col-xs-12
col-sm-12
col-md-12
col-lg-12
col-xs-12
col-sm-12
col-md-12
col-lg-12
videoType
dynamic-media
videoDmUrl
https://delivery-p136806-e1377785.adobeaemcloud.com/adobe/assets/urn:aaid:aem:503bd3bd-fca8-4e74-a013-9431812a42ae/play?assetname=Scaling+Up+and+Systems+Change+June+10.mp4
keyFrameImage
videoDescription
Title: Scaling Up and Systems Change – A Webinar and Interactive Clinic on Building Coalitions
timestamp

00:00 Very good.

00:00 Welcome everyone to this,

00:02 uh,

00:02 to this session.

00:03 We are very pleased to,

00:04 to start the conversation today about scaling up and system change.

00:09 And it's going to be a very interesting session.

00:12 We have two parts.

00:13 The first one is a presentation of a recent publication,

00:16 and,

00:17 and let me introduce who are going to speak today with us.

00:20 And then the second part of the,

00:21 of the sessions for those of you who can stay

00:24 in person only

00:25 is a hands-on exercise on,

00:27 on how to actually

00:28 start thinking in a different way,

00:30 this issue of scaling up,

00:32 which is not just doing more of the same,

00:34 right?

00:34 It's a different logic into,

00:35 into it.

00:36 So uh we're gonna have uh opening remarks from Arturo.

00:40 Herrera,

00:41 who is our

00:42 global director for governance here at the World Bank,

00:46 um,

00:46 and then we're gonna have a presentation by the three main authors of the book.

00:50 The first one is Isabel Guerrero.

00:52 Many of you know

00:53 Isabel is an economist.

00:55 He's a psychoanalyst,

00:56 so be careful about what you say.

00:59 Oh,

00:59 don't say

01:03 what is about the what you forget that is very important.

01:08 She's also the co-founder of IMAGO Global Grassroots,

01:12 which helps organizations scale up.

01:14 Since 2014,

01:16 10 years now,

01:17 she has taught the course Scaling Up and Sis exchange

01:20 for Development Impact at the Harvard School of Government.

01:23 Prior to this,

01:24 Isabel worked for 30 years at the World Bank.

01:27 Where she had several country director positions,

01:29 including Bolivia,

01:30 Ecuador,

01:30 Peru,

01:31 and Paraguay,

01:32 and later Mexico,

01:33 Colombia,

01:34 and India.

01:35 Then she was vice president for the South Asia region for 5 years.

01:39 She holds a master's degree from the London School of Economics and graduated

01:43 from the Washington Psychoanalytic Institute.

01:46 Follow me,

01:46 Isabel.

01:47 We're gonna have uh Sijante

01:49 Rocale.

01:50 He's a knowledge manager

01:52 at Imago Global Grassroots where he builds the knowledge function.

01:56 He co-authored a recent theoretical paper

01:58 on the adaptive evaluation methodology.

02:00 And advises in Mago's evaluation projects.

02:03 He previously worked

02:04 at the Behavioral Development lab,

02:07 establishing JPAL South Asia's

02:09 first project in the state of Goa.

02:12 He holds a master's degree in

02:14 Public Administration and International Development from

02:16 the Harvard Kennedy School and a master's in Economics from Columbia University.

02:20 You could have done better,

02:21 right?

02:25 Thank

02:25 you for

02:25 joining us

02:27 and uh.

02:27 Finally,

02:28 uh,

02:29 Jossy,

02:29 uh,

02:30 Fassbender is a program manager at Iago Global Grassroots

02:34 focused on advancing,

02:35 scaling up and adaptive evaluation projects in Latin America and,

02:39 uh,

02:39 global office.

02:40 Previously,

02:41 Jossy worked at the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank.

02:43 Bank in implementation and evaluation of projects in jobs,

02:46 rural development,

02:47 and agriculture.

02:48 She holds a master's degree in Public Administration

02:51 and International Development from the Harvard Kennedy School.

02:54 I'm Roby Serovic.

02:55 I will be your host today.

02:56 I'm the manager of the Global Unit on governance here at the World Bank.

03:00 So let's start with,

03:01 uh,

03:01 with Arturo and Michael,

03:02 you,

03:02 you can.

03:05 Improvise.

03:05 Michael Wolcom

03:07 used to work at the World Bank for many years,

03:10 and he actually did a wonderful,

03:12 uh,

03:13 work,

03:13 break,

03:13 uh,

03:14 groundbreaking work on poverty

03:16 at that time,

03:16 if I remember correctly,

03:18 Michael,

03:18 and part of the work we did together with Michael was on,

03:21 on Mexico and the need to actually,

03:23 uh,

03:24 break monopolies down,

03:25 uh,

03:25 not an easy thing to do.

03:27 In,

03:27 uh,

03:27 some of our countries in Latin America.

03:29 So there was a huge conference in,

03:32 not in terms of the number of people,

03:33 but the quality

03:34 on,

03:35 uh,

03:36 basically promoting competition,

03:37 uh,

03:38 in Mexico.

03:38 And I remember when I worked with,

03:40 with Michael on this,

03:41 um,

03:42 we were putting together the agenda,

03:43 and we said,

03:44 who are we going to invite?

03:45 And Michael said,

03:46 well,

03:46 we need to have

03:47 on the room people from that.

03:49 And they said people from I met for this type of thing,

03:51 and he said,

03:52 well,

03:53 they have all the credibility on this,

03:54 so if we are going to,

03:56 to,

03:56 to,

03:57 to open a real conversation all this,

03:59 they need to be in the room.

04:00 After that,

04:00 Michael,

04:01 uh,

04:01 passed to a better life,

04:03 and,

04:03 uh,

04:03 he

04:04 retired from the World Bank and became a full professor at Harvard,

04:07 uh,

04:08 and,

04:08 uh,

04:09 you know,

04:09 living in different countries around the world.

04:11 So

04:11 part of Imago as an advisor if I understand correctly,

04:14 I'm full-time now,

04:15 full-time now.

04:18 Full time.

04:18 Very good.

04:19 All right,

04:20 let's start now with uh maybe Arturo with,

04:21 with the introductory,

04:23 uh,

04:23 remarks from this session.

04:26 Arctor's joining in person.

04:28 He's joining in person.

04:29 I thought he was traveling

04:31 a little bit later today.

04:32 Ah,

04:32 so he's traveling today.

04:33 All right,

04:33 he'll be here.

04:35 OK.

04:35 So,

04:36 shall we start?

04:36 What,

04:37 what do you think,

04:37 uh,

04:37 with the wedding?

04:40 But

04:41 Should start,

04:43 well,

04:43 it would be nice to know who is in the room in terms of what,

04:46 what areas do you work and we can use a little bit of time.

04:50 So,

04:50 so name and the where,

04:51 where do you work just to get a sense.

04:54 Yes,

04:55 Zen Choudhry,

04:56 I'm in the poverty division,

04:57 but we are the behavioral unit of the World Bank.

05:01 And me see Yong Kim,

05:02 a senior specialist in contacting,

05:04 working with Matthew and with other a call.

05:07 My name is Sarah.

05:08 I work at the Labor DIC with Elena Carranza.

05:11 I think it's a couple of us.

05:14 Hello.

05:14 Good to see you.

05:15 Guzmano Lassa.

05:16 I'm a senior government specialist now in the global unit with the

05:19 Peruvian team.

05:22 I,

05:22 I'm Matthieu.

05:23 I'm a senior economist in Ruby's unit as well working on governance.

05:26 I'm the program manager for Coalition for Reform.

05:29 Exactly,

05:29 yes,

05:30 I mean,

05:30 I'm gonna get more chairs in case they will be welcome.

05:33 Uh,

05:34 I'm Kiara Brunke.

05:34 I'm the practice manager for Public institution data

05:36 and analytics in the governance of global practice.

05:41 Oh,

05:42 the woman.

05:43 Uh,

05:43 I'm Ahab Tofi.

05:44 I'm from MTI,

05:45 not completely foreign to this practice,

05:47 um,

05:48 and what is the,

05:48 is the macro,

05:49 is the,

05:49 is the old EP.

05:51 Oh yes,

05:51 apologize.

05:52 It's all these acronyms ever,

05:54 uh,

05:54 in grad school,

05:55 uh,

05:55 we did some workshops on systems change in complex systems,

05:59 very good,

05:59 um,

06:00 and,

06:01 um,

06:01 the theme that we explored was,

06:03 um,

06:03 uh,

06:03 climate change.

06:04 How can we?

06:06 So,

06:07 uh,

06:07 this triggered,

06:08 uh,

06:08 memories or flashbacks or traumas in grad school.

06:12 And now I want to come back here,

06:13 do things differently

06:16 with your post-traumatic stress.

06:20 I'm Guillermotar.

06:22 Uh,

06:22 you also work in the labor GSG with the

06:27 Lara,

06:27 and it is.

06:27 I'm I'm

06:28 external

06:35 specialist

06:40 Carwin.

06:41 Carmen Del Rio and

06:42 and the governance team um working on partnership and communications today.

06:47 Hi,

06:47 I'm Diana Swin.

06:49 I'm in social protection and jobs also with Eliana Carlo.

06:53 And

06:53 I'm Elizabeth McBride.

06:55 I'm a knowledge and advocacy consultant with WiFi and um

06:59 also working on a book about

07:01 sort of a

07:02 guidebook for business leaders adapting to the new world of capitalism,

07:05 or one of the concepts we're writing about in it is a coalition building.

07:09 Oh,

07:09 very good.

07:11 I wanted to call it the Ion the Women reports Finance Initiative,

07:14 which is an HD

07:16 on Pablo Guerreros,

07:17 senior governance specialist at the public administration we need.

07:22 Great.

07:22 We have

07:23 to

07:27 careful.

07:29 So Arturo,

07:30 we,

07:30 we start with your introduction,

07:32 uh,

07:32 to the session.

07:34 Yeah,

07:34 no,

07:35 it's,

07:35 it's,

07:35 it's,

07:36 it's not gonna be about this.

07:37 I was,

07:38 uh,

07:38 as I was coming here,

07:39 I,

07:40 I realized that the first person I met the World Bank

07:43 ever was actually again

07:47 we,

07:47 we were in a dinner in,

07:48 in Mexico City,

07:50 I mean

07:51 that was right after,

07:54 after I,

07:54 I met up.

07:56 Some presentations in New York.

07:58 I talked with her what,

07:59 what I,

08:00 uh,

08:01 she was our country director.

08:02 What I,

08:03 what I did and then she said,

08:05 so why don't you present it in Washington.

08:07 So I came to Washington

08:09 and uh I've been living in New York.

08:11 I thought it was easier

08:12 to catch a cab here than in New York,

08:15 uh,

08:15 which was not at the time.

08:17 So I,

08:18 so she asked R to pick me up and I,

08:20 and I declined.

08:22 So I,

08:22 I end up,

08:23 uh,

08:24 I end up running.

08:26 So I came sweating

08:29 as today.

08:30 Uh,

08:31 it's becoming a partner,

08:33 uh,

08:33 but what is interesting is that,

08:35 uh,

08:36 the second time we met

08:37 she was hosting

08:39 a presentation for me here.

08:41 Now we're hosting a presentation for you.

08:46 That's perfect.

08:46 So let's go to the presentation and then,

08:48 uh,

08:49 we will have time.

08:50 Until 9:45 for this,

08:52 uh,

08:52 session,

08:53 right back.

08:54 Yes,

08:54 and,

08:54 uh,

08:55 so if we,

08:55 if we have time,

08:56 hopefully we'll have a round of questions Q&A,

08:59 and then the second part of the session will be only for those who are in the room,

09:02 and so on,

09:03 starting at 9:45 or so.

09:04 So Isabel,

09:05 great,

09:06 good.

09:06 Well,

09:06 very happy to be here and see a lot of friends around the table,

09:10 um.

09:11 Uh,

09:11 we're going to go,

09:12 uh,

09:12 through this presentation.

09:13 I will start,

09:14 uh,

09:15 thinking about systems and then

09:17 see and Josie and Michael will,

09:19 will

09:20 work through and applied,

09:21 uh,

09:22 as,

09:22 uh,

09:23 you were saying systems can be traumatic,

09:25 but they can also be very easy to,

09:27 to get your,

09:28 your head around it.

09:30 Uh,

09:30 so why do we care?

09:31 This is a scaling up framework where we first make

09:35 clear,

09:36 uh,

09:36 that what is the vision,

09:37 what is the gap that somebody's trying to

09:39 Address through an intervention,

09:41 a program or a project,

09:43 and then really important to understand the system failure.

