Evidence on the Solution
Once you’ve established the nature, extent and overall salience of the issue you want to tackle, you must focus on your proposed solution. You need to demonstrate why what you’re asking decision-makers to do is the way forward. No matter how brilliant your proposed solution, you need to prove to decision-makers that it might actually work. In the past, policy decisions were often taken on the basis of anecdotal evidence and ideology, or simply at random. Today policymaking tends be more informed. Most countries now prepare impact assessment studies on their policy initiatives. These documents provide a detailed and systematic appraisal of the potential impacts of a new policy initiative in order to assess whether it will have the desired effect and whether bringing about some good in one field may inflict proportionally greater damage in another.
These studies generally compare different solutions in order to identify the one that works best. The idea is to ensure that regulation will enhance society’s overall wellbeing. In particular, a growing number of countries, including the United States, Japan and most European countries, establish whether a proposed action will bring in more benefits than costs (cost-benefit analysis) before they enact it. This approach converts all the costs and benefits of your proposed solution into a monetary metric and then measures the two. How can you define a ‘benefit to society’ and defend it?
To be able to subject your solution to a cost-benefit analysis, you need to collect data proving the effectiveness of your solution when compared with the status quo and/or other solutions. From a health perspective, is it more effective to ban indoor smoking, or to levy a tobacco tax? From an environmental perspective, is it more effective to ban coal plants or fracking? Can you weigh up the health and environmental harm caused by coal combustion fumes with the potential fall in GDP caused by the difficulty in replacing coal as a power source?
Generally, it is more difficult to gather evidence supporting your proposed action – be it a ban, a restriction or total opposition to an initiative – than to prove the existence of the underlying issue you want to address. This is for a multitude of reasons. Firstly, there is generally more evidence available about the underlying problem (smoking) than about its possible solutions (taxation increase, indoor ban, warnings). These solutions, including yours, tend to be either untried or context-specific (an indoor smoking ban worked somewhere else, but will it also work in my region/country?).
Secondly, once the ‘right evidence’ has been collected to substantiate and identify the issue at stake (fracking may cause environmental damage), you still have to translate that research into policy and effective action (how to mitigate that damage). Hence the need to show that your proposed solution will indeed prove effective in tackling the problem (to enable fracking only when it does not lead to water pollution). Yet many actions can do both good and harm, and the potential for both may be unevenly distributed in the population. So it is often necessary to assess the overall balance between risks and benefits, as well as how these are distributed among different members of the population. In relation to our fracking example, while the benefits of fracking may outweigh the costs for the average citizen, it poses significant risks for those who live close to fracking sites given the significant level of contamination of both the soil and the air. A further problem is whether an intervention that is effective in a research setting will prove equally effective in a real-world context. This may involve complex mathematical and statistical modelling and, in the case of behavioural-informed intervention,10 randomised control trials.11
Thirdly, given that many policy interventions involve lots of separate measures, it is often difficult to pinpoint the impact of a single one. What if tobacco taxes are the real reason that people are giving up smoking, rather than bans on lighting up indoors?
In sum, the numerous factors at stake in the underlying problem you want to tackle, the interdisciplinary character of the evidence available and the difficulty in proving the individual effectiveness of different policy options are some of the major challenges for any citizen lobbying campaign.
TIP 5 – Be Data-Driven, Even Without Data
It is not always possible to put a figure on the benefits and costs of your proposed action. As benefits tend to be more difficult to quantify than costs (because, as opposed to costs, they belong to the unknown), you might find yourself up against the wall. This should not, however, prevent you from showing decision-makers the qualitative data in your proposal: identifying who would bear the costs, who would benefit and why. This will allow policymakers and their aides to understand whether your concept is achievable. They might even do the maths themselves!
Evidence on the Precedents
Has anyone already tried to engage with your issue (or a similar one) in the past? You might be surprised by how many previous attempts have been made, perhaps in other parts of the world, at addressing your issue. But great minds think alike, right?
Looking for precedents is key for citizen lobbying, because we don’t have unlimited resources. And in the process of finding out about previous initiatives, you may find out why they failed. Even if you can dig out just one prior attempt, campaign or mere analysis of your issue, it might prove a real treasure trove of information. Here are some of the questions that should drive your hunt for precedents:
Who sponsored (and/or supported) the initiative?
How long ago?
What exactly was proposed?
Why did it fail?
Who opposed the idea and on what grounds?
For instance, I recently discovered that in Italy more than 58 bills have been lodged to regulate professional lobbying. Yet none have made it through. Getting hold of those bills might be key to understand the challenges ahead for an action aimed at promoting the regulation of professional lobbying in Italy.
