To be presented to the Joint Meeting of the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) / The Bureau of the IGC MOST, 26 March 2013 OUTLINE

Transcription

1 Report on the MOST International UNESCO Workshop on Measuring Social Public Policies: Inclusiveness and Impact, March 2013, UNESCO Headquarters, Paris To be presented to the Joint Meeting of the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) / The Bureau of the IGC MOST, 26 March 2013 OUTLINE Source: Article XV of the Statutes of the Intergovernmental Council of the Management of Social Transformations (MOST) Programme. Background: In accordance with this Article, the Intergovernmental Council shall maintain the high scientific standards of the MOST Programmme and this shall, in particular, include assessing the scientific quality of projects submitted to the programme. Purpose: The report provides a summary of the main themes discussed during the MOST International UNESCO Workshop on Measuring Social Public Policies: Inclusiveness and Impact, held in Paris from 25 to 26 March 2013, and identifies specific issues addressed during the workshop that can contribute to UNESCO activities focused on MOST s thematic priority on social inclusion, in particular as regards the objective of assisting Member States in the development of comprehensive and context-adapted inclusive public policies. 1. Organized within the framework of UNESCO's Management of Social Transformations (MOST) Programme, an international workshop on Measuring Social Public Policies: Inclusiveness and Impact was held from 25 to 26 March 2013, at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris, with the aim to support the work of the MOST programme in assisting Member States in the development of comprehensive inclusive public policies. To this end, the workshop discussed current experiences with the study and mapping of indexes and methodologies available to measure social inclusion and assess the level of inclusion of public policies. 1 SHS/2013/PI/H/9

2 2. Building inclusive societies has been a longstanding commitment of the international community. The Copenhagen Declaration and Programme of Action, a key outcome of the 1995 World Summit for Social Development, contained a specific commitment to advance social integration through fostering inclusive societies. Current international deliberations, such as those within the framework of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) and the ongoing process of formulating the post-2015 international development agenda, emphasize even stronger the notions of inclusion and equity. The recent report to the UN Secretary-General, drawing upon main successes and challenges in the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), calls for (a) inclusive social development and (b) inclusive economic development to become two of the four key dimensions of the post-2015 international agenda. This orientation is also articulated in the 2012 Report of the UN Secretary-General s High Panel on Global Sustainability. 3. Public policy is an essential factor as it sets legal and political frameworks regulating action in a vast array of domains. Limitations and loopholes in such frameworks trickle down from the upstream policy level to national and sub-national government planning, budgeting and programming resulting in systemic barriers that impact the welfare of the population in general and reinforces processes of social exclusion that particularly affects certain social groups, particularly women and girls, migrants, youth, indigenous peoples, and persons with disabilities. 4. Predominant expert opinion captured in the report of the UNDESA Expert Group Meeting on Practical Strategies to Promote Social Integration: Lessons Learned from Existing Policies and Practices points to the inadequate uptake of social inclusion in all its dimensions social, economic, political and cultural at the policy level and the need for the integration of social inclusion objective as an overarching theme in all main policy areas. This is a gap that was addressed during the international workshop on Measuring Social Public Policies: Inclusiveness and Impact which demonstrated the relevance of evidence-based work to convert the broad concept of social inclusion into an operational framework for public policy and help Member States to tackle identified challenges. 5. In order to accompanying the efforts of Member States in designing appropriate inclusive and equitable public policies, it is essential to bring to the forefront knowledge and experience existing across the board regarding at least two specific threads: a) taking stock of the methodologies for measuring social inclusion and related concepts and, when feasible, its impact; and b) creating a sustainable research-policy nexus. The workshop was therefore structured around three thematic sessions addressing the following topics: i) Measuring social inclusion; ii) Assessment and impact of inclusive policies; and iii) the link between research and policymaking. 6. The session on Measuring social inclusion included four main presentations on indexes and indicators as well as two additional presentations introducing the issue of the multidimensional aspect of social inclusion. Following the presentations, other interventions were made by participants representing UN agencies that explained their statistical frameworks in the field of social inclusion; experts from statistical institutions, specialists from different fields of UNESCO activity, and representatives from NGOs. The debate mainly addressed five main questions that received special attention by the 2

