The 5-year Department for International Development (DFID) funded Decentralized Livestock
Services in Eastern Indonesia (DELIVERI) project was an action-research project aiming to make
livestock service institutions more responsive to the needs of small-scale farmers. It was much
more successful than anyone expected.
The project worked concurrently at several levels: with field-level government staff and farmers
to research livestock production systems and identify opportunities for improved services, then
provided appropriate training to staff and farmers to establish and evaluate pilot projects; with
District and Provincial livestock service managers to research institutional constraints and
opportunities for supporting more client-oriented services, using the results of the field-level pilot
projects to convince them of their value; and with National livestock service managers to research
the policy framework and bureaucratic mechanisms for providing livestock services, using the
results of the field-level pilot projects, and increasingly enthusiastic field, district and provincial
livestock service staff to encourage them to change policies and practices to support more clientoriented
approaches.
When the project started in 1996, towards the end of the Suharto era, government services were
highly centralized, bureaucratic and inefficient, although policies promoting decentralization,
privatization and participation had been in place for a number of years. All budgets, services,
programs and projects continued to be designed and controlled from Jakarta, and regional and
district staff simply followed orders. During the first two years, although farmers and field-level
staff were enthusiastic about the results of the projects research and the new approaches, and a
few enlightened senior managers recognized their value, the project made little headway with the
bureaucracy. Then the economic, social and political crisis in 1997/8 pushed Suharto out of office
and the new era of “Reformasi” forced ill prepared government departments to rapidly implement
the long-shelved policies of “decentralizasi”, “privatizasi” and “participasi”. By that time the
DELIVERI project had a number of successful pilot projects up and running, and some
charismatic champions among livestock service staff at all levels, and suddenly found itself in
high demand.
By the end of the project livestock services were significantly more available to smallholder
farmers in the project areas, more client-oriented, and higher quality. A customer satisfaction
survey in 2000 found that 78% of farmers were satisfied or very satisfied with livestock services
in general compared with only 16% in 1998, and the improved availability and quality of services
has encouraged farmers to invest more in livestock enterprises resulting in a substantial increases
in income. By the same time, government policies, practices and budgets were changing to
support the development and implementation of more client-oriented services. The Department
had a new people-oriented vision “Healthy and productive communities through the development
of locally-based livestock resources”, new decentralized interdepartmental structures and new
mechanisms to co-operate across departmental boundaries, and over 50% of central government
livestock service budgets incorporated more “participatory” approaches. The new approaches
were also starting to spread to other sectors at district, province and national level2.
The surprising success of the DELIVERI project illustrates several critical factors, which
influence whether the results of research can influence policy. Some are about the ‘location’ of
the research within the pre-existing policy environment:
• Focus – the project was undertaking research on how to implement the government’s
well established, but not yet implemented policies of decentralization privatization and
participation. The research had political legitimacy, but, initially at least, little political
influence.
• Close linkages with policy-makers – the project built on DFID relationships in the
livestock sector at field, district, provincial and national level, that had been established
through collaborative work over the preceding 10 years. It had champions who were able
to bring the results to the attention of policy makers and senior managers.
• Timing – the project was in place, well established and therefore able to capitalize on the
new policy opportunities presented by the economic and political collapse in 1998, and
rush for “reformasi”.
Others are about how the research was done:
• The DELIVERI project had a clear strategy for policy influence from the start – it had
explicit sequenced activities, first to undertake field research and establish, pilot projects,
then research the policies and practices government livestock service provision, then
synthesize convincing evidence to convince people at all levels of the value of the new
approaches, and finally to work with senior policy makers, planners and managers to help
them to make the necessary changes to policy, organizational structure and practice to
promote them on a wider scale. There is a clear and necessary role for research at all
stages of the policy process, if high-level policy change is to implemented in practice.
• Researchers and other staff worked closely with all stakeholders, including farmers,
community leaders, local, district, provincial and central government, and other
organizations involved in livestock services. Involving policy-makers and practitioners in
identifying the issues, undertaking the research, and implementing the results is likely to
be more successful that undertaking the research in isolation then seeking to interest
policy makers in the results afterwards. Establishing synergistic networking between
different stakeholder groups, so they could share their own interpretation of the results
was a particularly effective mechanism for communication.
• DELIVERI was a “process” project. Within the overall project framework,
implementation was iterative – activities were based on an assessment of the results of
previous activities, and the ever-changing context, and the project was flexible enough to
be able to respond to the political opportunity presented by the economic crisis in 1998.
• The project used a quality management approach – all activities were “fit-for-thepurpose”
rather than individually perfect. Much of the research was qualitative, or if
quantitative, based on small sample sizes, yet was good enough to convince senior
planners and policy makers.
• A major effort was made to synthesize and disseminated high-quality tailor-made
information to all of the stakeholder groups. The project developed a communications
strategy during the first year, which identified the key targets, their information needs and
preferences, and the most effective mechanism to deliver it. Personal meetings were the
most effective mechanism for senior policy makers, supported with attractive printed
materials, and video clips. An illustrated diary, with attractive summaries of key findings
and recommendations was very popular with field staff and service managers.
Particularly since government budgetary constraints prevented many departments from
producing their own.
• The project’s multidisciplinary team of researchers, practitioners and communicators
from a wide range of backgrounds focused on individual people at all levels, using
collaborative research, specific training activities, personal follow-up, coaching and
mentoring to generate enthusiasm.
