Is DFID Getting Real About Politics?A stocktake of how DFID has adopted a politically-informed approach (2010-2015)
Resource type
Authors/contributors
- Piron, Laure-Hélène (Author)
- Baker, Aislin (Author)
- Savage, Laura (Author)
- Wiseman, Katie (Author)
Title
Is DFID Getting Real About Politics?A stocktake of how DFID has adopted a politically-informed approach (2010-2015)
Abstract
1. Background
This internal stocktake assesses whether DFID is “getting real about politics” - how it
is taking power and politics into account in all its operations. Country Poverty
Reduction Diagnostics undertaken by DFID teams identify politics as the most
frequent barrier to poverty reduction and growth. The UK 2015 Aid Strategy has
committed DFID to spending 50% of Official Development Assistance (ODA) in
fragile states. This requires a “patient, long-term approach” to addressing barriers to
peace and stability which are fundamentally political, rather than purely financial or
technical.
The stocktake is based on three DFID offices case studies (Democratic Republic of
the Congo, Pakistan and Malawi) as well as extensive internal and external
consultations between June and December 2015. It provides illustrations of how
DFID is evolving but does not systematically offer evidence of development impacts
or non-country work, as this would have required a different methodology.
2. What does it mean to take politics into account?
Politically-informed approaches are based on a large body of evidence that
confirms the importance of institutions and politics for sustainable
development. External assistance needs to support locally-led change. Success
depends on timing, context, political processes and local actors. Desirable outcomes
are hard to achieve and difficult to predict.
Politically-informed approaches improve development effectiveness through:
The ‘what’: political goals, using development assistance to shift how
power is distributed in the economy and society. The two main elements are:
aiming for long term transformation of institutions; and supporting locally-led
change processes more likely to be sustainable and successful: locallyowned (i.e. with local salience) and locally-negotiated.
The ‘how’: politically-smart methods, with greater realism and
feasibility. The three main elements are: understanding power and politics
in a specific context in order to identify opportunities and barriers for change;
influencing and stakeholder management skills; and proactive risk
management.
To influence DFID operations, a politically-informed approach needs to be
iterative, not one-off. The explicit understanding of context, whether formal setpiece studies or more routine analysis, should inform policy and programme
decisions, from high level strategic choices, to day-to-day implementation, for both
international policy and country support. This is a dynamic process: as the context
evolves and lessons are learned about what works, analyses and decisions are
updated. These are the principles behind the ‘flexible and adaptive’ agenda.
Report Type
Discussion Paper
Place
London
Institution
DFID
Date
2016.03
Language
en
Library Catalogue
Zotero
Citation
Piron, L.-H., Baker, A., Savage, L., & Wiseman, K. (2016). Is DFID Getting Real About Politics?A stocktake of how DFID has adopted a politically-informed approach (2010-2015) [Discussion Paper]. DFID.
Link to this record