09:47 Why haven't others been able to solve that problem that you're looking to solve,

09:51 which could be

09:52 the market or the government or social entrepreneurs.

09:55 Understanding that failure is a really important part of your success later.

09:59 Then you get into the model and,

10:01 you know,

10:01 uh,

10:01 and experimenting or or theory of change,

10:04 how you're going to have the social impact that you think

10:07 that you're having.

10:08 And your business model,

10:10 your intervention,

10:11 your minimum viable intervention,

10:13 the essence of that intervention,

10:15 and that's where we work a lot with

10:18 organizations that can take actually several years,

10:20 and then only when,

10:21 when you found that model,

10:23 you start spending money and building the foundation

10:26 so that you can um er you know,

10:28 make the best use of your runway

10:31 by testing the model before building that

10:33 foundation and building evidence as you see

10:36 starts from the beginning.

10:37 the vision,

10:38 uh,

10:38 the best organizations are those that start with the

10:41 evidence from the beginning and then at the end,

10:44 of course,

10:45 that becomes part of the learning and helping you to,

10:48 uh,

10:49 to make sure that you are doing what you thought you were doing.

10:52 Uh,

10:52 we have the framework with many questions.

10:54 I just went through them,

10:56 why isn't the system producing the results that you want to produce.

11:00 So,

11:00 we look at systems.

11:02 I started teaching this course on scaling up 10 years ago.

11:06 And it made a lot of sense then.

11:09 Suddenly with everything that has happened

11:12 with COVID,

11:12 the disruptions,

11:13 the climate change,

11:15 it,

11:15 it seems sort of strange to be focusing so much only on scaling up,

11:20 and that's why we have really

11:22 started to put much more emphasis on systems because systems are failing.

11:26 Because we see that around us many sectors are being disrupted by tech,

11:32 um,

11:33 and therefore understanding that environment before knowing

11:36 whether you're scaling up within a system

11:38 or you have to change the system to scale development impact is important.

11:43 So the first time

11:44 The first question is that,

11:46 understand where you are,

11:48 where your program is relative to that system.

11:51 Then to help clarify the model and

11:53 interventions and strengthen the theories of change.

11:56 As you will see in the clinic afterwards,

11:58 when you start to map the system,

12:00 sometimes you realize you cannot go at it alone.

12:03 You need to bring other stakeholders,

12:05 other partners that

12:06 have other

12:07 interests but also other skills into the The System for change and

12:11 that's like coalitions for Change is a very good example of that.

12:15 And then

12:16 to understand what's the pathway to scale that you're choosing

12:20 and do you need to think about alternative pathways because

12:24 as we will see,

12:25 systems are very resilient.

12:27 Uh,

12:27 they are,

12:28 uh,

12:29 produced,

12:29 they're,

12:30 they're designed to produce the results that you see.

12:32 So,

12:33 uh,

12:34 what do we mean by a system?

12:36 Nature is the most amazing,

12:37 you know,

12:38 example of a system.

12:39 You think about the trees,

12:40 you think about all the roots that are underneath,

12:43 all the mycelium that is underneath.

12:45 That system

12:46 is an awesome system,

12:48 very resilient.

12:49 A tree will die and for

12:51 decades sometimes,

12:53 it will be fed from the roots underneath,

12:55 from the system of roots under,

12:56 underneath.

12:57 Same is true for the,

12:58 for the,

12:59 for the human body,

13:00 you know,

13:00 the human body is a system totally uh interrelated.

13:04 So the parts,

13:05 the sum of its parts

13:07 is,

13:07 is much more than,

13:09 than each part uh independently.

13:11 So there's a property of the whole in a system,

13:14 which is really important to understand when you're trying to change that system.

13:18 So the properties of a system

13:20 come from how

13:22 the different parts interact,

13:24 rather than just from the parts themselves.

13:26 And so,

13:27 So,

13:27 when you want to change a system,

13:29 you need to shift the conditions that are holding that system in place.

13:34 Um,

13:34 and as I said,

13:36 since systems are designed to produce exactly the results

13:39 that they

13:40 are producing when you're writing your book on business for

13:44 this whatever you're seeing is actually

13:48 an awesome system working to replicate itself every time.

13:52 Some of the

13:53 Uh,

13:53 properties of a system is that,

13:55 uh,

13:56 a system is nested,

13:57 and if you go in,

13:58 you will find another system which is also complex.

14:01 So finding the boundaries to the system that you want to change is part of the,

14:05 of the challenge.

14:07 It's non-linear,

14:08 some sometimes you have a little change in one part

14:11 and it causes unexpected large uh sys uh uh large

14:16 impacts on the overall system.

14:18 I remember

14:19 when I was uh the VP for South Asia,

14:22 we had an amazing pro uh project um

14:25 for road safety for trucks in Pakistan.

14:29 And so we thought that it would be great

14:31 uh to have stops because the

14:34 truck drivers will be able to stop,

14:37 have a rest at night,

14:38 and then continue

14:39 uh later and reduce um

14:42 Uh,

14:43 reduce

14:44 accidents.

14:45 And what happened is,

14:47 without us knowing the nonlinear part,

14:49 there was a huge increase in venereal diseases

14:53 among truck drivers,

14:54 which if you think about it is,

14:55 of course,

14:56 but we were not thinking systems

14:58 when we were designing that project.

15:00 It's unpredictable,

15:02 linear predictions always fail.

15:04 It has feedback loops that help actually

15:07 reinforce and sustain that system.

15:10 Or destabilize you when you want to,

15:13 to get a systems change,

15:15 you need to disrupt,

15:17 you need to destabilize,

15:18 and you need to know where to do it.

15:20 And then

15:21 systems learn,

15:22 they are adaptive,

15:23 they will learn from

15:25 uh uh shocks and then adapt to those

15:28 shocks like what has happened with COVID actually

15:31 it's a very good example.

15:32 So there are um

15:34 3 levers for system change.

15:38 Um,

15:38 the first level is the one that we usually work on,

15:41 policies,

15:42 regulations,

15:44 resources.

15:45 Uh,

15:45 that is the structural level,

15:46 it's very explicit,

15:48 we usually go to that for change.

15:50 But if you find that a system is being really

15:52 tough and resilient and it doesn't produce the change and so we have so many wicked

15:58 Development problems if that happens,

16:00 you need to go one step further,

16:01 which is the relational change,

16:03 which has to be with relations between uh players and the power dynamics in

16:09 um in the system.

16:11 Those are much more powerful leverage points to change a system.

16:15 That's why coalitions for change are so important.

16:18 And then finally,

16:18 the,

16:19 the biggest,

16:20 the biggest leverage is the shift in mental models.

16:23 That is the one that really brings transformation,

16:26 and that's why all these um

16:29 advocacies are important,

16:30 all these movements are important.

16:32 Over time they change mental models in society,

16:36 and within that

16:38 the most important mental change,

16:40 mental shift that you can make is your own.

16:42 Uh,

16:42 as Gandhi said,

16:43 be the change that you want to see outside.

16:45 That is the first step,

16:47 because,

16:48 because the system is designed to produce the changes that it's,

16:51 the,

16:52 the,

16:52 the realities that it's producing,

16:55 you have a role in that and understanding what's

16:57 your role is the first step for system change.

17:00 So that is a very quick um overview of systems and I'm going to pass on to Michael to

17:06 introduce us to the next,

17:07 I'm trying to,

17:08 yeah.

17:10 So that's

17:11 why we got into it and Isabel has sketched

17:13 some of the

17:14 conceptual aspects of systems that people.

17:18 You,

17:18 you said it with some pain,

17:19 um,

17:20 but what I'd like to

17:22 emphasize that we're going to spend the rest of the session on

17:25 is actually practical tools

17:28 that actually we have developed in the field

17:31 to engage with problems.

17:32 Either one of them is actually,

17:33 we actually

17:34 had to do

17:35 online in the field and the other really,

17:36 really

17:37 um in the field.

17:38 Now we've always used,

17:40 or we've discovered we were,

17:42 We discovered we were,

17:43 we're doing stuff and then we discovered it's called human-centered design.

17:46 Um,

17:46 so we

17:47 use a lot of that,

17:48 we do a lot of mapping and interpretation,

17:51 and as Isabel highlighted,

17:53 a key part of this is going from the systems diagnostic

17:57 to exploring where is the resistance,

17:59 where are pathways to change

18:01 through the system,

18:02 and how that then maps to

18:05 The classic domain of theories of change and

18:08 dog frames,

18:09 and then

18:09 it almost always you have to iterate.

18:11 Let's go forward.

18:13 We're going to,

18:14 um,

18:14 Sedat and Josi are going to present

18:17 two

18:17 kinds of techniques that we've developed in the form,

18:20 in,

18:20 in,

18:20 in the field.

18:21 One is what we call

18:22 a systems dynamics map that emphasizes

18:26 mapping

18:27 relationships and functions within the system.

18:29 The other is starting from

18:32 uh an aftermath of the system.

18:34 The only thing I'd like to highlight as you go in,

18:36 these are two prisms

18:38 on

18:39 the same system,

18:40 and the question is,

18:41 it's often a very pragmatic choice

18:43 of where you start.

18:44 So with that,

18:45 so that,

18:45 over to you.

18:46 Great,

18:47 thank you.

18:48 So,

18:48 we,

18:49 I'm gonna walk through an example of our work,

18:51 uh,

18:52 we did with UNDP Tunisia

18:54 and the,

18:55 the,

18:55 the development challenge we were dealing with was intimate partner violence,

18:59 and this is prevalent

19:00 in many developing countries,

19:02 but in this case,

19:02 we worked on Tunisia.

19:04 And the existing intervention strategy was one that's very common in

19:08 multilaterals and in governments where you

19:10 have these portfolio of interventions,

19:12 often in different departments and areas.

19:15 In this case,

19:15 it was justice,

19:16 security,

19:17 and women's empowerment,

19:19 but

19:19 They're uncoordinated.

19:21 It's unclear how they connect and it's unclear how all of them together

19:25 are causing the system to change or transform in the direction we want to.

19:29 And so our task here was to understand

19:32 how these different parts of the system are interrelated

19:35 and also how are the gaps in the intervention portfolio

19:39 and which feedback loops that are,

19:41 are causing this problem to be more persistent,

19:44 uh,

19:45 are addressed by these interventions and so.

19:48 The very first step,

19:49 and this is often the first step in

19:52 when we do a diagnostic,

19:53 is to really understand the problem

19:55 much more deeply.

19:56 And so this was really a joint effort with

19:59 UNDP Tunisia and Imago.

20:01 So,

20:02 UNDP Tunisia did a lot of work interviewing 30+ stakeholders.

20:05 So different actors.

20:07 In the system.

20:07 So from the Ministry of Child and Health,

20:10 from the Ministry

20:11 of Justice,

20:12 Security,

20:13 they interviewed NGOs working very closely with um

20:17 people who,

20:19 with,

20:19 with intimate partner violence and victims of violence.

20:21 They also interviewed

20:23 victims of violence and spoke to sociologists.

20:25 Sanny Mago spoke to a lot of people in UNDP Tunisia,

20:29 personnel who were working on projects of intimate partner violence.

20:34 Uh,

20:34 and so,

20:35 so what we're seeing here is a problem space that's a culmination of,

20:38 of that work.

20:39 And so roughly we found

20:41 three big areas of

20:43 proximate causes of intimate partner violence,

20:45 and these actually aligned very closely to,

20:48 uh,

20:48 Isabel's,

20:49 what Isabel showed which were the three leverage points in the system.

20:52 So the first,

20:54 institutional,

20:55 this,

20:55 this really relates to policies and rules.

20:58 So

20:58 the judiciary where we found,

21:00 um,

21:01 that,

21:02 you know,

21:02 judges often.

21:04 Put cases on hold expecting the family to withdraw,

21:07 uh,

21:07 because of,

21:08 expecting victims to withdraw because of family pressure.

21:11 Uh,

21:12 that's the police where there's issues of trust and reassurance

21:14 of women going to the police and social services,

21:17 which is shelters.

21:18 There's societal factors,

21:20 and this

21:21 is,

21:21 I think,

21:21 more in the domain of mental models that Isabel just presented.

21:25 It's about,

21:26 it,

21:26 it's about societal norms,

21:28 patriarchy,

21:29 the institution of marriage,

21:31 pressures to preserve family image,

21:33 and so on and so forth.

21:34 And then there's individual factors,

21:36 things like,

21:37 uh,

21:38 a woman's own agency,

21:39 their ability to earn income,

21:41 uh,

21:41 their support from immediate family members,

21:44 and so on and so forth.

21:45 So,

21:45 these were the three pillars.