Services in Eastern Indonesia (DELIVERI) project was an action-research project aiming to make
livestock service institutions more responsive to the needs of small-scale farmers. It was much
more successful than anyone expected.
The project worked concurrently at several levels: with field-level government staff and farmers
to research livestock production systems and identify opportunities for improved services, then
provided appropriate training to staff and farmers to establish and evaluate pilot projects; with
District and Provincial livestock service managers to research institutional constraints and
opportunities for supporting more client-oriented services, using the results of the field-level pilot
projects to convince them of their value; and with National livestock service managers to research
the policy framework and bureaucratic mechanisms for providing livestock services, using the
results of the field-level pilot projects, and increasingly enthusiastic field, district and provincial
livestock service staff to encourage them to change policies and practices to support more clientoriented
approaches.
When the project started in 1996, towards the end of the Suharto era, government services were
highly centralized, bureaucratic and inefficient, although policies promoting decentralization,
privatization and participation had been in place for a number of years. All budgets, services,
programs and projects continued to be designed and controlled from Jakarta, and regional and
district staff simply followed orders. During the first two years, although farmers and field-level
staff were enthusiastic about the results of the projects research and the new approaches, and a
few enlightened senior managers recognized their value, the project made little headway with the
bureaucracy. Then the economic, social and political crisis in 1997/8 pushed Suharto out of office
and the new era of “Reformasi” forced ill prepared government departments to rapidly implement
the long-shelved policies of “decentralizasi”, “privatizasi” and “participasi”. By that time the
DELIVERI project had a number of successful pilot projects up and running, and some
charismatic champions among livestock service staff at all levels, and suddenly found itself in
high demand.
By the end of the project livestock services were significantly more available to smallholder
farmers in the project areas, more client-oriented, and higher quality. A customer satisfaction
survey in 2000 found that 78% of farmers were satisfied or very satisfied with livestock services
in general compared with only 16% in 1998, and the improved availability and quality of services
has encouraged farmers to invest more in livestock enterprises resulting in a substantial increases
in income. By the same time, government policies, practices and budgets were changing to
support the development and implementation of more client-oriented services. The Department
had a new people-oriented vision “Healthy and productive communities through the development
of locally-based livestock resources”, new decentralized interdepartmental structures and new
mechanisms to co-operate across departmental boundaries, and over 50% of central government
livestock service budgets incorporated more “participatory” approaches. The new approaches
were also starting to spread to other sectors at district, province and national level2.
The surprising success of the DELIVERI project illustrates several critical factors, which
influence whether the results of research can influence policy. Some are about the ‘location’ of
the research within the pre-existing policy environment:
• Focus – the project was undertaking research on how to implement the government’s
well established, but not yet implemented policies of decentralization privatization and
participation. The research had political legitimacy, but, initially at least, little political
influence.
• Close linkages with policy-makers – the project built on DFID relationships in the
livestock sector at field, district, provincial and national level, that had been established
through collaborative work over the preceding 10 years. It had champions who were able
to bring the results to the attention of policy makers and senior managers.
• Timing – the project was in place, well established and therefore able to capitalize on the
new policy opportunities presented by the economic and political collapse in 1998, and
rush for “reformasi”.
Others are about how the research was done:
• The DELIVERI project had a clear strategy for policy influence from the start – it had
explicit sequenced activities, first to undertake field research and establish, pilot projects,
then research the policies and practices government livestock service provision, then
synthesize convincing evidence to convince people at all levels of the value of the new
approaches, and finally to work with senior policy makers, planners and managers to help
them to make the necessary changes to policy, organizational structure and practice to
promote them on a wider scale. There is a clear and necessary role for research at all
stages of the policy process, if high-level policy change is to implemented in practice.
• Researchers and other staff worked closely with all stakeholders, including farmers,
community leaders, local, district, provincial and central government, and other
organizations involved in livestock services. Involving policy-makers and practitioners in
identifying the issues, undertaking the research, and implementing the results is likely to
be more successful that undertaking the research in isolation then seeking to interest
policy makers in the results afterwards. Establishing synergistic networking between
different stakeholder groups, so they could share their own interpretation of the results
was a particularly effective mechanism for communication.
• DELIVERI was a “process” project. Within the overall project framework,
implementation was iterative – activities were based on an assessment of the results of
previous activities, and the ever-changing context, and the project was flexible enough to
be able to respond to the political opportunity presented by the economic crisis in 1998.
• The project used a quality management approach – all activities were “fit-for-thepurpose”
rather than individually perfect. Much of the research was qualitative, or if
quantitative, based on small sample sizes, yet was good enough to convince senior
planners and policy makers.
• A major effort was made to synthesize and disseminated high-quality tailor-made
information to all of the stakeholder groups. The project developed a communications
strategy during the first year, which identified the key targets, their information needs and
preferences, and the most effective mechanism to deliver it. Personal meetings were the
most effective mechanism for senior policy makers, supported with attractive printed
materials, and video clips. An illustrated diary, with attractive summaries of key findings
and recommendations was very popular with field staff and service managers.
Particularly since government budgetary constraints prevented many departments from
producing their own.
• The project’s multidisciplinary team of researchers, practitioners and communicators
from a wide range of backgrounds focused on individual people at all levels, using
collaborative research, specific training activities, personal follow-up, coaching and
mentoring to generate enthusiasm.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar