Agricultural Policy and Advocacy Training Course

Participants can assess political incentives, interests and constraints affecting a proposed agricultural reform.

• Political economy analysis using interests, incentives, institutions and ideas
• Actor incentives behind fertilizer policy, procurement and price controls
• Distributional effects identified among farmers, traders, consumers and government
• Rent-seeking risks assessed in input subsidy and procurement systems
• Windows of opportunity linked to elections, shocks and budget cycles
• Country context assumptions tested before selecting advocacy tactics

Participants can formulate a policy problem statement supported by causal analysis and affected-group perspectives.

• Problem statements distinguish symptoms, causes, consequences and affected groups
• Problem tree analysis applied to agricultural service delivery failures
• Causal pathways tested against farmer, trader and extension-worker evidence
• Gendered constraints identified within land, labour, finance and market systems
• Policy failure distinguished from implementation, capacity and accountability failures
• Priority problems selected using scale, severity, feasibility and mandate

Participants can map stakeholders, assess power relationships and prioritise engagement approaches.

• Power-interest grids classify decision-makers, allies, opponents and affected groups
• Stakeholder roles mapped across agenda setting, approval and implementation
• Influence networks traced between ministries, parliament, business and media
• Gatekeepers and informal advisers identified through structured stakeholder interviews
• Farmer representation assessed for legitimacy, inclusion and accountability
• Engagement priorities set using influence, alignment, access and risk

Participants can integrate rights, gender, inclusion and accountability considerations into advocacy design.

• Rights-based analysis links duty bearers, rights holders and accountability mechanisms
• Gender analysis examines access, control, decision-making and unpaid care work
• Youth, pastoralist and indigenous perspectives incorporated into policy positions
• Do-no-harm principles applied to public advocacy and stakeholder engagement
• Safeguarding risks considered when collecting testimony from vulnerable groups
• Feedback loops connect community priorities with organisational advocacy decisions

Participants can compare policy options and recommend actions that are technically credible and politically feasible.

• Policy instruments include regulation, taxation, subsidies, services and information
• Option appraisal compares effectiveness, equity, cost, feasibility and risk
• Cost implications separated between capital expenditure and recurrent expenditure
• Implementation capacity assessed across national, district and community institutions
• Unintended consequences examined through scenario analysis and distributional assessment
• Recommendations matched to authority mandates, budget cycles and legal powers

Participants can assess, synthesise and communicate evidence suitable for policy advocacy.

• Evidence hierarchy distinguishes administrative data, surveys, evaluations and testimony
• Research questions aligned with policy decisions and intended advocacy claims
• Farm-level evidence triangulated with market, budget and administrative data
• Data quality assessed through source, method, bias, relevance and timeliness
• Evidence gaps documented without overstating certainty or causal attribution
• Key findings translated into claims, supporting facts and policy implications

Participants can develop an advocacy Theory of Change linking actions to plausible policy outcomes.

• Theory of Change links activities, actors, assumptions and policy outcomes
• Long-term outcomes defined as policy, budget, implementation or accountability changes
• Backcasting identifies interim shifts in knowledge, commitment and behaviour
• Assumptions tested against political economy findings and stakeholder incentives
• Influence pathways distinguish insider engagement, public mobilisation and litigation
• Contribution logic documented without claiming sole responsibility for change

Participants can develop an advocacy strategy with targeted objectives, messages and tactics.

• SMART advocacy objectives specify decision, decision-maker, timeframe and change
• Audience segmentation differentiates primary targets, influencers and public constituencies
• Message boxes connect problem, evidence, solution, benefit and call-to-action
• Framing choices tested for farmer livelihoods, fiscal responsibility and food security
• Tactics matched to stakeholder access, policy stage and organisational credibility
• Strategy documents assign objectives, audiences, messages, tactics and responsibilities

Participants can structure coalitions that maintain legitimacy, coordination and shared policy positions.

• Coalition mapping identifies complementary mandates, constituencies, resources and risks
• Shared policy platforms define common demands and acceptable compromise boundaries
• Governance arrangements clarify membership, decision rights, funding and spokesperson roles
• Conflict protocols address disagreements over tactics, visibility and political affiliation
• Representative participation supports meaningful input from marginalised producer groups
• Coalition communications coordinate public statements, meetings and response procedures

Participants can plan constructive engagement with public institutions and formal consultation mechanisms.

• Meeting objectives define requested decisions, evidence and follow-up commitments
• Briefing packs prepare decision-makers for meetings, hearings and budget discussions
• Parliamentary committee submissions follow procedural requirements and evidence standards
• Public consultations analysed for timing, submission rules and participation barriers
• Negotiation preparation identifies interests, concessions, red lines and alternatives
• Follow-up trackers record commitments, owners, deadlines and escalation actions

Participants can select public communication methods that support rather than dilute policy objectives.

• Media mapping identifies specialist journalists, editors, broadcasters and rural outlets
• Press releases present newsworthy evidence, human impact and policy recommendations
• Spokesperson preparation handles hostile questions, uncertainty and political sensitivity
• Digital content calendars align messages with policy milestones and audience behaviour
• Social listening tracks misinformation, opposition narratives and emerging public concerns
• Communications approvals protect accuracy, safeguarding and coalition message discipline

Participants can prepare concise written and oral materials for policy decision-makers.

• Policy brief structure presents issue, evidence, options, recommendation and references
• Executive summaries state requested action within the opening paragraph
• Tables and charts communicate agricultural data without misleading simplification
• Consultation submissions respond directly to questions, criteria and statutory mandates
• Oral briefings use issue, evidence, ask and anticipated objection structure
• Citation practices distinguish published research, administrative data and stakeholder testimony

Participants can plan advocacy campaigns with realistic resources, safeguards and risk controls.

• Campaign workplans sequence research, engagement, communications and review milestones
• RACI matrices assign responsible, accountable, consulted and informed roles
• Risk registers assess political, legal, security, reputational and safeguarding threats
• Scenario planning prepares responses to backlash, misinformation and policy reversals
• Budget assumptions cover staff time, travel, research, media and coalition costs
• Ethical advocacy protocols protect consent, confidentiality and community representation

Participants can monitor advocacy progress and adapt actions using credible influence evidence.

• Influence indicators track access, discourse, commitments, policy text and implementation
• Outcome harvesting captures unexpected changes and tests contribution claims
• Process tracing assesses causal contribution within complex policy decisions
• Monitoring plans specify baselines, sources, collection frequency and responsibilities
• Learning reviews compare assumptions, results, risks and tactical adjustments
• Donor reporting distinguishes outputs, outcomes, contribution and attribution limits

Participants can build, review and present a complete agricultural policy advocacy package for a defined policy issue.

• Policy issue selected with defined decision, geography, affected groups and timeframe
• Political economy findings inform stakeholder priorities and feasible advocacy pathways
• Evidence summary substantiates the problem statement and proposed policy action
• Theory of Change connects activities with interim and long-term outcomes
• Advocacy strategy integrates objectives, messages, tactics, coalition and engagement plans
• Policy brief, monitoring framework and risk register completed for presentation