21:47 From

21:47 which we developed our

21:49 understanding of the system.

21:50 So that's the boundary of the system.

21:52 There's of course a much larger system that envelopes this

21:55 system that we're dealing with with intimate partner violence.

21:59 And so

22:00 there's of course many factors.

22:01 COVID-19 was important then and you know,

22:04 other,

22:04 other factors.

22:06 So from here we began mapping the system,

22:09 but we use those three pillars and causes to

22:12 understand how different variables interrelate with one another.

22:16 And so the first is,

22:17 we always start with the,

22:19 the,

22:19 the main outcome.

22:20 So in this case,

22:21 the main outcome

22:22 was the number of IPV instances,

22:24 the likelihood of a case being pursued with,

22:27 and also the number of convictions.

22:28 And because this was a problem,

22:30 the hypothesized levels

22:32 were,

22:32 were low in the case of number of convictions,

22:35 high in the case of a number of instances.

22:37 We also mapped institutional factors which I already described

22:41 pertaining to the legal,

22:43 uh,

22:43 legal delays,

22:44 you know,

22:44 trust with the police.

22:46 And,

22:46 and their hypothesis levels.

22:48 There's societal factors uh pertaining to

22:51 um beliefs about resolving marital problems internally

22:55 and we found them to be high.

22:56 All of these hypothesized levels,

22:58 of course,

22:58 were built

23:00 from,

23:00 um,

23:01 our interviews and,

23:02 and discussions with various stakeholders.

23:05 And then there's individual factors around agency,

23:07 awareness,

23:08 so on and so forth.

23:09 But I think the task of the system dynamics mapping,

23:12 and this may be familiar to you,

23:14 given you've,

23:14 you've done some of this work,

23:16 is to find the interrelationships between these variables.

23:19 And so we start as an example with one.

23:22 So,

23:22 if you have a low likelihood of a case being pursued.

23:26 Uh,

23:27 the number of convictions is likely to be low,

23:29 and this is a positive relationship in the sense

23:32 that a low variable leads to another low variable.

23:36 Now if we take it a step further,

23:38 right,

23:38 uh,

23:38 low number of convictions

23:40 means there's low awareness,

23:42 uh,

23:43 among women about their legal rights,

23:45 partly because they don't see it in the media,

23:47 their neighbors don't know it.

23:48 So the low number of convictions contributes to this low awareness

23:52 and this low awareness in turn

23:54 leads to a further,

23:55 uh,

23:56 uh,

23:56 a reduced likelihood of a case being pursued

23:58 and persisted with because they have low awareness.

24:01 And so what we have just mapped.

24:02 Is a feedback loop that explains why IPV is a persistent problem in the system.

24:08 It's one of the many feedback loops that explains that this awareness,

24:11 this lack of awareness is an

24:13 adverse self-reinforcing feedback loop

24:16 that,

24:17 that explains why this problem has not changed.

24:19 And so we did this mapping with all.

24:22 All of the relationships and if you look closely,

24:24 you'll be able to see,

24:26 you can draw many circles of different feedback loops that

24:29 explain different hypotheses of why this problem is persistent.

24:33 But,

24:33 but the,

24:34 the goal of this was not to understand just

24:36 different interactions between different parts of the system,

24:39 but to see

24:40 where our interventions coming in

24:42 and where do they address some of these feedback loops.

24:45 And so we did a lot of detailed analysis,

24:47 but this was a broad landscape analysis of where multilaterals.

24:51 We're working in Tunisia on the problem of intimate partner violence

24:55 and you see,

24:56 most of the projects

24:57 were on the,

24:58 on,

24:59 on rules and policies and UNDP was focusing a lot on justice and security,

25:03 but majority

25:05 were,

25:05 were on rules and,

25:06 and policies

25:08 which often is,

25:09 you know,

25:10 the first level but not the most powerful as Isabel was,

25:13 was mentioning.

25:14 Uh,

25:14 the hardest to change our mental models and so very few

25:17 projects on societal factors and one of the things we found.

25:21 Was that a lot of the societal interventions did not focus on attitudes to men.

25:25 So that was one of the big gaps we found in our analysis.

25:29 Uh,

25:29 one of the things we did was look at

25:31 individual projects and how they enter the system,

25:34 but also which subsystem they affect and what feedback loops.

25:37 And so,

25:38 a quick illustration of that is here.

25:40 So

25:41 suppose we have interventions to improve access to women's entrepreneurship.

25:45 So that immediately affects women's income.

25:48 Right?

25:49 But

25:49 if you follow the arrows from women's income

25:52 to the main,

25:53 uh,

25:54 outcome variables we started.

25:56 What you see is the feedback loop it effects.

25:58 So,

25:59 women's income,

26:00 if you reduce,

26:00 if you increase women's income,

26:02 you reduce dependence on spousal income,

26:05 which was one of the main reasons women tolerate violence.

26:07 So reducing

26:09 dependence on spousal income

26:11 reduces tolerance for violence,

26:12 which means fewer number of IPV cases,

26:14 but also fewer number of cases,

26:17 um,

26:17 a higher likelihood of cases being pursued.

26:20 And,

26:20 uh,

26:21 so this is just another illustration

26:23 of that.

26:24 That was the subsystem of the larger system,

26:27 and this is an initial theory of change which can then be further fleshed out.

26:31 So the idea of doing all of this was really to

26:35 understand how these different interventions

26:37 from different departments are interconnected.

26:39 Often they address one or many feedback loops

26:42 and how this can lead to a greater understanding of,

26:45 you know,

26:46 what is the theory of change.

26:47 Uh,

26:48 that this effects,

26:49 and from here I'll pass on to Josie.

26:51 He'll go on to system after another.

26:53 Thank you.

26:54 So yeah,

26:54 I'll present,

26:55 like Michael said,

26:57 another reason how you can look also at assistance,

26:59 and this one is you start by mapping all

27:02 your stakeholders and then the relationships between them.

27:04 In this case,

27:05 it was,

27:06 uh,

27:06 work that we were doing with local governments in Brazil.

27:09 Uh,

27:09 it was the uh recipe government,

27:11 and they were trying to respond

27:14 to the weed development challenge and that they were.

27:17 facing a lot of learning deficits in reading and math due to COVID-19.

27:21 And there were so many things changing at the same time,

27:24 and the government was trying to explore different alternatives of how to solve

27:28 these learning gaps.

27:29 So they were just exploring different policies.

27:31 It was very hard to say,

27:32 OK,

27:33 we're going,

27:34 we're gonna go into one policy and really

27:36 uh do an impact assessment to know if this is working or not.

27:39 So we really needed to.

27:41 Understand the whole and really try to get an

27:44 idea of how are all these policies working together,

27:47 but also it was important to first

27:50 understand uh for each of the interventions,

27:52 how was the system uh working

27:54 in relation to,

27:55 to that.

27:56 So one of the policies that we were trying to help them assess was that

27:59 they were trying to implement teaching at the right level,

28:02 which is uh a program that was developed by RTA in India.

28:06 So of course it's,

28:06 it also needed to have some adjustments to be implemented

28:10 in Brazil,

28:10 but basically,

28:11 it,

28:12 the way that it works is that you,

28:14 you regroup students based on the initial learning levels that you're observing.

28:18 And according to that,

28:19 you give them the material to their initial learning level,

28:22 and the idea is that then they are going to be able to

28:25 recover and be at the grade level that they are currently assigned.

28:29 Um,

28:30 so what we did was we first really make a big

28:34 effort to understand who should be there mapping the system.

28:38 And we think that

28:39 uh outdoor mapping is very important,

28:41 especially when we are doing fieldwork,

28:43 it's important that you have people from the school,

28:45 people from the government,

28:47 because everyone understands the system in a different way.

28:49 But everyone knew,

28:50 OK,

28:51 at the center of the intervention is the student.

28:54 This is the,

28:54 actually the,

28:55 the last beneficiary,

28:56 the person that we want to affect.

28:58 So they put the student in the center and then we started

29:01 mapping for all the stakeholders that are connected to the student,

29:04 if we are thinking,

29:05 if we are thinking of the teaching at the right level intervention.

29:08 So we have

29:09 At the school level,

29:10 we have the school directors and coordinators,

29:12 but then we also have teachers.

29:14 And then it's important to even go into that system and separate the levels.

29:18 We have family of commu or community of students.

29:21 We have the Department of Education itself,

29:23 and we have CAEI which was

29:25 a research organization which was helping them

29:28 develop the assessments for this intervention.

29:31 So,

29:31 for example,

29:32 uh,

29:33 we map,

29:34 the very important thing in the system

29:36 mapping when you focus on actors is to

29:39 focus um mapping the relationship but both ways.

29:42 So for example,

29:43 if CAG,

29:44 that is a research organization,

29:46 is developing formative assessments,

29:48 which are gonna give feedback to understand the students uh

29:52 learning.

29:53 Then the students need to participate in these assessments.

29:56 Then with this information,

29:58 then CET gives the information

30:00 to the school directors and coordinators so that they can analyze

30:03 uh how the students are improving learning levels or not.

30:06 And then with them,

30:07 we map all the different relationships.

30:10 So it was like,

30:11 everyone just really understand,

30:13 OK,

30:13 how does this work or it doesn't work,

30:15 but like,

30:16 basically just understanding all the different connections which even

30:19 include how is the family connected to the students,

30:21 how is the Department of Education connected to families,

30:24 so at every level.

30:26 And this in a way gave us

30:28 a process mapping as well.

30:29 No,

30:31 you understand what is the process so that this

30:32 intervention actually work in the system that you're working

30:35 in very simple terms,

30:36 it was OK.

30:37 First,

30:37 the government needs to give the the guidelines for

30:40 teaching at the right level to the schools.

30:42 Then the schools diagnose the student learning levels.

30:46 Then with this,

30:47 uh,

30:47 the teachers are going to be able to regroup the students,

30:50 and then the students receive teachings,

30:52 uh,

30:53 based on the teaching at the right level methodology.

30:56 And this

30:57 will give you an initial way of thinking of what is the theory of change.

31:01 Of course,

31:02 there are some intermediate outcomes that are missing

31:04 that it's like after following all these steps,

31:06 then you get some,

31:07 to some intermediate outcomes that

31:09 um make it possible that the students are able to reach

31:12 at the expected

31:14 learning level for the grade level,

31:16 and then you are going to be able to decrease learning gaps after the pandemic.

31:20 But then the interesting thing to map with them

31:24 was that

31:25 even if they could see that there were many parts that

31:28 they were actually working as they are supposed to work,

31:31 there were also many other parts where

31:33 the system was just not responding.

31:35 Like

31:36 there were many things that even if the

31:38 government had a very clear understanding of how things

31:41 uh will need to happen

31:43 inside of the schools,

31:44 that things were just not happening.

31:45 So that's why it was important.

31:47 that the coordinators that were in contact with the schools were

31:50 the ones that were in the room and could say like,

31:52 actually,

31:53 it's not happening that the teachers have any kind of meetings

31:57 with the directors to access the information and to know if actually

32:00 uh students are improving their learning levels.

32:02 Also,

32:03 there are no meetings so that they can then

32:05 improve the way that they are doing this uh intervention with the students.

32:09 So then,

32:10 this was the initial step,

32:12 so that with them we could work on a revised theory of change,

32:15 and then we also developed a

32:18 process tracing methodology,

32:19 which is something that we do in adaptive evaluation,

32:21 but that basically

32:23 helps you understand for each step of the theory of change,

32:26 what is happening,

32:27 what is not happening,

32:28 and then regularly going to the schools and creating this.

32:32 Feedback mechanisms between people that has to be aware of this,

32:36 that includes researchers,

32:38 implementers,

32:38 people in the government that can make decisions

32:40 of the pedagogy that needs to change.

32:43 So that actually you don't need to wait so long to see the final outcome change,

32:47 but actually understand

32:49 on the way,

32:50 like what is working and what is not

32:52 working and be able to improve your implementation.

32:55 So this is a very fast example but it's like

32:59 uh very connected to what we are gonna try to be working with you today

33:03 but before going into that or opening questions

33:06 I wanted to pass again to Isabel because

33:09 we wrote a book where we explain these

33:11 tools and also

33:13 other ways of thinking about.

33:17 So for everybody in the room,

33:18 all,

33:19 all connected,

33:20 OK,

33:21 this is the latest publication of Iago scaling up development,

33:24 uh,

33:25 impact,

33:25 uh,

33:26 you can find it in many places,

33:27 right?

33:27 Amazon only.

33:28 Amazon only,

33:29 OK.

33:30 And if you refer to this conversation,

33:31 you're gonna have it.

