An Overview of Advocacy Practices
National Seminar on
Globalisation and India: Voices from the Ground
18-19 December 2006 at Lucknow
organised by
CUTS International, Jaipur
in partnership
with NEED, Lucknow
Jayati Srivastava
Centre for International Politics,
Organisation and Disarmament
School of International Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Email: jayatis@mail.jnu.ac.in
Advocacy






Advocacy: a planned and organised set of actions to
effectively influence public policies to empower the
marginalised.
In a liberal democracy, uses democratic, non-violent
and constitutional means
Perceived as a value driven political process
Questions and changes existing unequal power
relations in favour of the socially, politically and
economically marginalised
Can occur at multiple levels of the policy process: local,
national, and/or international
At some or all phases of public policy making:




agenda setting
formulation of policies
enactment of policies
At implementation; monitoring and enforcement stage
The Study




Addressing the pertinent issues of
accountability and transparency.
Main objective: evaluate advocacy practices to
ascertain what advocacy tools is most efficient
at the ground level on issues of globalisation
and trade.
Within a right-based framework emanating
from the development literature which is
considered more effective, and sustainable.
Promises higher levels of empowerment,
ownership, and free, meaningful and active
participation.
Methodology and Field Area
 Case study methodology
 Four states: Karnataka, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh
and West Bengal; four different independent
researchers.
 Context specificity of advocacy practices
considered important given diverse socioeconomic and political context of the 4 states
 Overall framework: Comparative research design
for comparable success and failure stories of
advocacy practices and tools.
 Qualitative field interviews in select villages and
districts with different stakeholders
Partner Organisations




Karnataka: Consumer Research, Education &
Awareness Trust (CREAT), Bangalore
Rajasthan: CUTS Centre for Consumer Action,
Research & Training (CUTS-CART), Jaipur
Uttar Pradesh: Network for Entrepreneurship &
Economic Development (NEED), Lucknow
West Bengal: CUTS Calcutta Resource Centre (CUTSCRC), Calcutta
Advocacy Tools

Outreach Meetings

Workshops targeting State Level Officials

State and national advocacy workshops also for:

State level for State Trade Policy Councils (STPCs)

National level for National Trade Policy Council (NTPC)

Media Workshops

National Seminars and Workshops

E- Group and E- list

Publications: Making Things Happen, Gram Gadar,
GRANITE Newsletter, Briefing papers, etc.
Evaluating Advocacy Practices -1



Practice means: an experience, a specific intervention
strategy, activity or process of an organisation or a group
of organisations to achieve social change.
Could include policy advocacy, poverty eradication,
agricultural technique, an educational method or
international coalition building.
Based on these criterions, good, bad and innovative
practices were identified:
 Good practice: reasonable quantitative and qualitative
evidence to show its effectiveness in achieving specific
objective and has potential for replication.
 Innovative practice: Inconclusive evidence of its
effectiveness but it looks promising.
 Bad practice: Failures or negligible success; learning
from failures needed to achieve desired objectives.
Evaluating Advocacy Practices - 2






Success of individual advocacy practice contingent on
it meeting one, some or all of the following criteria:
Creating awareness amongst stakeholders about
WTO, trade and globalisation.
Ascertaining their perceptions on livelihood concerns
in the context of WTO and globalisation
Influencing trade policy making both at the state and
union level.
Positive intervention people’s livelihood: in terms of
generating alternative marketing avenues for farmers
and textile workers.
Capacity building of partner organisations and other
CSOs.
Evaluating Advocacy Practices: An Overview
An Overview of Advocacy Practices
Stakeholders
Purpose of Advocacy
Main Tool of Advocacy
Evaluation
Villagers including farmers and textile
workers
(1) improve the knowledge of
stakeholders about the changes
brought about by the WTO regime
in the context of globalisation;
(2) ascertain their perceptions about the
globalisation and its impact on
their livelihood concerns in order
to feed the grassroots demands
into the policy domain;
(3) creating alternative marketing
avenues*
Combination of outreach meetings;
distribution of publication
material; placard processions
(1) Good practice
(2) Good practice
(3) Innovative practice
State government officials/ Minsters, etc.
(1) Making trade policy making more
transparent, and accountable ; (2)
creating structural spaces for
grassroots inputs into the policy
domain
State-level workshop; distribution of
publications; personal contacts
and persuasions
(1) Bad practice
(2) Bad practice
Media
(1) Sensitise the media about economic
impacts of WTO policies in the
context of globalisation;
(2) use media as a medium to
disseminate information
Media workshops; distribution of
publication material
(1) Innovative practice
(2) innovative practice
Grassroots CSOs
(1) Capacity-building of grassroots CSOs
on economic dimensions of
globalisationn and WTO;
(2) Creating a network of CSOs at the
which informed by the debate on
WTO would carry the process
forward
Workshops, seminars, involving them in
organising outreach meetings,
distribution of publication
material
(1) Innovative Practice**
(2) Innovative Practice **
* The focus on generating alternative marketing avenues to a large extent emanated from the feedback received from of farmers, artisans and producers at some of the
outreach meetings. In UP it was found to be most effective. In the case of Karnataka, Rajasthan, advocacy made them aware about existing alternatives away from
moneylenders but no actual marketing channels were instituted. In West Bengal some direct marketing channels are being attempted.
** In the case of Karnataka, it was very effective followed by UP and West Bengal. In Rajasthan, isolated instances of grassroots networking with other CSOs were reported.
Lessons Learnt

Different advocacy practices are effective on different stakeholders.
 Outreach meetings: most effective tool for awareness generation and
ascertaining peoples perceptions at the grassroots.
 Capacity building and training workshop


Government officials and policy makers



reasonably effective for media representatives and partner CSO’s as also
publications.
a multi pronged approach including personal pursuance, capacity-building
and training workshop, specific publication; delegations, signature
campaigns, etc. are useful advocacy tools
Overall success was limited
Different approach and medium of communication for diverse
stakeholders.

use of local language.

Contextual specificity important.

Collective effort rather than individual effort is of utmost importance in
making a meaningful intervention
Conclusions

Access of public to trade policy-making is actively denied:



Intransigence of government officials to respond to ground reality
Transparency and accountability in public policy process absent.
VeneKlasen and Miller:
although a key advocacy goal is to create opportunities for citizen’s groups
to be directly engaged in policy processes, engagement does not always
impact policy decisions in the end. It is easy to believe that access to
policymakers will translate into influence, but in practice this is rarely true
(emphasis added).


Influence of CSOs in the policy- making domain is more if they
claim the space rather than being invited
Claming and creating that space in the policy domain should
be priority of advocacy in future