Standard 12: Advocacy
Our Commitment:
We are committed to influencing
key decision-makers to make and
implement policies and practices
that work in favour of people who
are vulnerable to disaster.
Women in an Indian village consider written evidence
in support of their advocacy work on women’s rights
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 12: Advocacy
The issues
Every disaster has both causes and effects. ‘Causes’ are the things that lead to a
disaster happening; the reasons why a disaster happens. ‘Effects’ are the
repercussions of a disaster; the things that occur as a result of a disaster. For
most NGOs, it is easier to address the effects (for example, by providing shelter
in the aftermath of an earthquake) than it is to address the causes (for example,
by putting early warning and preparedness systems in place for people living in
earthquake zones).
Most NGOs are recognising that they need to address the causes, as well as the
effects, of disasters if people are going to have their vulnerability to disaster
reduced. Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) is one way of doing this. In the context of
a disaster advocacy aims to address the underlying issues.
At the root of many emergency situations, there is often an unjust policy.
Advocacy aims to change policy. Sometimes, it seeks to change an existing unjust
policy. At other times, it seeks to implement a policy which exists but is not
actually being put into practice or it seeks to create policies where none existed
before. Every time, it is targeted at the bodies, institutions or individuals that
are responsible for making, deciding and implementing policy. These people are
collectively called ‘decision-makers’. They can be in the community, at the local
or national level, or even the international level.
Advocacy can be done directly by those affected by injustice, or on their behalf,
or through a combination of both. Anyone can undertake advocacy work. It does
not have to be left to professionals or experts. Good advocacy work empowers
people. It enables people to speak for themselves and their communities. It helps
them recognise and claim their rights from those with a responsibility and duty to
uphold them. An example:
After a conflict, people might be urged to return home, but there might
be no water and sanitation facilities back home. Sometimes, there is a
government resolution in place to provide water and sanitation. Advocacy
work might involve speaking out to the local authority in the home
districts and urging them to comply with the provisions of the government
resolution. When they comply, water and sanitation facilities are
provided, and people are more willing and able to return home.
In the absence of advocacy emergency projects, which correctly respond based
on need and the imperative to intervene, will only address the immediate
problems without also addressing the root causes that contributed to and
exacerbated the disaster in the first place. Without advocacy, preventative
measures would be limited and underlying power structures would be
unchallenged. Without advocacy, beneficiaries may not be aware of their
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 12: Advocacy
entitlement to have their basic rights fulfilled, nor the responsibility of those in
power to fulfil those rights.
Biblical foundations
This quality standard recognises that we have a responsibility to speak for those
who are weak, vulnerable and destitute, before those who are decision-makers in
emergency settings. The Bible has many examples of advocates: Moses, who
pleaded with Pharoah to set the Israelites free from slavery in Egypt; Nehemiah,
who challenged the government officials to stop exacting usury; and Esther, who
risked her life to ask the king to stop oppressing the Jews. The Bible urges us to
“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who
are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and
needy.” (Proverbs 31:8-9).
Good Practice commitments
In the context of our emergency projects, being an advocate means asking, “Is
there a policy underlying this emergency situation? Who has decision-making
power to change and/or implement it? How can I influence them to favour our
beneficiaries?”
As an organisation, Tearfund is committed to influencing the key decision-makers
in emergency situations, so that their policies work in favour of people who are
vulnerable to disaster. For example:
• In a conflict situation, we might advocate to tribal chiefs to encourage peacebuilding and power-sharing.
• In a place vulnerable to flooding, we might advocate to wealthy landowners to
allow access across their land so that those who live in the flood risk zones can
get to safety on higher ground.
• In areas prone to droughts, we might influence the government Ministries to
coordinate better to prepare for droughts in the future, rather than simply
responding after people’s livelihoods have been eroded. Or we might try to
tackle the attitude of fatalism at the local level.
• In a place vulnerable to earthquakes, we might advocate to local authorities to
reinforce the structure of public buildings and to put in place preparedness
measures.
• In a cyclone situation, we might advocate to government ministers for money
to help with rebuilding.
