LIBERIA ACCOUNTABILITY AND VOICE INITIATIVE (LAVI) NRM Advocacy Policy, Inclusive Citizen Compliance Monitoring and Media Framework January 2017 AID-669-C-16-00003 This report is made possible by the support of the American People through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID.) The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of DAI and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. LIBERIA ACCOUNTABILITY AND VOICE INITIATIVE NRM COALITION Advocacy Policy, Inclusive Citizen Compliance Monitoring and Media Framework: Advocating for Good Governance and Participation in the Natural Resource Management Sector LAVI NRM Coalition January 2017 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Section 1: Policy Advocacy Framework I. Advocacy Coalition Goal and Objectives II. Awareness Building IIA. Identifying Advocacy Audiences 1. “Primary” Audiences 2. “Secondary” Audiences / “Influencers” Section 2: Public Information Strategy and Messaging III. Awareness Building: Strategies for Reaching Audiences a. Primary & Secondary Audiences (Decision-Makers and Influencers) b. Civil Society Allies - Issue/Advocacy Organizations c. Media d. General Public Section 3: Inclusive Citizen’s Compliance Monitoring Framework IV. Bott om Up Advocacy & Inclusive Cit izen’s Compliance Mo nit oring IVA. Community Level Advocacy and the Political Process IVB. Inclusive Citizen Compliance Monitoring IVC. Compliance Monitoring Mechanisms Section 4: Evaluation and Monitoring Section 5: Key Assumptions Appendix A and B: Policy Advocacy Capacity Strengthening Framework and Inclusive Citizen Compliance Monitoring Capacity Strengthening Framework Appendix C: Media Capacity Strengthening Framework 2 Introduction This Framework was developed as a guide to help LAVI Coalition members and other actors in the NRM Sector to think through how expected changes occur in the Sector. The concept of this framework has been adopted from an advocacy framework developed by Julia Coffman & Tanya Beer’s Advocacy Strategy Framework (March 2015). It focuses two key dimensions of advocacy: 1) the target audiences; and 2) the anticipated changes. Audiences are the individuals and groups that advocacy strategies target and attempt to influence or persuade. They represent the main actors in the policy process and include the public (or specific segments of it), policy influencers/secondary audiences (e.g., media, community leaders, the business community, thought leaders, political advisors, other advocacy organizations, etc.), and decision makers/primary audiences (e.g., elected officials, administrators, judges, etc.). Strategies may focus on just one audience or target more than one simultaneously.1 Changes are the results an advocacy effort aims for with audiences to progress toward a policy goal. Successful advocacy focuses on evidence-based research, objective analysis, coordinated coalition and network initiatives and effective messages. The three points on this continuum differ in terms of how far an audience is expected to engage on a policy issue. The continuum starts with basic awareness or knowledge. Here the goal is to make the audience aware that a problem or potential policy solution exists. The next point is will. The goal here is to raise an audience’s willingness to take action on an issue. It goes beyond awareness and tries to convince the audience that the issue is important enough to warrant action and that any actions taken will in fact make a difference. The third point is action. Here, policy efforts actually support or facilitate audience action on an issue. Again, advocacy strategies may pursue one. Change with an audience or more than one simultaneously. 2 To be effective, CSO/NGO advocacy must be built on evidence based research and careful analysis; it needs to be focused on constructive engagement with government, rather than confrontation. 3 Research and analysis is critical in demonstrating why an issue is important and why the solutions presented are effective. Where government is constrained by a lack of capacity, well-researched arguments and solutions are particularly important in providing government with a base of information from which to work. Further, by demonstrating the capacity to conduct evidence-based and objective research and analysis, CSOs/NGOs are able to gain credibility with government and work as constructive partners in future reform efforts. In addition, effective advocacy also requires a united voice: Government is less likely to heed the arguments of one organization that is representing an issue or policy-recommendation. Indeed, when confronted by a multitude of different demands regarding the same issue, decision makers may have difficulty assessing which demands are most legitimate, and consequently may focus on none. Unified 1 Julia Coffman & Tanya Beer’s Advocacy Strategy Framework (March 2015); al the framework first appeared in Coffman, J. (2008). Foundations and Public Policy Grantmaking.Paper prepared for The James Irvine Foundation. 