33:35 we go and chapter 3 is on systems change and then chap the last 3 chapters are on

33:40 adaptive evaluation which is

33:42 how do you accompany this process through uh what we call a process of

33:46 meaning making,

33:48 uh,

33:48 about what is happening in a way that

33:50 In fact,

33:51 evaluations are part of the solution,

33:52 but a,

33:53 a small part,

33:54 most of it is about iterating,

33:56 helping to pivot,

33:58 giving just in time information

34:00 through a set of tools that are described there.

34:03 Great.

34:03 Good.

34:04 Thank you very much for the presentation,

34:05 the 4 of you.

34:06 So we have a few minutes for Q&A maybe now before we go to,

34:10 into the

34:10 hands-on

34:12 uh

34:13 exercise later on.

34:14 Anyone wants to come in?

34:16 Maybe that's the question.

34:17 Thank you very much.

34:18 Actually,

34:19 I like this,

34:20 uh,

34:20 conceptualization as well.

34:22 So,

34:23 and the example are very compelling.

34:27 Yet I'm trying to think all the way through

34:30 the example of education actually you've highlighted numerous factors

34:35 in order to succeed,

34:37 and Brazil has a certain context,

34:40 of course.

34:40 Also we work a lot because they have a lot of

34:42 data now they're much more advanced in terms of monitoring,

34:45 and I was wondering

34:47 how would that play out in countries that are less endowed

34:51 in terms of skills

34:54 it's often.

34:55 You know,

34:55 we have tried,

34:56 I don't know,

34:57 uh,

34:59 Bigger SWAT teams initiatives.

35:02 I think

35:03 your conceptualization can then play in different ways,

35:06 but we've seen example of that,

35:08 and it,

35:08 it's just I'm trying to think how we can

35:14 That sometimes there is accountability.

35:15 There has to be some level of accountability that I

35:18 would like you to pull out more at some point

35:21 of also achieving the results,

35:23 and all these are instruments,

35:24 but somebody needs to be really responsible and precisely for what you said,

35:28 Isabel,

35:28 at the beginning,

35:29 this level of accountabilities are becoming

35:32 looser in many countries and with CEOs and advanced economies,

35:36 it's all very confusing these days.

35:38 I wonder also if you could tell a little bit about that.

35:41 Yeah,

35:41 great question.

35:42 Should I answer?

35:43 Yeah,

35:43 so,

35:44 um,

35:44 we use this with SEWA.

35:46 SEWA is an organization of 2 million women that come from the informal market who

35:51 they,

35:51 they

35:52 don't even know how to read and write,

35:54 and we do the system mapping with them.

35:56 Uh,

35:57 because as you will see in the clinic,

35:59 you can do it in a very playful way,

36:01 uh,

36:02 where

36:03 what we do is facilitate this by asking the right questions

36:06 and then they are doing the mapping and it works beautifully.

36:10 So I think in very low capacity environments you can do it.

36:14 Um,

36:14 the important thing is to help them

36:17 choose who are the people who need to be in the room

36:20 and then have somebody who's going to be the problem holder

36:23 and who eventually is going to be the champion through that.

36:25 Usually

36:26 it would be the organization that wants to work on solving that problem,

36:30 who needs to hold it,

36:31 uh,

36:32 in order for the accountability of the work as you

36:35 go through different iterations because

36:38 you will need to do it several times,

36:39 it's not a one,

36:40 a one shot thing,

36:42 yeah.

36:42 I can also compliment.

36:44 So I think that's,

36:45 for example,

36:45 in Brazil it was very important for us also to determine,

36:48 OK,

36:49 inside of the government who are our champions,

36:51 who actually believes in this and wants to do this and

36:54 wants to be part of the core team that is gonna keep like pushing this forward.

36:58 And then we also have people from CAI who is

37:00 the research organization who is going to be doing this,

37:02 so you just identify the.

37:04 Who,

37:05 what,

37:05 and when,

37:06 and it was very important to say,

37:08 OK,

37:09 every 2 months people are going to meet and discuss these results so

37:13 that we can keep understanding how the system is changing or not.

37:16 I know that we have also faced,

37:18 uh,

37:18 a lot of restrictions because if the government changes and it's like difficult to

37:23 again get a new person,

37:25 but so.

37:25 But you also need a lot of

37:27 ownership from the government and they need to understand why it's important.

37:30 So we kept trying to

37:32 involve the government and say,

37:34 look,

37:34 we are here to try to help you make decisions,

37:37 and then in that,

37:38 in that way,

37:38 they were OK,

37:39 actually,

37:39 this makes sense,

37:40 this is just

37:41 kind of complementary to the,

37:43 to what we are doing already.

37:45 And also I think something

37:47 For the low skill or like

37:49 uh countries that don't have a lot of data like

37:52 we don't rely a lot of administrative data.

37:54 We try,

37:55 we try to understand what administrative data is available that

37:58 we can use so that we don't build it again.

38:01 But then we also develop very simple questionnaires and we also Understand

38:05 when they are already going and interviewing teachers,

38:08 so that it's not like we are adding a new questionnaire that they don't want to have,

38:12 it's just,

38:13 hey,

38:13 how are you working right now and how

38:15 in this way that you're working,

38:17 we can just do it in a more structured way

38:19 so it's easier for you and it's also more sustainable.

38:24 Thank you,

38:24 Justiceabel others.

38:25 Yes,

38:25 Jose.

38:27 I'm curious if you can talk more about the issue of mental models and how they affect

38:32 the

38:33 The initial step that you had there that

38:35 it's uh understanding the problem even more.

38:39 Owning the problem and,

38:40 and in many societies in many,

38:42 many governments lack the,

38:45 the self-awareness to understand that there is something that needs to be changed

38:50 and,

38:50 and they,

38:51 there is not a cultural kind of value of,

38:53 of

38:53 say,

38:54 OK,

38:54 acknowledging that things are failing,

38:56 therefore

38:57 you,

38:58 you have a big block there,

38:59 yeah.

39:00 Great question.

39:01 So I,

39:01 I think first of all,

39:03 that's why we talk about the wicked development problems,

39:05 because we go into those problems that are really resistant to change.

39:09 Some problems don't need this,

39:10 but when you're trying to do something and

39:12 You try again and again and it,

39:14 and the problem persists,

39:15 that's the time where it's good to go in and

39:18 you know,

39:18 I,

39:18 I think,

39:19 uh,

39:19 it,

39:20 it's the,

39:20 it's the pain of not seeing the solution which actually makes people open up

39:25 to the awareness that there might be something that I'm not quite seeing.

39:30 And the second thing is that we've discovered that,

39:32 well,

39:33 there's no surprise,

39:33 uh,

39:34 that

39:34 the many times government,

39:37 uh,

39:37 people at the front line are very frustrated.

39:40 Because they have gone there with uh,

39:42 with the,

39:43 for,

39:43 for doing public service and they find that

39:46 the

39:46 environment where they are working is one where it's very bureaucratic,

39:50 very difficult to innovate,

39:51 to take risks,

39:53 and so

39:54 making them our allies in that,

39:56 uh,

39:57 so that they can actually deliver what

39:59 they were even sometimes asked to deliver but are unable to do so because of the

40:04 old bureaucratic system which doesn't allow for the innovation.

40:08 Yeah,

40:09 I wanted to add as well.

40:10 So,

40:10 I think the,

40:12 the really persistent social problems and I think intimate partner violence

40:15 is an example of it is where often mental models are,

40:20 are really driving uh the problem.

40:23 Uh,

40:23 it's also where coalitions for change

40:26 become

40:26 very important,

40:27 and a lot of the awareness movements,

40:30 collaboration movements,

40:32 uh,

40:32 to raise awareness often are the interventions that try and

40:36 change,

40:37 uh,

40:37 how you think about,

40:38 you know,

40:39 You know,

40:39 some of these mental models and sometimes

40:41 it's,

40:42 uh,

40:42 it's a shock,

40:43 uh,

40:44 an incident or an

40:45 external shock that,

40:47 that,

40:47 that is like COVID-19

40:49 that really changed how we think about interacting in meetings like,

40:53 like this meeting,

40:55 um,

40:56 that often

40:57 feels very disruptive in the beginning,

40:59 but is the groundwork

41:01 for rethinking and changing mental models and

41:04 throughout history there have been a lot of shocks.

41:06 That made us reassess how,

41:08 how we,

41:08 how,

41:08 how we think about the way the world should be.

41:10 So I think this is a moment like that.

41:13 We're living in a moment like that.

41:15 I think we have a few questions.

41:17 How many,

41:17 uh,

41:17 we have one question online.

41:18 One question online.

41:19 I think that on this topic something interesting is

41:22 you said at the beginning systems are designed to reproduce themselves in a way,

41:25 right,

41:26 not to be changed.

41:27 And then we,

41:28 this is the World Bank,

41:29 so it's an institution where a lots of economies uh exist and the,

41:32 the,

41:33 the tendency is to say,

41:34 well,

41:35 people will change if you provide the right incentives

41:38 and what we are saying is something is something different.

41:40 It's not just about incentives,

41:43 uh,

41:43 because changing your mental model is not about an incentive.

41:46 It's about the realization.

41:47 Maybe it's about,

41:48 uh,

41:48 maybe at that moment it's something that goes against

41:51 everything that you think and thought during your life

41:54 until you want to do it.

41:55 So

41:56 what's in there for you?

41:56 I mean,

41:57 it's suicidal to your identity in a way,

41:59 and you still do it.

42:01 So

42:02 yeah,

42:02 we're all economists,

42:03 the four of us,

42:06 and,

42:06 and I think,

42:07 I think it recoveries,

42:08 yeah,

42:11 there's,

42:11 there's some problems which are easy to fix with incentives,

42:14 but for us the most interesting ones are those wicked ones that are not,

42:18 yeah.

42:19 OK,

42:19 very good.

42:20 So who is in line?

42:21 Perfect.

42:21 Linnea,

42:21 do you wanna come in,

42:22 please?

42:25 Yes,

42:25 thank you so much.

42:26 Thank you for fantastic presentations.

42:28 It's such an,

42:29 such an interesting topic.

42:31 I am,

42:31 um,

42:33 I have many questions,

42:34 but the question I wanted to pose now

42:36 was,

42:36 uh,

42:37 being realistic about the resources you need to conduct these kind of mappings.

42:41 What,

42:42 can you give us an idea of

42:43 The,

42:44 um,

42:44 the

42:45 amount of time needed,

42:46 kind of the team needed,

42:48 the process,

42:49 uh,

42:49 the resources,

42:50 the,

42:50 just to give us a very practical

42:53 lay of the land,

42:54 what,

42:54 what is needed to do this,

42:55 please.

42:56 Thank you.

42:57 Thank you.

42:57 And maybe we collect any other remaining question before

43:00 we go to the next part of the session.

43:02 Uh,

43:03 I would have a question.

43:03 So you showed us two examples that were really kind of in the social sector.

43:08 Um,

43:08 I mean,

43:08 I come from governance and we're in

43:10 love with institutions and institutions I think.

43:12 Do you have any examples in the book or maybe

43:15 from the top of your head just kind of mentioning

43:16 working within public sector,

43:19 within,

43:19 for example,

43:20 uh,

43:20 a tax administration unit or,

43:22 um,

43:23 you know,

43:23 installing a new system in the financial.

43:25 Ministry,

43:26 for example,

43:27 and just,

43:28 just to add one more

43:29 is where is that you see this more useful in sector-specific problems or

43:34 horizontal problems like a fighting hunger,

43:37 right,

43:37 like in Brazil did a few years,

43:39 gender issues,

43:40 climate change where you need to actually work

43:42 across the,

43:43 the vertical sectors that governments have.

43:45 So I,

43:45 I'll answer that and Michael,

43:47 I'll ask you to talk about.

43:48 The Gates grant that we're working on convergence,

43:51 um,

43:52 so because I think the,

43:53 the Gates grant answers both the question on resources and the question on,

43:58 uh,

43:59 examples of working within government,

44:01 uh,

44:01 but in terms of,

44:02 of how it's useful in the sector,

44:04 so

44:05 it is

44:05 very interesting how to see

44:07 that our water and sanitation problem

44:11 has

44:11 A lot of links with other sectors

44:14 or I remember when we were working on infant mortality in Bolivia,

44:17 one of the biggest breakthroughs was to say

44:20 what really matters.

44:21 And so even though you go in a sector,

44:24 the wicked development problems usually have

44:27 a very broad intersectional connection.

44:30 So

44:30 I think,

44:31 um,

44:32 yeah,

44:32 it,

44:33 it's very useful.

