9.3 Problem analysis

Developing a reliable base of information and evidence is crucial to advocacy. Time constraints and multiple demands on programme managers may limit the capacity for information gathering and analysis, especially in the early days of a response. Gathering policy-related information through pre-emergency programming activities and surveys and through engagement with partners can be a useful starting point, and can be supplemented with rapid assessment data (see guidelines in the Chapter on Assessment), including Rapid Gender Analysis

Relevant information for problem analysis may be gathered from crisis affected people, aid recipients, local partners, external experts, government sources, other NGOs, the UN, academia, private sector actors and the media. In all cases, CARE must always ensure not to expose aid recipients or CARE and partners’ staff to security risks in the process.

It is critical to assess and verify all information for accuracy and bias and to rely on sources that are the most trustworthy, legitimate and verifiable – including how these sources are perceived by the policymakers and power holders we are trying to influence. Using a diverse set of sources helps to triangulate and provide a balanced picture. Because marginalised or vulnerable groups experience policy impacts in distinct and often harsher ways, the collection and analysis of information and evidence must identify and take into account the specific needs of women, ethnic and religious minorities, children and others (see the Chapter on Gender). Data collected and used should be sex-, age-, and diversity-disaggregated whenever possible.

Checklist

• What are causes of the problem and who is most affected by it? This helps to determine whether advocacy is an appropriate response to the problem. Baseline assessments and surveys, interviews with local actors and diverse crisis affected, and eyewitness accounts are all common approaches to gather humanitarian information, while tools such as problem tree analyses can be useful to analyse information (see Chapter on Assessment, and Annex 11.6 Problem Tree Analysis).
• Who are the key actors and institutions that make or influence policy decisions on this issue? This involves identifying both the institutions and the actual individuals who directly make and implement policies, as well as those who can (indirectly) influence decision-makers and determine their positions on relevant policies and actions, their degree of influence, their resources, and their (political or economic) interests (see Annex 11.7 Stakeholder Map and Analysis Tool).
• What is the social and political context, often disrupted after an emergency? This includes identifying the distribution of political power among key actors – including civil society, understanding the formal and informal policymaking processes and determining the extent of public participation in decision-making on the given issue (that is, political or social restrictions on public dialogue). This analysis must also take into account the impact of local and national events such as elections, ongoing conflict (and the role, motivation and influence of non-state armed groups), major policy changes and economic trends (see Annex 11.4 CARE’s Benefit-Harm Analysis Tool, pp. 23-24; and Chapter on Conflict sensitivity).
• What are the options for policy change? After analysing the problem’s causes, effects, key actors and policy context, it may be possible to develop recommendations for policy solutions or changes necessary to address the problem.
• What are the changes required for CARE and partners’ advocacy to have a positive outcome or impact?
• What advocacy products or initiatives are being undertaken by others / allies that CARE and partners could join or contribute to?