Politics and the political economy matter for whether and how reforms happen in developing as well as in developed countries. The World Bank as an institution and its individual country and task teams has been grappling with this issue for many years. The good practice framework described here is an attempt to summarize relevant analytic tools and approaches, to indicate how it can be used (more) systematically, and to make key lessons readily available. It also seeks to set out how such tools can be used in a way that is problem driven, that is, focused on specific issues and challenges rather than on developing broad overviews, in order to generate operationally relevant findings and implications. Integrating governance and political economy (GPE) analysis more systematically into Bank operational work is important to enhance development effectiveness, to better address risks, and to respond to client demands for approaches that are tailored to specific situations. The objective of this framework is to systematize approaches to GPE analysis and to provide orientation for teams that are considering undertaking it. The framework especially draws on the experience with a number of pilot studies undertaken in FY2008 and FY2009, as well as on earlier studies. Analysis focused on a variety of sectors- electricity, transport, and telecommunications, water, and public sector reforms and on thematic challenges, especially the management of natural resource wealth. The framework is therefore tailored to the context of Bank operations and strategy development (such as country assistance strategies) designed to show how GPE analysis can be used to inform and shape them to support more effective development. The framework is divided into six parts: part one discusses the overall rationale of this framework and sets out the key foundations. Part two discusses how PGPE analysis can be used to inform and shape Bank strategies and operations, and offers options for translating the analysis into action more broadly. Part three sets out the various levels of analysis that may be undertaken, from an overall country focus, to a sector or thematic focus, to a GPE analysis that is undertaken to inform specific projects or policy decisions. Part four addresses the issue of evidencing a GPE analysis, a key challenge in producing high-quality work. Part five addresses process issues that arise when undertaking GPE-type analysis. Finally, part six gives conclusion and looking forward.

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2013/11/18/000442464_20131118143126/Rendered/PDF/826520WP0Probl00Box379862B00PUBLIC0.pdf

Problem-Driven Governance and Political Economy Analysis : Good Practice Framework

Risk analysis of species invasions links biology and economics, is increasingly mandated by international and national policies, and enables improved management of invasive species. Biological invasions proceed through a series of transition probabilities (i.e., introduction, establishment, spread, and impact), and each of these presents opportunities for management. Recent research advances have improved estimates of probability and associated uncertainty. Improvements have come from species-specific trait-based risk assessments (of estimates of introduction, establishment, spread, and impact probabilities, especially from pathways of commerce in living organisms), spatially explicit dispersal models (introduction and spread, especially from transportation pathways), and species distribution models (establishment, spread, and impact). Results of these forecasting models combined with improved and cheaper surveillance technologies and practices [e.g., environmental DNA (eDNA), drones, citizen science] ena...

https://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs_journals/2016/rmrs_2016_lodge_d001.pdf

Risk Analysis and Bioeconomics of Invasive Species to Inform Policy and Management

There has been a renewed interest in impact evaluation and measuring results in recent years amongst development agencies and donors. This paper reviews the case for promoting and formalising qualitative and combined methods for impact evaluation and measuring results, as part of a broader strategy amongst donors and country partners for tackling the evaluation gap. The accompanying workshop report provides a summary of the January 2009 workshop “Make an Impact: Tackling the “I” and the “D” of Making It Happen”, which aimed to familiarise DFID staff with the use of qualitative methods in impact evaluation and measuring results. 
The case for qualitative and combined methods is strong. Qualitative methods have an equal footing in evaluation of development impacts and can generate sophisticated, robust and timely data and analysis. Combining qualitative research with quantitative instruments that have greater breadth of coverage and generalisability can result in better evaluations that make the most of their respective comparative advantages.

https://www.gsdrc.org/docs/open/eirs4.pdf

Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in Impact Evaluation and Measuring Results

Powering Africa: Facing the Financing and Reform Challenges

This paper argues that existing political economy approaches lack the analytical tools needed to grasp the inner politics of development. Political economy has come to be seen narrowly as the economics of politics – the way incentives shape behaviour. Much recent political economy work therefore misses what is distinctively political about politics – power, interests, agency, ideas, the subtleties of building and sustaining coalitions, and the role of contingency. This paper aims to give policy makers and practitioners more precise conceptual tools to help them interpret the inner, ‘micro’, politics of the contexts in which they work. It argues in particular for more focus on recognising and working with the different forms of power, on understanding how and where interests develop, and on the role of ideas.

Derick W. Brinkerhoff

Papers

Tools for Institutional, Political, and Social Analysis of Policy Reform: A Sourcebook for Development Practitioners