Advocacy is all about influencing these powerful people to act in equitable ways.
It is about urging them to make just decisions and fair policies, and it is about
holding them to account for their promises.
Close links to other Quality Standards
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 12: Advocacy
There are close links with Values, with our commitment to justice; Disaster Risk
Reduction, as the root causes of vulnerability are often issues of policy; and HIV,
recognising that policy issues need to be addressed where HIV is a priority
concern.
Where to look for further information:
• Tearfund advocacy toolkit (ROOTS 1&2)
• Seeking Justice for All (PILLARS guide)
• TILZ advocacy learning zone: http://tilz.tearfund.org/Topics/Advocacy
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 12: Advocacy
Practical Steps to carrying out our Advocacy commitment
Identification
Step 1: Identify the problem
issue that needs to be
addressed and gather
information about its causes
and effects
Step 2: Identify the policies
that relate to the problem
issue, at which level they
sit, and who has
responsibility for them
Design
Step 3: Identify key
stakeholders and establish
relationships with them
Step 4: Assess the risks and
benefits of going ahead with
advocacy
Step 5: Put it all together in
an action plan and integrate
it into your project plans
Implementation
Step 6: Engage in advocacy
using the most contextappropriate methods
Step 7: Continually reflect
on what is being learnt in
order to continually improve
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 12: Advocacy
Step 1: Identify the problem
issue that needs to be
addressed and gather
information about its causes
and effects
To undertake advocacy in an
emergency situation, the key
problem
issues
need
to
be
identified. A budget line may need
to be set aside, at least initially, to
pay for the initial research involved.
A facilitator needs to listen to those affected and ask them questions, perhaps
through semi-structured interviewing or focus groups, and then agree which
issues are priority needs. This process may link with the Disaster Risk quality
standard, where capacities and vulnerabilities are identified.
Once the main problem issues have been identified, a facilitator needs to work
with the beneficiaries to identify the main effects and causes of the issues. This
can be done using a problem tree, a contextual analysis, or another similar tool.
To identify the causes, it is helpful to keep asking why problems exist until you
find the root cause which may be related to policies, culture or finance. An
allocated resource person then needs to gather information about the causes and
effects. Local churches can be key information providers.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 12: Advocacy
Step 2: Identify the policies
that relate to the problem
issue, at which level they
sit, and who has
responsibility for them
Using the information gathered in Step 1, you
need to research and identify the
policy/policies or practices that relate to the
problem issues. At the same time, you need
to establish whether the policy or policies are
local, provincial, national, regional or even
international. You also need to identify who has responsibility for the policy or
policies. All this will help determine the level at which advocacy is undertaken.
For example:
• If the problem issue relates to land ownership, there might be a local
authority policy or certain practices about land rights, so any advocacy
would be done at local level and targeted at the local authority.
• If the problem relates to resettlement of internally displaced people, there
might be a national government policy about resettlement, so any advocacy
would be done at national level and targeted at the national government.
• If the problem relates to tribal conflicts and the tribal divisions cross
country-borders, there might be a regional policy about peace-building, so
any advocacy would be done at regional level and targeted at regional
bodies, such as SADC.
This process of identification could be done through independent research or
through conversations with other peer agencies. (See Step 3) The level of detail
and the amount of information needed will vary in different situations, but it
always needs to be easily accessible, in the language and format most
appropriate for the target audience that you will influence, and updated
regularly.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 12: Advocacy
Step 3: Identify key
stakeholders and establish
relationships with them
You need to identify other people
who are concerned for the same
problem issues as you. You could do
this through a stakeholder analysis
or another similar tool. Amongst
others, you will need to establish
relationships with other peer agencies and the communities affected by the
emergency.
It is good to identify other people who are concerned with the same problem
issues because it allows potential for joint advocacy action. This has several
advantages. Firstly, it generates a more powerful collective ‘voice’. Secondly, it
offers some safety for those involved because any repercussions are directed at
the collective group rather than the individuals involved. Thirdly, it enables those
with less experience in advocacy to learn from those with more experience.
