{"id":2843401,"date":"2024-07-09T08:29:46","date_gmt":"2024-07-09T13:29:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/articles\/\/"},"modified":"2024-07-10T05:45:00","modified_gmt":"2024-07-10T10:45:00","slug":"centring-context-recent-shifts-in-political-economy-analysis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/articles\/centring-context-recent-shifts-in-political-economy-analysis\/","title":{"rendered":"Centring context: recent shifts in political economy analysis"},"content":{"rendered":"

Many philanthropic donors and implementing partners aspire to be contextually grounded in their work. This is especially important for the growing group of donors interested in deepening their understanding of governments and their partnerships with them<\/a>.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

We know that identifying and seizing \u2018windows of opportunity\u2019<\/a> is a crucial element of successful government advisory relationships.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The lessons learnt from political economy analysis (PEA) approaches can inform how donors do this in ways that are light, agile and useful in maximising the impact of government advice.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Over the past two decades (and perhaps even longer), PEA approaches and experiences have been accumulating and evolving.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

As part of a <\/span>learning partnership on advisory support to governments<\/span><\/a>, the OTT team recently reviewed approaches to PEA in the international development space.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In this article, we highlight five ways that PEA approaches have changed over the last decade and explore five lessons learnt along the way.<\/span><\/p>\n

Five changes in PEA\u00a0<\/b><\/h2>\n

1. Less of an \u2018event\u2019, more of a process\u00a0<\/span><\/h3>\n

While a \u2018foundational\u2019 or \u2018baseline\u2019 PEA report is still commonly recommended and produced, interest in other forms of quick and ongoing analysis has grown.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The purpose, as <\/span>Pact outline<\/span><\/a>, \u201cis not to generate analysis for analysis\u2019 sake\u201d but to inform decisions and strategies to achieve results in shifting political and economic climates.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This has led to much more attention on the process of ongoing approaches to working politically and integrating this into day-to-day organisational and project realities.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

2. Politics presents both an opportunity and a barrier\u00a0<\/span><\/b><\/h3>\n

As the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office\u2019s (FCDO\u2019s) latest guidance points out, PEA approaches <\/span>increasingly focus on the opportunities in the context<\/span><\/a>, rather than just the barriers or blockages.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

As the <\/span>Developmental Leadership programme observed<\/span><\/a>, \u201cPolitics isn\u2019t the obstacle\u2026it\u2019s the way change happens\u201d.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Yet this is still an ongoing process \u2013 in the evidence-informed policy space, for instance, we still very often see politics listed under \u2018barriers\u2019. Actually, it should be seen as a cluster of factors that can act as barriers or opportunities \u2013 sometimes both at the same time!\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Efforts by organisations like the Centre for Democratic Development (CDD) in Ghana<\/span><\/a> are moving the sector towards a more nuanced understanding of the politics of evidence use.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

3. More focus on gender and equity<\/h3>\n

There has been recognition that some earlier PEA models were effectively \u2018gender blind\u2019. Later models place <\/span>much more emphasis on gender and equity<\/span><\/a>.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Incorporating this lens brings its own challenges but also reveals new insights. This <\/span>learning brief <\/span><\/a>shares reflections from think tanks in Ghana, Uganda and Pakistan on designing and implementing a gender- and equity-responsive approach to PEA.<\/span><\/p>\n

4. Increasing interest in \u2018localisation\u2019<\/b><\/b><\/h3>\n

There is increasing interest in how national actors are using PEA to understand and respond to their own contexts.<\/span><\/p>\n

This stands in contrast to some of the earlier PEA models, which were sometimes seen as ways for \u2018outsiders\u2019 (namely, northerners) to understand southern contexts.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The thinking and working politically (TWP) community\u2019s recent profiles of locally-led approaches in <\/span>Colombia<\/span><\/a>, <\/span>Mali<\/span><\/a>, <\/span>DRC<\/span><\/a> and <\/span>Uganda<\/span><\/a> are illustrative of this growing recognition of the expertise of national actors in navigating the political contexts that they\u2019re embedded in and know intimately.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This is a theme we\u2019re particularly interested in at OTT, leading us to ask the following questions:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n