Evaluation of Norway’s support for advocacy in the development policy arena

About the publication

  • Published: September 2016
  • Series: Evaluation report
  • Type: Evaluations
  • Carried out by: Swedish Institute for Public Administration (SIPU)
  • Commissioned by: Evalueringsavdelingen i Norad
  • Country:
  • Theme: Conflict prevention and resolution, peace and security, Women and gender equality, Health, Education and research, Public administration
  • Pages: 79
  • Serial number: 5/2016
  • ISBN: 978-82-7548-835-8
  • ISSN: --
NB! The publication is ONLY available online and can not be ordered on paper.

English text follows underneath

Norge har lang tradisjon for å påta seg en rolle som internasjonal pådriver i utviklingsspørsmål. Denne evalueringen har kartlagt og vurdert Norges pådriverrolle i fire globale engasjement i perioden 2005-2014; nemlig barne- og mødrehelse, kvinner, fred og sikkerhet, ulovlig kapitalflukt og regjeringens pågående utdanningssatsing.

Hensikten med evalueringen har vært å fremskaffe kunnskap og trekke frem lærdommer til pågående og fremtidige satsinger.

Evalueringen viser at Norge oppfattes å ha bidratt til å sette de aktuelle tema på global dagsorden samt inngåelse av større politiske og økonomiske forpliktelser fra andre donorer. Innenrikspolitiske prioriteringer synes å være den mest avgjørende faktoren for valg og tidspunkt av et bestemt engasjement, men til dels også Norges komparative fortrinn innenfor valgte områder. Her trekker evalueringen frem flere områder der Norge sees å ha et fortinn.

Evalueringen skisserer også fire hovedutfordringer i engasjementene: De har svært ambisiøse mål, forutsetter langsiktig innsats, står ovenfor en uferdig agende og risikere et misforhold mellom omfang av engasjementet og tilgjengelig kapasitet.

På grunnlag av funn og konklusjoner, anbefaler evalueringsavdelingen at Utenriksdepartementet bør gå for satsinger hvor Norge har et komparative fortrinn, opprettholde realisme via å justere ambisjoner og planer i forhold til ressurstilgang, trekke på faglige ressurser der de finnes – innenfor og utenfor utenrikstjenesten. Behov for exit-strategi på politisk nivå trekkes også frem av avdelingen.

...

Norway has a long tradition of undertaking the role of an international prime mover in the development policy arena. The evaluation provides a comparative assessment of Norway`s advocacy role in four global engagements - maternal and child health, women, peace and security, measures against illicit financial flows, and the Norwegian government`s ongoing education initiative.

The objective of this evaluation was to identify the driving factors that determine the achievement of Norway’s advocacy outcomes and draw lessons for future programming of the Norwegian government’s policy of advocacy engagements in the development policy arena. 

The evaluation finds that Norway’s advocacy engagements over the past decade have covered a wide range of thematic areas. Using a mix of high level diplomacy and indirect support and, working with, other governments, multilateral institutions, civil society; Norway manages to elevate the targeted issues on the global agenda. Its coalition partners perceive Norway as a flexible and efficient partner without a hidden agenda. Norway’s financial resources and experience in some of the policy areas also provide the necessary legitimacy to Norway’s role as a prime mover in the development policy arena.

The evaluation points out that all four engagements have ambitious goals and require long-term efforts. All engagements are facing an unfinished agenda. There is a perception that there is a mismatch between staff and technical resources and the scope of Norway’s engagements.

Building on the evaluation findings, the Evaluation Department recommends that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs may choose to prioritize commitments where Norway is perceived to have a comparative advantage. There is a need for a greater focus on adjusting ambitions and plans in line with the resources. Available resources should be accessed from both within and outside of the Foreign Service. Need for an exit-strategy for high-level political engagement is also highlighted in the recommendations.

Published 01.09.2016
Last updated 01.09.2016