44:35 Yeah.

44:37 Uh,

44:37 we find you can tailor

44:39 what you do

44:40 to the context that you have,

44:42 and

44:42 the examples that,

44:43 um,

44:44 Josie gave,

44:45 or we're working,

44:46 we're going to illustrate that for those who stay later,

44:48 that actually

44:49 doing the system mapping,

44:51 you can actually do it in one workshop

44:53 and already get insights.

44:55 At the other extreme,

44:58 we are in a,

44:59 in a

45:00 project,

45:00 which is actually a three-year project where Gates is supporting

45:03 an evaluation,

45:04 adapt,

45:05 we've got an adaptive evaluation

45:06 of a very complex intervention.

45:09 Which is trying in

45:10 two states of India

45:12 to

45:13 activate

45:14 two huge programs that the Indian government has.

45:17 One about building

45:18 women's groups from top down,

45:20 from the bottom up,

45:21 and one about um

45:23 parenting employment,

45:24 to bring them together to work differently.

45:26 That's a case

45:27 where you've got

45:28 wonderful goals

45:30 and a very complex system which is very

45:32 resistant.

45:33 Now

45:33 that is

45:34 a

45:35 3 to 4 year program with a lot of money.

45:38 Um,

45:38 but both as a what,

45:39 what,

45:39 what we'd like to give a signal,

45:41 uh,

45:41 many,

45:41 many years ago I worked for many years in the World Bank.

45:44 And I,

45:44 and

45:45 so I have a sense of the kind of

45:47 very varied resources that you have

45:49 when you're working on a project,

45:50 when you're working on an analysis.

45:52 And this,

45:53 this is either

45:54 no more

45:55 nor less.

45:56 It's coming in with a different mentality

45:59 and with different tools,

46:01 which takes you to

46:02 different questions.

46:03 But to the Recifu project

46:06 we were working on for.

46:07 Over 2 years

46:09 with

46:10 it wasn't

46:11 that expensive because we were working

46:13 with an existing,

46:15 existing groups,

46:16 working with the governmental system,

46:18 uh,

46:18 yes,

46:18 tracking the stuff,

46:19 having

46:20 working in 9 schools to get insights in the system.

46:23 The Tunisia project

46:25 we worked on

46:26 over

46:27 6 months,

46:28 but again it wasn't.

46:30 Very substantial

46:31 financial resources,

46:33 but we were doing a lot

46:35 that required resources of

46:37 the

46:37 working with the UNDP groups.

46:40 Some

46:40 understood the ideas,

46:41 some didn't understand them at all,

46:43 and we were doing some,

46:44 a lot of design work as we went along.

46:46 So it was 6 months,

46:47 fairly,

46:48 uh,

46:48 not by far from full-time,

46:50 but,

46:50 um,

46:50 uh,

46:51 quite,

46:51 quite a lot of,

46:52 quite a,

46:53 quite intensive work to build that and to build the understanding.

46:56 If we did it again,

46:56 it'd be much quicker.

46:58 Well,

46:59 you could also,

46:59 in addition to for project preparation where you know the World

47:02 Bank will need to for a project of the bank,

47:04 let's say,

47:05 right,

47:05 uh,

47:05 come up with the,

47:06 with the resources

47:07 you can

47:08 eventually build this up into the project design

47:13 totally and then it's going to be paid by the,

47:15 by the loan proceedings,

47:16 so by the government itself,

47:18 so then the resources become less.

47:19 It's important,

47:20 uh,

47:20 yes,

47:21 good.

47:22 All right,

47:23 yes,

47:23 one more question.

47:24 Yes,

47:24 um,

47:25 so I was curious if you could talk a little

47:27 bit about how to institutionalize some of these things,

47:30 right?

47:30 So many parts of the system sometimes are very person dependent,

47:34 so you're there,

47:35 you talk to them,

47:36 or even project dependent,

47:38 so you map for one project,

47:39 but then.

47:41 Have you seen anything,

47:42 you know,

47:42 once the bank leaves,

47:44 once,

47:44 once the project ends,

47:46 how are many of those things that are advanced

47:48 in one project actually institutionalized for the next project,

47:51 so that a lot of these

47:53 things,

47:53 uh,

47:54 are

47:55 repeated within the government.

47:56 And maybe that,

47:57 I know it's a

47:58 very hard question,

47:59 um.

48:01 Uh it is a hard question and we've experienced that a lot.

48:04 It's no different from,

48:06 um,

48:07 we work a lot in

48:08 India.

48:09 And you get a reform initiative and the bureaucrat leaves and it stops.

48:12 It's no different from that as a general problem

48:15 for

48:16 any of the stuff that we're engaged with.

48:18 How you do it is actually

48:20 would be

48:21 building the practices and processes

48:24 within the governmental system or within the,

48:26 within the non,

48:27 the non-governmental system.

48:29 So

48:30 one of the reasons that we emphasize that

48:32 you can use this and take it to something very standard,

48:35 which is the log road.

48:36 This is a way of getting a better log frame,

48:38 and working with that log frame

48:40 is that will be a way of kind of building into standard project preparation

48:45 and monitoring

48:47 how to do this,

48:48 which is also why

48:49 increasingly,

48:50 when we're involved in the follow-up,

48:52 we try to work with administrative systems.

48:55 So that the counterparts see they can use the data they're collecting

48:59 already to begin to understand

49:01 how different parts of the system

49:03 uh are

49:03 are or are not working.

49:05 Yeah,

49:05 I think also in the case of Brazil,

49:08 uh,

49:08 as we were doing it,

49:09 we were also trying to do capacity building,

49:12 so it was also important that they really understood how it's gonna

49:15 be done and like why it was done in that way.

49:18 And for example,

49:19 in just in the case of Brazil,

49:20 it was very important for us that we had a local partner which was CEI which

49:24 they are in all of Brazil doing assessments and they started

49:29 in recipient and then they saw the value and they're like,

49:31 oh,

49:31 OK,

49:31 let's do the same now in Minas Gerais.

49:33 So now we are going to start doing the same Minaira which is also going to involve

49:37 government of Minas Gais and the idea is that

49:39 people from the government should.

49:41 Always

49:41 participate and co-create with that so that they see that this actually

49:46 makes sense for them in the way that they want to use it

49:49 and then they can just adapt the tools themselves because we,

49:52 we are not planning to stay there forever,

49:54 right?

49:54 Like maybe it's going to be 1 year,

49:55 2 years and then they use it and I one reason that's one reason

50:02 we haven't gone to new jobs here.

50:04 You made

50:05 mathematical

50:06 er system

50:07 analysis,

50:08 partly because that tends to obscure too much

50:11 and it's opaque

50:12 for users.

50:13 er we,

50:14 we do something that anybody can actually understand.

50:17 Uh,

50:18 I,

50:18 I'll,

50:18 I'll,

50:19 so we have a project,

50:20 uh,

50:20 in India,

50:21 uh,

50:21 which is an innovation that Sewa did for women entrepreneurs,

50:25 uh,

50:26 to move from nano-enterprises to

50:29 more,

50:29 uh,

50:29 you know,

50:30 sustainable enterprises,

50:31 and what we did was,

50:33 uh,

50:33 work on demons.

50:34 Demonstration centers so in each we're working on 3 states.

50:38 In each state we have 5 demonstration centers

50:40 and then the government is doing 100

50:43 demonstration centers and that is what we call

50:45 an intermediation function where we're there for 2-3 years

50:49 helping adapt this to the government because.

50:52 The government will have things that are less flexible than CEWA had,

50:56 but also you can tap into so many other resources than CEWA didn't have.

51:00 And so

51:01 there we have a large team in place in each of these three states

51:06 working with the government to adapt it,

51:08 even some of the people we're hiring.

51:10 are then going to be in the government when the project finishes

51:13 and so that's the only way that you can really scale through to 8 million women

51:19 from,

51:19 you know,

51:20 a very small,

51:21 in the end it's a small grant from Gates

51:23 relative to the impact that it's going to have,

51:25 yeah,

51:26 very quickly,

51:26 so I think.

51:28 I think it's,

51:28 it's very,

51:29 I wouldn't underestimate how difficult that is.

51:31 That's like a very difficult challenge.

51:33 But,

51:33 um,

51:34 uh,

51:34 in the book,

51:35 we have some examples also.

51:37 So one of the examples we,

51:38 the famous examples is of the cash transfers in Mexico.

51:42 And I think the lessons from there for me were about

51:46 how they used evidence as a way to convince a lot of stakeholders,

51:50 but also if

51:51 If you're able to demonstrate something works and people have,

51:54 you have support of the people for it,

51:56 I think that also,

51:57 and that,

51:59 so that,

51:59 so that's one element is community support evidence,

52:02 and I think the third element is trying to

52:05 make it embedded in the government system such that the administrative

52:08 and bureau bureaucratic processes are simpler and easier so that it.

52:12 It's not something,

52:13 it's not a,

52:14 like a virus attacking the government system.

52:17 It's embedded in the government system,

52:18 which makes it easy for future political parties

52:22 to just,

52:23 you know,

52:23 have it,

52:24 maybe rebrand it,

52:25 but still have,

52:25 you know,

52:26 the,

52:26 the core of the program.

52:27 Um,

52:28 thank you.

52:28 So we are almost ready to go to the second part of this,

52:31 uh,

52:31 session.

52:32 Artur,

52:32 anything you want to say before we go to the

52:34 hands-on exercise?

52:36 Really happy to have you here.

52:38 Very good.

52:39 Thank you.

52:40 And those of you who are connected,

52:41 thank you for connecting so far.

52:43 We are now going to disconnect and,

52:45 and move on to,

52:46 to the next part of the session.

52:47 Thank you.

52:47 The,

52:48 the recording of the session is also gonna be on the website,

52:50 the questions for

52:52 for website with all of our blogs and resources as well.

52:54 So feel free to contact us.

52:56 Thank you.

52:57 All right.

52:57 OK.

52:58 Second part.

53:00 Uh,

53:00 we should predict him.

53:02 OK,

53:03 yes,

53:04 um.

53:07 Like you want to transition?

