Summary of meeting Bangkok June 2015
|Day 1: Monday 15th June|
|8:00 – 8:30||Pre workshop coffee/tea|
|8:30 – 9:10||Welcome and introduction: Graham Teskey, DFAT|
9:10 – 9:40
9:40 – 10:00
10:00 – 10:20
|Agenda item 1: Setting the scene Chair: Sandra Kraushaar, DFAT
(a) What is TWP? Tom Parks, DFAT
Politically-smart, iterative programming in practice: revisiting and reflecting on the core principles of the TWP agenda – strong political analysis, insight and understanding; detailed appreciation of and response to the local context; and flexibility and adaptability in program design and implementation.
(b) Why are we bringing gender into the TWP agenda? Sally Moyle, DFAT
A brief exploration of gender and power, experience and practice from the women’s movement, and how this might inform and enhance TWP concepts and approaches.
Session outcome: Shared understanding of the meeting objectives (i.e. exploring the practicalities of working within donor development programs, testing assumptions about how to do this, and extending the knowledge base of what is currently working in different geographical regions), as well as key TWP and gender concepts and issues, as a basis for discussions over the two days.
|10:20 – 10.35||Tea / Coffee|
|10:35 – 11:30||Agenda item 2: Is TWP really gender blind? Chair: Heather Marquette, DLP
We will investigate TWP approaches, with and without gender analysis, opening discussion on the merits and pitfalls of not including gender in political and economic power analytics. We will consider how TWP approaches might help gender focused programs and reform efforts have more impact. What are the entry points? And why is this so hard?
Reflections: Nadine Ragonjan, TAF and Saku Akmeemana, World Bank (7 minutes each)
Session outcome: Consideration of whether TWP actually is gender blind and, if so, why, and what can we do about it.
|11:30 – 12:30||Agenda item 3: What does a gendered TWP approach look like in action? Chair: Sarah Goulding, DFAT
In this session, we will consider how programming might look different with a gendered TWP approach, with consideration of both gender focused programs/activities and programs where gender is mainstreamed.
Case studies on what a gendered TWP approach looks like in reality (7 minutes for each)
1) Peni Tawake, Pacific Leadership Program/ Michael O’Keefe, La Trobe University
2) Tam O’Neil, ODI
3) Gillian Fletcher, DLP
4) Nicola Nixon/ Vanya Abuthan/ Andini Mulyawati, DFAT Jakarta Post
Session outcome: Common principles applicable to TWP and gender-sensitive approaches identified.
|12:30 – 13:30||Lunch|
|13:30 – 14:30||Agenda item 3 contd.|
|14:30 – 14:40||Tea / Coffee (short break!)|
|14:40 – 16:30||Agenda item 4: Mapping gender dynamics across the TWP narrative and aid programming cycle
Chair: Chris Roche, DLPIn this session we will investigate the practical implications of ‘genderising’ TWP, including what revisions may be necessary to the TWP narrative to include gender power analysis, and how a gendered TWP approach might be applied across the aid programming cycle.(Break out groups, 10-12 per group, mixing TWP COP and DFAT programmers)Session outcome: TWP narrative revisited and practical options for donor policy and programs identified.
|16:30 – 17:00||Rounding off the day: where have we got to and next steps Chair: Alan Whaites, OECD
1) Policy leadership – OECD GovNET/GenderNET/INCAF: Sally Moyle, DFAT (10 minutes)
2) Programming for TWP and Gender Equality: Aislin Baker, DFID (10 minutes)
|Day2: Tuesday 16th June|
|8:00 – 8:30||Pre workshop coffee/tea|
|08:30 – 9:00||Recap on day 1: David Hudson, DLP|
|9:00 – 9:30||Setting the scene: Graham Teskey, DFAT
COP Discussion to date has been focused on smaller more agile programs that are able to adapt and reflect current realities. However, large, complex, logframe and outputs-oriented programs constitute the majority of donor programming for various reasons (efficiencies, risk and financial management, etc.). How can we use TWP principles and lessons in these programs?
|9:30 – 11:00||Agenda item 5: Can large, traditional aid programs be politically smart and adaptive?
Chair: Kirsten Bishop, DFAT
1) Presentation and case study examples on how some DFAT rural development programs have become more adaptive and politically smart: Tom Parks/ Mark Taylor DFAT (15 minutes)
2) Other donor experiences: Saku Akmeemana, World Bank (10 minutes)
3) Challenge from a non-donor perspective on the major obstacles to TWP in large programs:
4) Open discussion.
Session outcome: Major obstacles for large programs to be more politically smart and adaptive identified; consideration of some useful examples of large programs that have managed this efficiently.
|11:00 – 11:20||Tea / Coffee|
|11:20 – 13:00||Agenda item 6: How can we move large programs in the evolutionary direction?
Chair: Richard Butterworth, DFID
In this session we will explore the following key questions: What are the major structural/policy impediments to greater adoption of flexible, politically smart programming in large aid programs? What would progress look like? What can be done within donors to make progress in this area? How can implementing partners and researchers encourage greater use of TWP in large programs?
Session outcome: Strategies and key reforms needed for donors to expand the space for large programs to use TWP approaches identified; ideas developed for the CoP to collectively encourage more TWP approaches in large programs; consideration of what ‘results’ at a country level might look like.
|13:00 – 14:00||Lunch|
|14:00 – 16:00||Agenda item 7: How to apply TWP across a country-level development portfolio
Chair: Heather Marquette, DLP
In this session we will compare typical, conventional approaches to development with a TWP approach to a country portfolio. TWP approaches are more likely to be effective in smaller, more flexible programs that can adapt quickly. The morning sessions focused on the challenges of working with large donor programs using TWP approaches. This session looks at how to apply TWP approaches across a country portfolio, attempting to answer some questions about what would this look like, what would you spend your money on, how would you measure results?
Case studies (10 minutes each)
1) DFAT’s approach in Indonesia: Nicola Nixon, DFAT Jakarta
2) DFAT’s Philippines portfolio and Coalitions for Change: Geoff King and Paul Hutchcroft, DFAT Manila
3) Open discussion
Session outcome: Challenges and strategies to apply TWP to country portfolios identified.
|Tea / Coffee|
|16:00 – 17:00||TWP – key gaps/the big challenges…
Chair: Graham Teskey, DFAT
· Results and evidence
· Donor internal incentives
· Embracing and managing risk
Documentation from the event.
Photos from top left. (1) L to R. Saku Akmeemana, Lisa Denney, Nadine Ragonjan. (2) Jaime Faustino, Charlotte Blundell, Dilhara Goonewardena. (3) Graham Teskey. (4+5) Michael O’Keefe, Peni Tawake, Sarah Goulding, Nicola Nixon, Gillian Fletcher, Tam O’Neil. (6) Jennifer Kalpokas. (7) Graham Teskey, David Hudson. (8) Suda Perera, Alan Whaites, Clyde Hamilton. (9) Clyde Hamilton, Heather Lyne de Ver, Declan Magee. (10) Sally Moyle, Alan Whaites, Aislin Baker.
Photography by Siân Herbert