The four case studies are real examples of research-based advocacy campaigns that were successful in influencing policy decisionmaking in transition countries. In this chapter and also chapters 4, 5, and 6, we take the main elements of the APF in turn and build on the case studies to develop and illustrate core concepts and to draw out deeper advocacy lessons and insights. We advise that you take some time to become familiar with the basics of the cases provided in the table below as we will reference them throughout the guide.
Case 1: Kazakhstan
Improving One Stop Shops (2006–2007)
Policy fellow1 and civil servant
One Stop Shops were introduced by presidential decree in Kazakhstan a few years prior to this research as the solution to corruption and weak public service delivery. There had been much criticism in public and the media of the supposed effectiveness of the One Stop Shops and the minister in charge desperately needed an evaluation of the current problems and suggestions for improving the approach so it could fit with local capacities. The researcher, who at the time was a PhD student and a policy fellow, was on a leave of absence from a government job in the Civil Service Agency. She was able to produce the research that was needed and made a connection to a key advisor in the Ministry of Justice (the agency with the responsibility to manage the implementation of One Stop Shops). They readily accepted her research input and her solutions focused on local capacity development.
Case 2: Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)
Reorganization of local administrative units in Mitrovica (2003–2006)
Think tank (European Stability Initiative)
At the beginning of the European Stability Initiative research and advocacy, the town of Mitrovica was the poster child for the problems of Kosovo (UNSCR 1244), with two ethnic groups entirely separated from one another by the Ibar river. The challenge of Mitrovica had been extensively discussed in national, regional and international policy circles and the media but they were stuck on how to solve what they viewed as primarily a policing/security problem. The European Stability Initiative started from a different point and looked at the basic socioeconomic issues in the town. What they found was that the town was living off the crisis, with most people existing on subsidies and stipends from Belgrade, Pristina, and the international community for example, only 14 percent of cash income for the Serbian population was coming from private business. Once the crisis was over and the stipends dried up, the town would be dead. It was on this basis that they were able to get the Albanian and Serbian sides to accept the division of the town into separate municipalities (to keep the Serbs in the town), but only on the conditions that there was freedom of movement, full property return on both sides, and joint economic planning. This solution was also included in the Ahtisaari Plan, the blueprint for status talks on the independence of Kosovo (UNSCR 1244).
Case 3: Macedonia
Introducing and passing a Patients’ Bill of Rights (2006–2008)
Policy fellow2 and think tank (Studiorum3)
The passing of a Patients’ Bill of Rights for Macedonia was one of the commitments made by the country through the EU preaccession process. It was on the country’s legislative agenda but not a stated priority for the new administration elected in the summer of 2006. The researcher, who worked for the Studiorum think tank in Skopje, had completed research on a Patients’ Bill of Rights early in 2006 through the Open Society Foundations’ International Policy Fellowship4 program. A colleague and friend became the new advisor to the minister of health and was looking for policy suggestions to put forward. The researcher show the recent research, which the advisor liked and presented to the minister. Soon after, the researcher was asked to become the NGO representative on the ministry’s working group that drafted the legislation. She was also a member of the parliamentary working group when the draft bill went through the legislature and the Patients’ Bill of Rights was passed in July 2008.
Case 4: Mongolia
Preventing the signing of an ill-considered mining contract between the Mongolian government and an international mining consortium (2006–2007)
National and international NGO coalition (Open Society Forum, Mongolia and Revenue Watch Institute)
The issue of the revenue received by the Mongolian government through mining contracts with international mining companies has been hugely debated for more than a decade in Mongolia. Stories of large-scale corruption, unfairly negotiated contracts, and environmental damage have been at the center of the discussion. All sectors have been involved because the mining sector has the potential to revolutionize the economic future of the country. The debate centered around the discovery of one of the largest copper deposits in the world, the Oyu Tolgoi mine. It was estimated that this one mine alone had the potential to double government revenue, if negotiated and managed properly. The initial negotiation with the mining consortia, completed with the ministerial working group (from the ministries of finance, energy and mineral resources), was a closed discussion, although many tried to get involved. Once the draft contract was submitted to Parliament, it became public in July 2007, and the Open Society Forum pushed quickly to reveal the shortcomings of the contract by commissioning an expert analysis and making the findings public. This was one key ingredient that led to street protests, and with this push they were able to prevent the quick approval of the agreement by Parliament.
-
Available online: http://www.policy.hu. ↩︎
-
Center for Regional Policy Research and Coopera on “Studiorum,” herea er Studiorum in the guide. ↩︎
-
Available online: http://www.policy.hu. ↩︎