53:09 Yes,

53:10 so,

53:11 I mean,

53:11 we're gonna

showAllTimestamps
no
transcript
Very good. Welcome everyone to this, uh, to this session. We are very pleased to, to start the conversation today about scaling up and system change. And it's going to be a very interesting session. We have two parts. The first one is a presentation of a recent publication, and, and let me introduce who are going to speak today with us. And then the second part of the, of the sessions for those of you who can stay in person only is a hands-on exercise on, on how to actually start thinking in a different way, this issue of scaling up, which is not just doing more of the same, right? It's a different logic into, into it. So uh we're gonna have uh opening remarks from Arturo. Herrera, who is our global director for governance here at the World Bank, um, and then we're gonna have a presentation by the three main authors of the book. The first one is Isabel Guerrero. Many of you know Isabel is an economist. He's a psychoanalyst, so be careful about what you say. Oh, don't say what is about the what you forget that is very important. She's also the co-founder of IMAGO Global Grassroots, which helps organizations scale up. Since 2014, 10 years now, she has taught the course Scaling Up and Sis exchange for Development Impact at the Harvard School of Government. Prior to this, Isabel worked for 30 years at the World Bank. Where she had several country director positions, including Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru, and Paraguay, and later Mexico, Colombia, and India. Then she was vice president for the South Asia region for 5 years. She holds a master's degree from the London School of Economics and graduated from the Washington Psychoanalytic Institute. Follow me, Isabel. We're gonna have uh Sijante Rocale. He's a knowledge manager at Imago Global Grassroots where he builds the knowledge function. He co-authored a recent theoretical paper on the adaptive evaluation methodology. And advises in Mago's evaluation projects. He previously worked at the Behavioral Development lab, establishing JPAL South Asia's first project in the state of Goa. He holds a master's degree in Public Administration and International Development from the Harvard Kennedy School and a master's in Economics from Columbia University. You could have done better, right? Thank you for joining us and uh. Finally, uh, Jossy, uh, Fassbender is a program manager at Iago Global Grassroots focused on advancing, scaling up and adaptive evaluation projects in Latin America and, uh, global office. Previously, Jossy worked at the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. Bank in implementation and evaluation of projects in jobs, rural development, and agriculture. She holds a master's degree in Public Administration and International Development from the Harvard Kennedy School. I'm Roby Serovic. I will be your host today. I'm the manager of the Global Unit on governance here at the World Bank. So let's start with, uh, with Arturo and Michael, you, you can. Improvise. Michael Wolcom used to work at the World Bank for many years, and he actually did a wonderful, uh, work, break, uh, groundbreaking work on poverty at that time, if I remember correctly, Michael, and part of the work we did together with Michael was on, on Mexico and the need to actually, uh, break monopolies down, uh, not an easy thing to do. In, uh, some of our countries in Latin America. So there was a huge conference in, not in terms of the number of people, but the quality on, uh, basically promoting competition, uh, in Mexico. And I remember when I worked with, with Michael on this, um, we were putting together the agenda, and we said, who are we going to invite? And Michael said, well, we need to have on the room people from that. And they said people from I met for this type of thing, and he said, well, they have all the credibility on this, so if we are going to, to, to, to open a real conversation all this, they need to be in the room. After that, Michael, uh, passed to a better life, and, uh, he retired from the World Bank and became a full professor at Harvard, uh, and, uh, you know, living in different countries around the world. So part of Imago as an advisor if I understand correctly, I'm full-time now, full-time now. Full time. Very good. All right, let's start now with uh maybe Arturo with, with the introductory, uh, remarks from this session. Arctor's joining in person. He's joining in person. I thought he was traveling a little bit later today. Ah, so he's traveling today. All right, he'll be here. OK. So, shall we start? What, what do you think, uh, with the wedding? But Should start, well, it would be nice to know who is in the room in terms of what, what areas do you work and we can use a little bit of time. So, so name and the where, where do you work just to get a sense. Yes, Zen Choudhry, I'm in the poverty division, but we are the behavioral unit of the World Bank. And me see Yong Kim, a senior specialist in contacting, working with Matthew and with other a call. My name is Sarah. I work at the Labor DIC with Elena Carranza. I think it's a couple of us. Hello. Good to see you. Guzmano Lassa. I'm a senior government specialist now in the global unit with the Peruvian team. I, I'm Matthieu. I'm a senior economist in Ruby's unit as well working on governance. I'm the program manager for Coalition for Reform. Exactly, yes, I mean, I'm gonna get more chairs in case they will be welcome. Uh, I'm Kiara Brunke. I'm the practice manager for Public institution data and analytics in the governance of global practice. Oh, the woman. Uh, I'm Ahab Tofi. I'm from MTI, not completely foreign to this practice, um, and what is the, is the macro, is the, is the old EP. Oh yes, apologize. It's all these acronyms ever, uh, in grad school, uh, we did some workshops on systems change in complex systems, very good, um, and, um, the theme that we explored was, um, uh, climate change. How can we? So, uh, this triggered, uh, memories or flashbacks or traumas in grad school. And now I want to come back here, do things differently with your post-traumatic stress. I'm Guillermotar. Uh, you also work in the labor GSG with the Lara, and it is. I'm I'm external specialist Carwin. Carmen Del Rio and and the governance team um working on partnership and communications today. Hi, I'm Diana Swin. I'm in social protection and jobs also with Eliana Carlo. And I'm Elizabeth McBride. I'm a knowledge and advocacy consultant with WiFi and um also working on a book about sort of a guidebook for business leaders adapting to the new world of capitalism, or one of the concepts we're writing about in it is a coalition building. Oh, very good. I wanted to call it the Ion the Women reports Finance Initiative, which is an HD on Pablo Guerreros, senior governance specialist at the public administration we need. Great. We have to careful. So Arturo, we, we start with your introduction, uh, to the session. Yeah, no, it's, it's, it's, it's not gonna be about this. I was, uh, as I was coming here, I, I realized that the first person I met the World Bank ever was actually again we, we were in a dinner in, in Mexico City, I mean that was right after, after I, I met up. Some presentations in New York. I talked with her what, what I, uh, she was our country director. What I, what I did and then she said, so why don't you present it in Washington. So I came to Washington and uh I've been living in New York. I thought it was easier to catch a cab here than in New York, uh, which was not at the time. So I, so she asked R to pick me up and I, and I declined. So I, I end up, uh, I end up running. So I came sweating as today. Uh, it's becoming a partner, uh, but what is interesting is that, uh, the second time we met she was hosting a presentation for me here. Now we're hosting a presentation for you. That's perfect. So let's go to the presentation and then, uh, we will have time. Until 9:45 for this, uh, session, right back. Yes, and, uh, so if we, if we have time, hopefully we'll have a round of questions Q&A, and then the second part of the session will be only for those who are in the room, and so on, starting at 9:45 or so. So Isabel, great, good. Well, very happy to be here and see a lot of friends around the table, um. Uh, we're going to go, uh, through this presentation. I will start, uh, thinking about systems and then see and Josie and Michael will, will work through and applied, uh, as, uh, you were saying systems can be traumatic, but they can also be very easy to, to get your, your head around it. Uh, so why do we care? This is a scaling up framework where we first make clear, uh, that what is the vision, what is the gap that somebody's trying to Address through an intervention, a program or a project, and then really important to understand the system failure. Why haven't others been able to solve that problem that you're looking to solve, which could be the market or the government or social entrepreneurs. Understanding that failure is a really important part of your success later. Then you get into the model and, you know, uh, and experimenting or or theory of change, how you're going to have the social impact that you think that you're having. And your business model, your intervention, your minimum viable intervention, the essence of that intervention, and that's where we work a lot with organizations that can take actually several years, and then only when, when you found that model, you start spending money and building the foundation so that you can um er you know, make the best use of your runway by testing the model before building that foundation and building evidence as you see starts from the beginning. the vision, uh, the best organizations are those that start with the evidence from the beginning and then at the end, of course, that becomes part of the learning and helping you to, uh, to make sure that you are doing what you thought you were doing. Uh, we have the framework with many questions. I just went through them, why isn't the system producing the results that you want to produce. So, we look at systems. I started teaching this course on scaling up 10 years ago. And it made a lot of sense then. Suddenly with everything that has happened with COVID, the disruptions, the climate change, it, it seems sort of strange to be focusing so much only on scaling up, and that's why we have really started to put much more emphasis on systems because systems are failing. Because we see that around us many sectors are being disrupted by tech, um, and therefore understanding that environment before knowing whether you're scaling up within a system or you have to change the system to scale development impact is important. So the first time The first question is that, understand where you are, where your program is relative to that system. Then to help clarify the model and interventions and strengthen the theories of change. As you will see in the clinic afterwards, when you start to map the system, sometimes you realize you cannot go at it alone. You need to bring other stakeholders, other partners that have other interests but also other skills into the The System for change and that's like coalitions for Change is a very good example of that. And then to understand what's the pathway to scale that you're choosing and do you need to think about alternative pathways because as we will see, systems are very resilient. Uh, they are, uh, produced, they're, they're designed to produce the results that you see. So, uh, what do we mean by a system? Nature is the most amazing, you know, example of a system. You think about the trees, you think about all the roots that are underneath, all the mycelium that is underneath. That system is an awesome system, very resilient. A tree will die and for decades sometimes, it will be fed from the roots underneath, from the system of roots under, underneath. Same is true for the, for the, for the human body, you know, the human body is a system totally uh interrelated. So the parts, the sum of its parts is, is much more than, than each part uh independently. So there's a property of the whole in a system, which is really important to understand when you're trying to change that system. So the properties of a system come from how the different parts interact, rather than just from the parts themselves. And so, So, when you want to change a system, you need to shift the conditions that are holding that system in place. Um, and as I said, since systems are designed to produce exactly the results that they are producing when you're writing your book on business for this whatever you're seeing is actually an awesome system working to replicate itself every time. Some of the Uh, properties of a system is that, uh, a system is nested, and if you go in, you will find another system which is also complex. So finding the boundaries to the system that you want to change is part of the, of the challenge. It's non-linear, some sometimes you have a little change in one part and it causes unexpected large uh sys uh uh large impacts on the overall system. I remember when I was uh the VP for South Asia, we had an amazing pro uh project um for road safety for trucks in Pakistan. And so we thought that it would be great uh to have stops because the truck drivers will be able to stop, have a rest at night, and then continue uh later and reduce um Uh, reduce accidents. And what happened is, without us knowing the nonlinear part, there was a huge increase in venereal diseases among truck drivers, which if you think about it is, of course, but we were not thinking systems when we were designing that project. It's unpredictable, linear predictions always fail. It has feedback loops that help actually reinforce and sustain that system. Or destabilize you when you want to, to get a systems change, you need to disrupt, you need to destabilize, and you need to know where to do it. And then systems learn, they are adaptive, they will learn from uh uh shocks and then adapt to those shocks like what has happened with COVID actually it's a very good example. So there are um 3 levers for system change. Um, the first level is the one that we usually work on, policies, regulations, resources. Uh, that is the structural level, it's very explicit, we usually go to that for change. But if you find that a system is being really tough and resilient and it doesn't produce the change and so we have so many wicked Development problems if that happens, you need to go one step further, which is the relational change, which has to be with relations between uh players and the power dynamics in um in the system. Those are much more powerful leverage points to change a system. That's why coalitions for change are so important. And then finally, the, the biggest, the biggest leverage is the shift in mental models. That is the one that really brings transformation, and that's why all these um advocacies are important, all these movements are important. Over time they change mental models in society, and within that the most important mental change, mental shift that you can make is your own. Uh, as Gandhi said, be the change that you want to see outside. That is the first step, because, because the system is designed to produce the changes that it's, the, the, the realities that it's producing, you have a role in that and understanding what's your role is the first step for system change. So that is a very quick um overview of systems and I'm going to pass on to Michael to introduce us to the next, I'm trying to, yeah. So that's why we got into it and Isabel has sketched some of the conceptual aspects of systems that people. You, you said it with some pain, um, but what I'd like to emphasize that we're going to spend the rest of the session on is actually practical tools that actually we have developed in the field to engage with problems. Either one of them is actually, we actually had to do online in the field and the other really, really um in the field. Now we've always used, or we've discovered we were, We discovered we were, we're doing stuff and then we discovered it's called human-centered design. Um, so we use a lot of that, we do a lot of mapping and interpretation, and as Isabel highlighted, a key part of this is going from the systems diagnostic to exploring where is the resistance, where are pathways to change through the system, and how that then maps to The classic domain of theories of change and dog frames, and then it almost always you have to iterate. Let's go forward. We're going to, um, Sedat and Josi are going to present two kinds of techniques that we've developed in the form, in, in, in the field. One is what we call a systems dynamics map that emphasizes mapping relationships and functions within the system. The other is starting from uh an aftermath of the system. The only thing I'd like to highlight as you go in, these are two prisms on the same system, and the question is, it's often a very pragmatic choice of where you start. So with that, so that, over to you. Great, thank you. So, we, I'm gonna walk through an example of our work, uh, we did with UNDP Tunisia and the, the, the development challenge we were dealing with was intimate partner violence, and this is prevalent in many developing countries, but in this case, we worked on Tunisia. And the existing intervention strategy was one that's very common in multilaterals and in governments where you have these portfolio of interventions, often in different departments and areas. In this case, it was justice, security, and women's empowerment, but They're uncoordinated. It's unclear how they connect and it's unclear how all of them together are causing the system to change or transform in the direction we want to. And so our task here was to understand how these different parts of the system are interrelated and also how are the gaps in the intervention portfolio and which feedback loops that are, are causing this problem to be more persistent, uh, are addressed by these interventions and so. The very first step, and this is often the first step in when we do a diagnostic, is to really understand the problem much more deeply. And so this was really a joint effort with UNDP Tunisia and Imago. So, UNDP Tunisia did a lot of work interviewing 30+ stakeholders. So different actors. In the system. So from the Ministry of Child and Health, from the Ministry of Justice, Security, they interviewed NGOs working very closely with um people who, with, with intimate partner violence and victims of violence. They also interviewed victims of violence and spoke to sociologists. Sanny Mago spoke to a lot of people in UNDP Tunisia, personnel who were working on projects of intimate partner violence. Uh, and so, so what we're seeing here is a problem space that's a culmination of, of that work. And so roughly we found three big areas of proximate causes of intimate partner violence, and these actually aligned very closely to, uh, Isabel's, what Isabel showed which were the three leverage points in the system. So the first, institutional, this, this really relates to policies and rules. So the judiciary where we found, um, that, you know, judges often. Put cases on hold expecting the family to withdraw, uh, because of, expecting victims to withdraw because of family pressure. Uh, that's the police where there's issues of trust and reassurance of women going to the police and social services, which is shelters. There's societal factors, and this is, I think, more in the domain of mental models that Isabel just presented. It's about, it, it's about societal norms, patriarchy, the institution of marriage, pressures to preserve family image, and so on and so forth. And then there's individual factors, things like, uh, a woman's own agency, their ability to earn income, uh, their support from immediate family members, and so on and so forth. So, these were the three pillars. From which we developed our understanding of the system. So that's the boundary of the system. There's of course a much larger system that envelopes this system that we're dealing with with intimate partner violence. And so there's of course many factors. COVID-19 was important then and you know, other, other factors. So from here we began mapping the system, but we use those three pillars and causes to understand how different variables interrelate with one another. And so the first is, we always start with the, the, the main outcome. So in this case, the main outcome was the number of IPV instances, the likelihood of a case being pursued with, and also the number of convictions. And because this was a problem, the hypothesized levels were, were low in the case of number of convictions, high in the case of a number of instances. We also mapped institutional factors which I already described pertaining to the legal, uh, legal delays, you know, trust with the police. And, and their hypothesis levels. There's societal factors uh pertaining to um beliefs about resolving marital problems internally and we found them to be high. All of these hypothesized levels, of course, were built from, um, our interviews and, and discussions with various stakeholders. And then there's individual factors around agency, awareness, so on and so forth. But I think the task of the system dynamics mapping, and this may be familiar to you, given you've, you've done some of this work, is to find the interrelationships between these variables. And so we start as an example with one. So, if you have a low likelihood of a case being pursued. Uh, the number of convictions is likely to be low, and this is a positive relationship in the sense that a low variable leads to another low variable. Now if we take it a step further, right, uh, low number of convictions means there's low awareness, uh, among women about their legal rights, partly because they don't see it in the media, their neighbors don't know it. So the low number of convictions contributes to this low awareness and this low awareness in turn leads to a further, uh, uh, a reduced likelihood of a case being pursued and persisted with because they have low awareness. And so what we have just mapped. Is a feedback loop that explains why IPV is a persistent problem in the system. It's one of the many feedback loops that explains that this awareness, this lack of awareness is an adverse self-reinforcing feedback loop that, that explains why this problem has not changed. And so we did this mapping with all. All of the relationships and if you look closely, you'll be able to see, you can draw many circles of different feedback loops that explain different hypotheses of why this problem is persistent. But, but the, the goal of this was not to understand just different interactions between different parts of the system, but to see where our interventions coming in and where do they address some of these feedback loops. And so we did a lot of detailed analysis, but this was a broad landscape analysis of where multilaterals. We're working in Tunisia on the problem of intimate partner violence and you see, most of the projects were on the, on, on rules and policies and UNDP was focusing a lot on justice and security, but majority were, were on rules and, and policies which often is, you know, the first level but not the most powerful as Isabel was, was mentioning. Uh, the hardest to change our mental models and so very few projects on societal factors and one of the things we found. Was that a lot of the societal interventions did not focus on attitudes to men. So that was one of the big gaps we found in our analysis. Uh, one of the things we did was look at individual projects and how they enter the system, but also which subsystem they affect and what feedback loops. And so, a quick illustration of that is here. So suppose we have interventions to improve access to women's entrepreneurship. So that immediately affects women's income. Right? But if you follow the arrows from women's income to the main, uh, outcome variables we started. What you see is the feedback loop it effects. So, women's income, if you reduce, if you increase women's income, you reduce dependence on spousal income, which was one of the main reasons women tolerate violence. So reducing dependence on spousal income reduces tolerance for violence, which means fewer number of IPV cases, but also fewer number of cases, um, a higher likelihood of cases being pursued. And, uh, so this is just another illustration of that. That was the subsystem of the larger system, and this is an initial theory of change which can then be further fleshed out. So the idea of doing all of this was really to understand how these different interventions from different departments are interconnected. Often they address one or many feedback loops and how this can lead to a greater understanding of, you know, what is the theory of change. Uh, that this effects, and from here I'll pass on to Josie. He'll go on to system after another. Thank you. So yeah, I'll present, like Michael said, another reason how you can look also at assistance, and this one is you start by mapping all your stakeholders and then the relationships between them. In this case, it was, uh, work that we were doing with local governments in Brazil. Uh, it was the uh recipe government, and they were trying to respond to the weed development challenge and that they were. facing a lot of learning deficits in reading and math due to COVID-19. And there were so many things changing at the same time, and the government was trying to explore different alternatives of how to