3 participants: a) Which are the most relevant dimensions that must necessarily be covered in UNESCO set of indicators?; b) Which populations should be concerned within the framework of an inclusive policy: everyone or only specific groups?; c) Which are the best indicators for covering these dimensions, taking into account the quality and the availability of data in a number of countries, and the degree of international comparability?; d) How should be covered in a consistent way countries with very different levels of economic development?; and e) How could we make progress in this field in the short, medium and longer term?, Who should decide on this measure? Who should coordinate such a process? The discussions of this session revealed consensus on the importance of measuring social exclusion and social inclusion at the national and international levels, and therefore the relevance of developing robust measuring tools for effectively measuring these complex social problems, assess its evolution over time, compare performances and assess public policies in this field. The presentations and debates illustrated both the diversity of approaches and the crucial role played by the institutions designing and collecting data. It was also identified the richness of existing databases reflecting a wide inventory of qualitative and quantitative indicators. It was also stressed the importance of utilizing contextualized approaches for measuring social inclusion as well as the need to adopt differentiated policy objectives, depending on specific circumstances. The debate reflected the rapid progress achieved in this area, particularly the fact that current discussions are cantered around methodological issues while a few years ago the exchanges were rather limited to the identification of general concepts. The session also addressed the importance of the participation of civil society for discussions on indicators and its interpretation. Statistic quantification is important but not sufficient. It is required a qualitative assessment based on participative approaches that directly involve social actors, in particular excluded persons. It was considered that this requirement is both a question of democracy and a matter of political effectiveness. 7. Among the subjects discussed during the workshop, the theme of the second session Assessment and impact of inclusive policies was the most directly related to current MOST activities concerning the thematic priority of social inclusion, namely assisting Member States in the assessment of the inclusiveness of public policies. The session consisted in three central expositions by leading experts on the topic, including an overview with information on the MOST methodology which is being prepared for assessing the inclusiveness of public policies. Two additional presentations opening a debate on the theme Which are the appropriate Assessment Tools for Efficient Inclusive Policies? Additional participants in the session included specialists from UN agencies, experts from institutions devoted to social assessment, professionals from institutions and associations specialized in evaluations, representatives of major cities and regional authorities, social scientists, and NGO s representatives. Debates in this session intended to provide answers to three questions: What type of data is needed to conduct assessments or impact studies of an inclusive policy?; What role should stakeholders have in assessment and impact studies?; How to ensure continuous monitoring of the assessment of inclusive policies?. Notwithstanding the diverse positions expressed as regards the current approaches for assessing inclusive public policies and for measuring its impact, the session exposed consent on certain key points: (i) social exclusion is a popular but extraordinarily elusive concept. There is no agreed definition on the phenomenon itself and its main causes. Comparative studies on policies are difficult to conduct in this field and it is important to consider the diversity of contexts while assessing the inclusiveness of public policies; (ii) good assessment and monitoring are regularly based on the availability of reliable and complete data and adequate analytical 3

4 instruments; (iii) impact studies are relevant for measuring the predictable impact of public policies and for detecting eventual problems in its implementation; and (iv) the active involvement of associations from civil society and solidarity networks in the process of assessment and impact study typically result in an improvement of public action. 8. The session examining the issue of The link between research and policymaking confirmed the relevance of the persistent attention that the MOST Programme has allocated to that crucial theme. Three key presentations initiated the session, reflecting varied regional perspectives on the main problems related to the utilization of official data by researchers, the application of social science research by policymakers and the requirements of successful network collaboration between social scientists and policymakers. Two additional presentations initiated the debate on the topic of How to Better Use the Potential of Research. Other participants included experts from UN agencies, researchers from academic institutions and scholarly associations, international networks for international cooperation, NGOs representatives and experts from think tanks that work as intermediaries between research and decision making. During the debate, it was stressed the pertinence of having the MOST programme acting as a catalyser of research- policy linkages not only at the country level but also at the regional level, through collaboration with the relevant regional organizations. It was also considered as crucial the identification of research groups working on social inclusion and developing schemes for connecting their work and bridging it to civil society and policymakers. The examples of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) show how, through intergovernmental collaboration mechanisms, a regional organization can play a major role in the fields of education, health, training, and also how a policy-research nexus can be built. The presentation of the UN Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) illustrated the difficulties to collect data and the necessity to obtain the involvement of the stakeholders. The presentation of the European Union s 7th Framework Programme in Social Inclusion stressed the important role of the links between research and policy-making. The discussion on youth inclusion offered a concrete example on how research can be valuable for political decision. In the future, the clustering of projects will allow concentrating the means to improve a common language among the researchers and to work on the impact of research on policy makers. Finally, it was reiterated that research on social inclusion should invest more on the processes and behaviors and determine new progress in the social inclusion knowledge through an improved understanding of the causes and through political dialogue. Issues addressed during the workshop that can contribute to UNESCO activities focused on MOST s thematic priority on social inclusion 9. The MOST programme should play a role of catalyst not only at the national level but also at the regional level in assisting Member States objectives of designing and implementing comprehensive and effective public policies for social inclusion. 10. Although further analysis would be required for adequately assessing the contribution of the Workshop to the implementation of the current MOST initiative concerning the preparation of a methodology for the assessment of the inclusiveness of social and its 4

5 application in selected country cases in different regions, several topics addressed during the Workshop seems to be valuable for the aforementioned MOST initiative. In succinct and provisional manner, at least four meaningful areas can be identified: a) the existence of diverse conceptualizations of social exclusion/ social inclusion; b) the relevance of contextualizing assessments of the inclusiveness of public policies; c) the importance of considering the assessment of the inclusiveness of public policies as part of larger analytical efforts that also comprises measuring social exclusion/ social inclusion through quantitative and qualitative tools; and d) the crucial role that participatory approaches should play in the assessment of public policies by directly involving social actors, especially excluded persons. 11. The multidimensionality of social inclusion, particularly as regards its various attributes that are essential for establishing access to opportunities and which correspond to UNESCO s fields of competence, indicates that strengthened priority should be given to the transversal coordination of the MOST programme with UNESCO activities in education, culture, information and communication. 12. The current activity of diverse organizations and institutions provides a significant potential for exploring partnerships between the MOST programme and those organizations and institutions on the thematic priority of social inclusion, especially in the area of building research- policy linkages. The cases of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the UN Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), and the European Union s 7th Framework Programme in Social Inclusion are clear examples of the potential for collaboration. In addition, activities of UNESCO Chairs and the work of the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) on social inclusion data, contributes to expand the internal capabilities of UNESCO for strengthening the possibilities of the MOST programme in the context of the aforementioned potential partnerships. Note: Detailed information on the workshop, including the presentations, is available at 5