GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»Using Action Research and Learning for Politically Informed Programming

Using Action Research and Learning for Politically Informed Programming

Library
Michael O'Keefe et al.
2014

Summary

This Research Paper outlines preliminary findings about how action research can help build more politically informed development programs. It discusses action research being undertaken by the Pacific Leadership Program, the Coalitions for Change program in the Philippines, and DLP.

This approach combines theory and practice to support development practitioners to think and work politically to bring about positive change. It involves recurring constructive engagement with practitioners and it rigorously documents, contextualises and explains the processes and outcomes of programs as they unfold –and the resultant changes (or not). It aims to help development practitioners and their partners understand more clearly the contexts in which they are operating, the consequences of their practices and policy decisions and how national and sub-national change is actually occurring.

Key Findings:

  • Findings suggest the need to think about this research and these programs in a more comparable way from the outset in order to draw out valuable lessons to help the ‘next generation’ of programs.
  • Politically informed programming requires extensive on-going empirical knowledge and analytical skills of how local change actually occurs. It requires understanding complex and evolving political and power processes, identifying affiliations and interests of diverse political actors, exploring windows of political opportunity and anticipating political outcomes and their implications.
  • Politically informed programming entails engagement with political processes that are highly contingent to national and sub-national power structures, and are almost always fluid and contested. This involves iterative adaptation based on regular re-evaluation and re-calibration of tactics and strategies.
  • It requires development practitioners to better understand and establish causal linkages between their own practices, the political processes in which they are engaged and the outcomes and implications of their work.

Recommendations:

  • The emerging action research approach should be integrated fully into whatever programming cycle underpins the donors’ approach to politically informed programming. Three broad components (phases) to a programming cycle are generally followed while noting that different development agencies may have unique detailed variations: Analysis of context, identification and design of program (including modality choice); Implementation; and Monitoring and Evaluation.
  • Careful consideration will need to be given to the incorporation, design and implementation of action research at each of the three phases for politically informed programming. It should be noted that while the long term goal of politically informed programming is to promote transformational change, the short to medium term output and process level results are also valuable and are likely to represent value-for-money.

Source

O'Keefe, M., Sidel, J., Marquette, H., et al. (2014) Using Action Research and Learning for Politically Informed Programming. Research Paper 29. Birmingham, UK: Development Leadership Program (DLP).

Related Content

Regional cooperation and political stability and prosperity
Donor funded alliances promoting regional cooperation
Helpdesk Report
2017
Factors affecting success or failure of political transitions
Helpdesk Report
2017
National climate change governance
Topic Guide
2017

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2025; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2025; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2025

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".