2 Ibid 3 Credible information sources include analyses/statistics from international organizations, e.g., World Bank, UNDP, UNEP; donor reports; International NGO; university/academic studies; news articles (from respected news outlets); government data/statistics; national/local NGOs (if research is credible). 3 sector representation and a coherent set of demands or recommendations that is made possible by a coalition are therefore critical. The Advocacy Coalition plays such a role and is in a position to affect change as it works together to ensure good governance and citizen-centered sustainable management and monitoring in the NRM sector. Beyond a guide to advocacy, the framework serves as a roadmap to the achievement of LAVI objective under which efforts of the Coalition is directed. Alone this line, it captures suggestions from all actors within and without the Coalition including inputs from international consultant and those from LAVI. Most importantly, it considers relevant findings from baseline assessment conducted by the Coalition in the NRM sector as benchmark for engagements. It thus assists communities in planning, designing, conducting, holding and evaluating advocacy campaigns to advance the implementation of existing policies and laws, with a specific focus on Natural Resource Management (NRM). While the framework is holistic in scope, it has been developed to focus County and Social Development Funds (CSDF) with the view that community-based advocacy is crucial and that much more needs to be done to equip grassroots groups, networks, CSOs with advocacy skills and strategies and information to demand that community needs and priorities in relation to the CSDF are properly addressed. The framework is designed in a way that it is accompanied by training modules that are intended for capacity strengthening of CSOs and communities, citizen engagement and advocacy training for CSOs and communities. Also, the framework outlined target audiences, methods and activities and advocacy tool for citizen engagement, advocacy training, community dialogue, consultative and accountability forum. Expected Results Advocacy Goal To contribute to and enhance accountability and transparency in CSDF management through citizen- centered sustainable management and participation by establishing adequate and long term mechanisms for effective and participatory CSDF governance Specific Objectives: 1. Objective 1 (National Level): To encourage political parties and candidates in the 2017 elections commit to establishing long term policy mechanisms for effective and participatory CSDF governance. 2. Objective 2 (National Level): To influence the 54th National legislature to introduce necessary reform agenda/draft legislation focused on establishing long term effective and participatory CSDF governance. 3. Objective 3 (Local Level): To increase communities and citizens’ active engagement in the CSDF governance reform advocacy initiatives through election-related initiatives. (See Section 3) 4. Objective 4 (Local Level): To enhance communities and citizens’ active engagement in the CSDF governance reform advocacy initiatives through local monitoring/reporting. (See Section 3) 4 Section 1: Policy Advocacy Framework4 I. Advocacy Coalition: Goal and Objectives Broad country-wide, county-level research of issues related to the Community Social Development Fund (CSD) was conducted by the members of the Advocacy Coalition from November – December, 2016. The assessment uncovered a wide range of governance challenges that constrain the effective and participatory implementation of CSDF including: (i) limited citizen participation in CSDF allocation decisions; (ii) lack of community-level understanding and skills regarding advocacy and engagement in local level governance processes; and, (iii) lack of knowledge regarding CSDF laws and regulations among stakeholders, ranging from citizens and CSOs, to formal and informal local leaders5, and law makers. The governance of CSDF is mandated in the Budget Law and is reviewed and revised annually. Any reforms in CSDF governance that may be accepted and applied one year, may be discontinued the next. As such, advocacy for any reform may have to be repeated year after year. It is critical that effective and participatory CSDF governance processes and rules be developed carefully and that they are given a level permanence that eliminates yearly revisions. The Advocacy Coalition is focusing on a four-part advocacy strategy