solve these learning gaps. So they were just exploring different policies. It was very hard to say, OK, we're going, we're gonna go into one policy and really uh do an impact assessment to know if this is working or not. So we really needed to. Understand the whole and really try to get an idea of how are all these policies working together, but also it was important to first understand uh for each of the interventions, how was the system uh working in relation to, to that. So one of the policies that we were trying to help them assess was that they were trying to implement teaching at the right level, which is uh a program that was developed by RTA in India. So of course it's, it also needed to have some adjustments to be implemented in Brazil, but basically, it, the way that it works is that you, you regroup students based on the initial learning levels that you're observing. And according to that, you give them the material to their initial learning level, and the idea is that then they are going to be able to recover and be at the grade level that they are currently assigned. Um, so what we did was we first really make a big effort to understand who should be there mapping the system. And we think that uh outdoor mapping is very important, especially when we are doing fieldwork, it's important that you have people from the school, people from the government, because everyone understands the system in a different way. But everyone knew, OK, at the center of the intervention is the student. This is the, actually the, the last beneficiary, the person that we want to affect. So they put the student in the center and then we started mapping for all the stakeholders that are connected to the student, if we are thinking, if we are thinking of the teaching at the right level intervention. So we have At the school level, we have the school directors and coordinators, but then we also have teachers. And then it's important to even go into that system and separate the levels. We have family of commu or community of students. We have the Department of Education itself, and we have CAEI which was a research organization which was helping them develop the assessments for this intervention. So, for example, uh, we map, the very important thing in the system mapping when you focus on actors is to focus um mapping the relationship but both ways. So for example, if CAG, that is a research organization, is developing formative assessments, which are gonna give feedback to understand the students uh learning. Then the students need to participate in these assessments. Then with this information, then CET gives the information to the school directors and coordinators so that they can analyze uh how the students are improving learning levels or not. And then with them, we map all the different relationships. So it was like, everyone just really understand, OK, how does this work or it doesn't work, but like, basically just understanding all the different connections which even include how is the family connected to the students, how is the Department of Education connected to families, so at every level. And this in a way gave us a process mapping as well. No, you understand what is the process so that this intervention actually work in the system that you're working in very simple terms, it was OK. First, the government needs to give the the guidelines for teaching at the right level to the schools. Then the schools diagnose the student learning levels. Then with this, uh, the teachers are going to be able to regroup the students, and then the students receive teachings, uh, based on the teaching at the right level methodology. And this will give you an initial way of thinking of what is the theory of change. Of course, there are some intermediate outcomes that are missing that it's like after following all these steps, then you get some, to some intermediate outcomes that um make it possible that the students are able to reach at the expected learning level for the grade level, and then you are going to be able to decrease learning gaps after the pandemic. But then the interesting thing to map with them was that even if they could see that there were many parts that they were actually working as they are supposed to work, there were also many other parts where the system was just not responding. Like there were many things that even if the government had a very clear understanding of how things uh will need to happen inside of the schools, that things were just not happening. So that's why it was important. that the coordinators that were in contact with the schools were the ones that were in the room and could say like, actually, it's not happening that the teachers have any kind of meetings with the directors to access the information and to know if actually uh students are improving their learning levels. Also, there are no meetings so that they can then improve the way that they are doing this uh intervention with the students. So then, this was the initial step, so that with them we could work on a revised theory of change, and then we also developed a process tracing methodology, which is something that we do in adaptive evaluation, but that basically helps you understand for each step of the theory of change, what is happening, what is not happening, and then regularly going to the schools and creating this. Feedback mechanisms between people that has to be aware of this, that includes researchers, implementers, people in the government that can make decisions of the pedagogy that needs to change. So that actually you don't need to wait so long to see the final outcome change, but actually understand on the way, like what is working and what is not working and be able to improve your implementation. So this is a very fast example but it's like uh very connected to what we are gonna try to be working with you today but before going into that or opening questions I wanted to pass again to Isabel because we wrote a book where we explain these tools and also other ways of thinking about. So for everybody in the room, all, all connected, OK, this is the latest publication of Iago scaling up development, uh, impact, uh, you can find it in many places, right? Amazon only. Amazon only, OK. And if you refer to this conversation, you're gonna have it. we go and chapter 3 is on systems change and then chap the last 3 chapters are on adaptive evaluation which is how do you accompany this process through uh what we call a process of meaning making, uh, about what is happening in a way that In fact, evaluations are part of the solution, but a, a small part, most of it is about iterating, helping to pivot, giving just in time information through a set of tools that are described there. Great. Good. Thank you very much for the presentation, the 4 of you. So we have a few minutes for Q&A maybe now before we go to, into the hands-on uh exercise later on. Anyone wants to come in? Maybe that's the question. Thank you very much. Actually, I like this, uh, conceptualization as well. So, and the example are very compelling. Yet I'm trying to think all the way through the example of education actually you've highlighted numerous factors in order to succeed, and Brazil has a certain context, of course. Also we work a lot because they have a lot of data now they're much more advanced in terms of monitoring, and I was wondering how would that play out in countries that are less endowed in terms of skills it's often. You know, we have tried, I don't know, uh, Bigger SWAT teams initiatives. I think your conceptualization can then play in different ways, but we've seen example of that, and it, it's just I'm trying to think how we can That sometimes there is accountability. There has to be some level of accountability that I would like you to pull out more at some point of also achieving the results, and all these are instruments, but somebody needs to be really responsible and precisely for what you said, Isabel, at the beginning, this level of accountabilities are becoming looser in many countries and with CEOs and advanced economies, it's all very confusing these days. I wonder also if you could tell a little bit about that. Yeah, great question. Should I answer? Yeah, so, um, we use this with SEWA. SEWA is an organization of 2 million women that come from the informal market who they, they don't even know how to read and write, and we do the system mapping with them. Uh, because as you will see in the clinic, you can do it in a very playful way, uh, where what we do is facilitate this by asking the right questions and then they are doing the mapping and it works beautifully. So I think in very low capacity environments you can do it. Um, the important thing is to help them choose who are the people who need to be in the room and then have somebody who's going to be the problem holder and who eventually is going to be the champion through that. Usually it would be the organization that wants to work on solving that problem, who needs to hold it, uh, in order for the accountability of the work as you go through different iterations because you will need to do it several times, it's not a one, a one shot thing, yeah. I can also compliment. So I think that's, for example, in Brazil it was very important for us also to determine, OK, inside of the government who are our champions, who actually believes in this and wants to do this and wants to be part of the core team that is gonna keep like pushing this forward. And then we also have people from CAI who is the research organization who is going to be doing this, so you just identify the. Who, what, and when, and it was very important to say, OK, every 2 months people are going to meet and discuss these results so that we can keep understanding how the system is changing or not. I know that we have also faced, uh, a lot of restrictions because if the government changes and it's like difficult to again get a new person, but so. But you also need a lot of ownership from the government and they need to understand why it's important. So we kept trying to involve the government and say, look, we are here to try to help you make decisions, and then in that, in that way, they were OK, actually, this makes sense, this is just kind of complementary to the, to what we are doing already. And also I think something For the low skill or like uh countries that don't have a lot of data like we don't rely a lot of administrative data. We try, we try to understand what administrative data is available that we can use so that we don't build it again. But then we also develop very simple questionnaires and we also Understand when they are already going and interviewing teachers, so that it's not like we are adding a new questionnaire that they don't want to have, it's just, hey, how are you working right now and how in this way that you're working, we can just do it in a more structured way so it's easier for you and it's also more sustainable. Thank you, Justiceabel others. Yes, Jose. I'm curious if you can talk more about the issue of mental models and how they affect the The initial step that you had there that it's uh understanding the problem even more. Owning the problem and, and in many societies in many, many governments lack the, the self-awareness to understand that there is something that needs to be changed and, and they, there is not a cultural kind of value of, of say, OK, acknowledging that things are failing, therefore you, you have a big block there, yeah. Great question. So I, I think first of all, that's why we talk about the wicked development problems, because we go into those problems that are really resistant to change. Some problems don't need this, but when you're trying to do something and You try again and again and it, and the problem persists, that's the time where it's good to go in and you know, I, I think, uh, it, it's the, it's the pain of not seeing the solution which actually makes people open up to the awareness that there might be something that I'm not quite seeing. And the second thing is that we've discovered that, well, there's no surprise, uh, that the many times government, uh, people at the front line are very frustrated. Because they have gone there with uh, with the, for, for doing public service and they find that the environment where they are working is one where it's very bureaucratic, very difficult to innovate, to take risks, and so making them our allies in that, uh, so that they can actually deliver what they were even sometimes asked to deliver but are unable to do so because of the old bureaucratic system which doesn't allow for the innovation. Yeah, I wanted to add as well. So, I think the, the really persistent social problems and I think intimate partner violence is an example of it is where often mental models are, are really driving uh the problem. Uh, it's also where coalitions for change become very important, and a lot of the awareness movements, collaboration movements, uh, to raise awareness often are the interventions that try and change, uh, how you think about, you know, You know, some of these mental models and sometimes it's, uh, it's a shock, uh, an incident or an external shock that, that, that is like COVID-19 that really changed how we think about interacting in meetings like, like this meeting, um, that often feels very disruptive in the beginning, but is the groundwork for rethinking and changing mental models and throughout history there have been a lot of shocks. That made us reassess how, how we, how, how we think about the way the world should be. So I think this is a moment like that. We're living in a moment like that. I think we have a few questions. How many, uh, we have one question online. One question online. I think that on this topic something interesting is you said at the beginning systems are designed to reproduce themselves in a way, right, not to be changed. And then we, this is the World Bank, so it's an institution where a lots of economies uh exist and the, the, the tendency is to say, well, people will change if you provide the right incentives and what we are saying is something is something different. It's not just about incentives, uh, because changing your mental model is not about an incentive. It's about the realization. Maybe it's about, uh, maybe at that moment it's something that goes against everything that you think and thought during your life until you want to do it. So what's in there for you? I mean, it's suicidal to your identity in a way, and you still do it. So yeah, we're all economists, the four of us, and, and I think, I think it recoveries, yeah, there's, there's some problems which are easy to fix with incentives, but for us the most interesting ones are those wicked ones that are not, yeah. OK, very good. So who is in line? Perfect. Linnea, do you wanna come in, please? Yes, thank you so much. Thank you for fantastic presentations. It's such an, such an interesting topic. I am, um, I have many questions, but the question I wanted to pose now was, uh, being realistic about the resources you need to conduct these kind of mappings. What, can you give us an idea of The, um, the amount of time needed, kind of the team needed, the process, uh, the resources, the, just to give us a very practical lay of the land, what, what is needed to do this, please. Thank you. Thank you. And maybe we collect any other remaining question before we go to the next part of the session. Uh, I would have a question. So you showed us two examples that were really kind of in the social sector. Um, I mean, I come from governance and we're in love with institutions and institutions I think. Do you have any examples in the book or maybe from the top of your head just kind of mentioning working within public sector, within, for example, uh, a tax administration unit or, um, you know, installing a new system in the financial. Ministry, for example, and just, just to add one more is where is that you see this more useful in sector-specific problems or horizontal problems like a fighting hunger, right, like in Brazil did a few years, gender issues, climate change where you need to actually work across the, the vertical sectors that governments have. So I, I'll answer that and Michael, I'll ask you to talk about. The Gates grant that we're working on convergence, um, so because I think the, the Gates grant answers both the question on resources and the question on, uh, examples of working within government, uh, but in terms of, of how it's useful in the sector, so it is very interesting how to see that our water and sanitation problem has A lot of links with other sectors or I remember when we were working on infant mortality in Bolivia, one of the biggest breakthroughs was to say what really matters. And so even though you go in a sector, the wicked development problems usually have a very broad intersectional connection. So I think, um, yeah, it, it's very useful. Yeah. Uh, we find you can tailor what you do to the context that you have, and the examples that, um, Josie gave, or we're working, we're going to illustrate that for those who stay later, that actually doing the system mapping, you can actually do it in one workshop and already get insights. At the other extreme, we are in a, in a project, which is actually a three-year project where Gates is supporting an evaluation, adapt, we've got an adaptive evaluation of a very complex intervention. Which is trying in two states of India to activate two huge programs that the Indian government has. One about building women's groups from top down, from the bottom up, and one about um parenting employment, to bring them together to work differently. That's a case where you've got wonderful goals and a very complex system which is very resistant. Now that is a 3 to 4 year program with a lot of money. Um, but both as a what, what, what we'd like to give a signal, uh, many, many years ago I worked for many years in the World Bank. And I, and so I have a sense of the kind of very varied resources that you have when you're working on a project, when you're working on an analysis. And this, this is either no more nor less. It's coming in with a different mentality and with different tools, which takes you to different questions. But to the Recifu project we were working on for. Over 2 years with it wasn't that expensive because we were working with an existing, existing groups, working with the governmental system, uh, yes, tracking the stuff, having working in 9 schools to get insights in the system. The Tunisia project we worked on over 6 months, but again it wasn't. Very substantial financial resources, but we were doing a lot that required resources of the working with the UNDP groups. Some understood the ideas, some didn't understand them at all, and we were doing some, a lot of design work as we went along. So it was 6 months, fairly, uh, not by far from full-time, but, um, uh, quite, quite a lot of, quite a, quite intensive work to build that and to build the understanding. If we did it again, it'd be much quicker. Well, you could also, in addition to for project preparation where you know the World Bank will need to for a project of the bank, let's say, right, uh, come up with the, with the resources you can eventually build this up into the project design totally and then it's going to be paid by the, by the loan proceedings, so by the government itself, so then the resources become less. It's important, uh, yes, good. All right, yes, one more question. Yes, um, so I was curious if you could talk a little bit about how to institutionalize some of these things, right? So many parts of the system sometimes are very person dependent, so you're there, you talk to them, or even project dependent, so you map for one project, but then. Have you seen anything, you know, once the bank leaves, once, once the project ends, how are many of those things that are advanced in one project actually institutionalized for the next project, so that a lot of these things, uh, are repeated within the government. And maybe that, I know it's a very hard question, um. Uh it is a hard question and we've experienced that a lot. It's no different from, um, we work a lot in India. And you get a reform initiative and the bureaucrat leaves and it stops. It's no different from that as a general problem for any of the stuff that we're engaged with. How you do it is actually would be building the practices and processes within the governmental system or within the, within the non, the non-governmental system. So one of the reasons that we emphasize that you can use this and take it to something very standard, which is the log road. This is a way of getting a better log frame, and working with that log frame is that will be a way of kind of building into standard project preparation and monitoring how to do this, which is also why increasingly, when we're involved in the follow-up, we try to work with administrative systems. So that the counterparts see they can use the data they're collecting already to begin to understand how different parts of the system uh are are or are not working. Yeah, I think also in the case of Brazil, uh, as we were doing it, we were also trying to do capacity building, so it was also important that they really understood how it's gonna be done and like why it was done in that way. And for example, in just in the case of Brazil, it was very important for us that we had a local partner which was CEI which they are in all of Brazil doing assessments and they started in recipient and then they saw the value and they're like, oh, OK, let's do the same now in Minas Gerais. So now we are going to start doing the same Minaira which is also going to involve government of Minas Gais and the idea is that people from the government should. Always participate and co-create with that so that they see that this actually makes sense for them in the way that they want to use it and then they can just adapt the tools themselves because we, we are not planning to stay there forever, right? Like maybe it's going to be 1 year, 2 years and then they use it and I one reason that's one reason we haven't gone to new jobs here. You made mathematical er system analysis, partly because that tends to obscure too much and it's opaque for users. er we, we do something that anybody can actually understand. Uh, I, I'll, I'll, so we have a project, uh, in India, uh, which is an innovation that Sewa did for women entrepreneurs, uh, to move from nano-enterprises to more, uh, you know, sustainable enterprises, and what we did was, uh, work on demons. Demonstration centers so in each we're working on 3 states. In each state we have 5 demonstration centers and then the government is doing 100 demonstration centers and that is what we call an intermediation function where we're there for 2-3 years helping adapt this to the government because. The government will have things that are less flexible than CEWA had, but also you can tap into so many other resources than CEWA didn't have. And so there we have a large team in place in each of these three states working with the government to adapt it, even some of the people we're hiring. are then going to be in the government when the project finishes and so that's the only way that you can really scale through to 8 million women from, you know, a very small, in the end it's a small grant from Gates relative to the impact that it's going to have, yeah, very quickly, so I think. I think it's, it's very, I wouldn't underestimate how difficult that is. That's like a very difficult challenge. But, um, uh, in the book, we have some examples also. So one of the examples we, the famous examples is of the cash transfers in Mexico. And I think the lessons from there for me were about how they used evidence as a way to convince a lot of stakeholders, but also if If you're able to demonstrate something works and people have, you have support of the people for it, I think that also, and that, so that, so that's one element is community support evidence, and I think the third element is trying to make it embedded in the government system such that the administrative and bureau bureaucratic processes are simpler and easier so that it. It's not something, it's not a, like a virus attacking the government system. It's embedded in the government system, which makes it easy for future political parties to just, you know, have it, maybe rebrand it, but still have, you know, the, the core of the program. Um, thank you. So we are almost ready to go to the second part of this, uh, session. Artur, anything you want to say before we go to the hands-on exercise? Really happy to have you here. Very good. Thank you. And those of you who are connected, thank you for connecting so far. We are now going to disconnect and, and move on to, to the next part of the session. Thank you. The, the recording of the session is also gonna be on the website, the questions for for website with all of our blogs and resources as well. So feel free to contact us. Thank you. All right. OK. Second part. Uh, we should predict him. OK, yes, um. Like you want to transition? Yes, so, I mean, we're gonna
showAllTranscripts
no
duration
PT53M35S
scene7File
worldbank/Scaling Up and Systems Change June 10
scene7Domain
https://worldbank.scene7.com/
scene7FileAvs
worldbank/Scaling Up and Systems Change June 10-AVS
title
Scaling Up and Systems Change June 10
description
Scaling Up and Systems Change June 10
showTimestampAndTranscript
yes
col-xs-12
col-sm-12
col-md-3
col-lg-3
col-xs-12
col-sm-12
col-md-7
col-lg-7
  • add-style
  • lp-body-content

