASP and partners were resource-documents/11011.pdf able to use a brief six-month extension to explore what a more strategic, anticipatory approach to evidence might look like in the Wills, A., M. Tshangela, N. Bohler-Muller, A. Datta, N. Funke, L. Godfrey, B. Matomela, G. Parliament of Ghana. Our experience suggests that such an approach Pienaary, N. Pophiwa, L. Shaxson, W. Strydom would need to involve inter-departmental collaboration as well as and Ke, Y. (2016) Evidence and policy in increased visibility of information support departments. A strategic South Africa’s Department of Environmental approach should also build in ways to consider and navigate political Affairs. Pretoria: Department of considerations. This includes identifying and planning for MPs’ Environmental Affairs and London: Overseas Development Institute. www.odi.org/sites/odi. information needs in advance. Increased staff capacity, particularly org.uk/files/resource-documents/11010.pdf in the Research Department, as well as top level support and recognition of the role of evidence and research in Parliament, would also contribute to building a strong institutional culture of evidence. Authors Parliament of Ghana’s senior leadership, in committing to adopting Emily Hayter, Programme and mainstreaming the approach piloted through these workshops, Manager, Evidence-Informed has taken an important step towards building strong and systematic Policy Making, INASP culture of evidence use, underpinned by institutional mechanisms Contributions from Rasheed and policies. Draman and colleagues at ACEPA

12 Training workshops were carried out by GINKS in 2016. The peer learning scheme was led by ACEPA in 2016-2017 during the same period as the strategic workshops.

9 www.inasp.info @INASPinfo