National church bodies can be key stakeholders, and they often represent a wide
network of local churches. The church often has natural links with the wider
world. It may be in touch with a district co-ordinating body such as a diocesan
office, through which it may have access to and contact with NGOs and INGOs. It
will also be recognised by, and often have contact with, local government. It can
act as an introduction agency and gate-keeper between the NGOs, INGOs and the
local community. The church can also pass information through its networks and
structures to the national level and the wider Church.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 12: Advocacy
Step 4: Assess the risks and
benefits of going ahead with
advocacy
Advocacy is not always a suitable course of
action in an emergency situation, so it is
important to assess whether to go ahead
with it. This is only possible once Steps 1-3
have been completed, i.e. you have done
your research, you have gathered your
evidence, and you have identified your
key stakeholders. You can do this using a risk/benefit tool, such as a SWOT/BEEM
analysis, or you could speak with other peer agencies and the communities
affected about the potential risks and benefits involved. What is important is that
the decision about whether or not to go ahead with advocacy is made and
approved by your leadership.
Step 5: Put it all together in
an action plan and integrate
it into your project plans
If the decision is made to go ahead with advocacy,
in full awareness of the risks and benefits, the next
step is to put all your preparatory work together in
a plan of action. Wherever possible, your plan should be incorporated into your
project log frames so that your advocacy work is an integrated part of your
project design, rather than additional to it. In addition to the normal components
of your log frames, you must be clear about your allies, your targets (who you will
influence), your assumptions, and the risks/benefits involved, as these all need to
be monitored and evaluated.
You might decide to appoint a dedicated staff member within your project team
(such as a Policy Officer or an Advocacy Officer). This would apply if you have
identified a major issue that needs dedicated capacity to research and address it
(otherwise Project staff can coordinate advocacy activities as part of the
project).
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 12: Advocacy
Step 6: Engage in advocacy
using the most contextappropriate methods
Your plan then needs to be put into
action and you need to start
advocating! This is when you need to establish relationships with key decisionmakers who you are targeting with your advocacy messages. Your advocacy
methodology will vary depending on the decision-makers and other stakeholders
involved, but could include meetings, phone calls, letter-writing, information
boards, leaflets, local radio or any other means that are appropriate. The
methods you choose must be context-specific and those that are most likely to
influence changes.
Step 7: Continually reflect
on what is being learnt in
order to continually improve
This final step involves reflecting on the
risks and benefits identified in Step 4,
now that advocacy is underway. Were
the assumptions made in Step 4 correct?
If not, what plans and actions need to
change in light of what is being
experienced? It is important to make
adjustments to your advocacy approach
to ensure it is effective.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 12: Advocacy
Project Examples
A partner in India advocated with local landowners in a flood-prone area to be
able to build a raised evacuation route across their private land. Their
successful negotiation with 47 landowners resulted in a safe evacuation route
from the frequent flooding.
In Niger, a partner as part of its work with a pastoralist group has tried to
change the text of the “Code Pastoral”, a government law outlining the rights
and entitlements of pastoralists. The partner has also worked to ensure these
rights are understood on the ground by the community and local authorities so
that the existing law can be better implemented.
A partner in Zimbabwe discovered that many of their beneficiaries
(households caring for orphans) were being left off lists for receiving official
food aid. They therefore advocated on behalf of these households to be
included on the distribution list.
In Afghanistan, a project team identified the need to raise awareness about
World Water Day and to work with media groups to have information on water
issues and the importance of water conservation in Afghanistan broadcast by
radio. The team produced an 18-minute special radio programme and then
lobbied the government and private radio stations for free broadcasting of the
programme. The media houses initially objected to this, but through
persistence and by making reference to the life saving nature of these
messages for the Afghan people, one radio station agreed to waive its fees and
then other major radio stations followed suit by agreeing to free broadcasts.
A project manager in Darfur, Sudan recognised that the local hospital which
was running a therapeutic feeding centre did not have sufficient rooms to
accommodate the patients. After lobbying donors to recognise the need for
upgrading the service available, UNICEF provided the necessary funding to
provide new rooms.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009