On June 10, 2024, the World Bank’s Coalitions for Reforms (C4R) team, in collaboration with IMAGO Global Grassroots, supported by the World Bank’s Governance & Institutions Umbrella Program, organized an event titled “Scaling Up and Systems Change – A Webinar and Interactive Clinic on Building Coalitions.” This event delved into the concepts and tools necessary for building coalitions aimed at systems change. It included discussions on the theory behind systems thinking in the context of scaling up, supplemented by a practical case study using system diagnostic tools. (View Presentation).

The event featured insights from Isabel Guerrero, Siddhant Gokhale, and Jossie Fahsbender, co-authors of the book “Scaling Up Development Impact.” This book draws on a decade of experience in aiding grassroots organizations to scale their impact, integrating learnings from a Harvard Kennedy School course. By merging concepts from economics, psychology, systems thinking, design thinking, and adaptive evaluation and management, the book offers a comprehensive framework for scaling up with practical relevance.

Explore further resources about the book:

About IMAGO

IMAGO Global Grassroots works with organizations around the world to build capacity and scale impact while taking into account the complexities of the different contexts and systems in which they operate.

SPEAKERS

MODERATOR

ROBY SENDEROWITSCH, Practice Manager for Public Administration, Governance Global Practice, World Bank

SPEAKERS

ISABEL GUERRERO, Co-Founder and Executive Director, IMAGO Global Grassroots, Harvard Kennedy School

SIDDHANT GOKHALE, Knowledge Manager, IMAGO Global Grassroots

JOSSIE FAHSBENDER, Program Manager, IMAGO Global Grassroots

SPEAKERS’ BIOS

Isabel Guerrero is an economist, a psychoanalyst, and the co-founder of IMAGO Global Grassroots, which helps organizations scale up. Since 2014, she has taught the course “Scaling Up and Systems Change for Development Impact” at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. Prior to this, Isabel worked for 30 years at the World Bank, where she had several country director positions, including Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru and Paraguay, and later Mexico, Colombia, and India. Then, she was Vice-President for the South Asia region for five years. She holds a master’s degree from the London School of Economics and graduated from the Washington Psychoanalytic Institute.

Siddhant Gokhale is a knowledge manager at IMAGO Global Grassroots, where he built the knowledge function. He co-authored a recent theoretical paper on the Adaptive Evaluation methodology and advises IMAGO’s evaluation projects. He previously worked at the Behavioral Development Lab, establishing J-PAL South Asia’s first project in the state of Goa. He holds a master’s degree in public administration and international development from the Harvard Kennedy School and an MA in economics from Columbia University.

Jossie Fahsbender is a program manager at IMAGO Global Grassroots, focused on advancing scaling up and Adaptive Evaluation projects in the Latin American and Global office. Previously, Jossie worked at the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank in the implementation and evaluation of projects in jobs, rural development, and agriculture. She holds a master’s degree in public administration and international development from the Harvard Kennedy School.

col-xs-12
col-sm-12
col-md-2
col-lg-2