During your research you might come across countries or regions that have already adopted your solution, but perhaps in a different way. This set of precedents may expand your understanding of both the issue you want to tackle and its possible solutions. Successful precedents will show what is and isn’t possible within a given context. Once more, your research efforts come with a bonus: while searching for precedents, you are likely to bump into key people who have been involved in your issue. These people are probably as passionate about the issue as you are, and may be keen to help you pass or oppose similar policies or actions in your territory. And, as veteran campaigners on the issue, they might share with you the major difficulties and successes and tell you how the policy was implemented (Step 10). Often neglected, this step of any lobbying action demands a great deal of attention, as it may determine whether your work will be worth the effort. People who were involved in previous campaigns can even tell you what they would do differently and thereby save you from a few mistakes.
TIP 6 – Precedents Matter
Looking for previous attempts at solving your issue may prove a treasure trove. You enrich your data collection when it comes to defining the extent and nature of the problem, and you back up your proposed solution. You uncover individuals and organisations who have worked on the issue – or would like to do so. You learn from their successes and past mistakes. Finally, reaching out puts the plausibility of your plans to the test again.
Factsheet
All the information that you’ve gathered through your research must first be summed up in a background document (Activity 3). This document is generally several pages long and contains an appendix citing the many studies, figures and data that you have gathered.
The background file, being an internal document, should not be circulated beyond the core team. It must then be distilled into a single two-sided sheet for external use, called the factsheet (or ‘one-pager’). This shorter document will provide a succinct summary of everything you have learned about your issue and why it supports your solution. It will be used to persuade everyone who will be meeting to discuss your issue – decision-makers, their as
sistants, journalists, friends or potential funders. The reader must be able to understand quickly what the issue is about and how you propose to address it.
The most important items to include in the factsheet are:
Title of the action (which is often replaced by the branding – Step 7)
A brief blurb stating the issue
Facts underlying the nature and extent of the issue (to be footnoted)
A story giving a face to your issue (include an image and/or quote) (Tip 4)
A brief blurb of your proposed solution
Facts supporting the effectiveness of your solution (to be footnoted)
A brief presentation of the avenue(s) that you intend to follow and related tactics (Step 4) (Tip 5)
A list of groups and organisations who support your action (Step 5)
The name and contact information of one of your core group members whose job it is to interact with the public (generally she/he is the communications officer)
The campaign website address
The quality and depth of your research will determine how seriously decision-makers, the media and the public will take you. The process of gathering and sometimes producing this information is key to the success of your citizen lobbying action. It will inform virtually all the subsequent steps, and be constantly updated.
TIP 7 – Appearance Matters: Make the Factsheet Slick!
The factsheet must speak for your campaign. It must convey your passion about the problem and testify to the plausibility of your solution. Make sure you produce a neat, catchy and succinct document. It will need a clear heading and/or branding, a neat font in a legible size and bullet points as well as box-outs. Don’t hesitate to ask a (pro bono) graphic designer to transform your Word document into an appealing two-sided sheet capable of drawing attention to your cause.
STEP 3: Map Your Lobbying Environment
Your problem does not exist in a vacuum. You need to have a grasp of the complex web of different political, economic and social dynamics that relate to your issue. To do so, before designing your lobbying plan (aimed at selling your big idea), you must draw up a map identifying the major actors who have some stake in what you want to change. In so doing you must keep in mind both the background document and the factsheet. By providing context, these documents will help you pinpoint the major actors.
The map is a working tool allowing you to identify:
the lobbying target – the relevant policymakers
your allies – actors you can work, build and share resources with
your supporters – people you want on your side
your opponents – people who disagree with you and may resist and oppose change
the influencers – other people who exert influence on your target
List Your Stakeholders
The target of your action is your major stakeholder. This is the individual or group with the power to make the change you advocate. In today’s society, it is rare to find a situation in which power is held by one individual. Generally, multiple people will exercise influence on your target, including your supporters, potential allies and opponents. ‘Key influencers’ or secondary targets, such as the media, celebrities and other opinion leaders, are really important too. You need to be aware of who all these people are.
Going back to our story of the Alcohol Marketing Restrictions (page 114), the potential stakeholders may be listed like this:
Potential stakeholders
Health community: health organisations and grassroots health activists
National politics: the government, ministers, MPs, devolved nations’ representatives and assemblies/national parliaments, government departments
Local politicians: local mayor, councillors, leader of the council and the unelected council executive
Communities: community leaders, faith leaders, local charities and community groups, school governors, the local Police and Crime Commissioner and police officials
Prominent influencers: celebrities and high-profile individuals, academics, national charities and think tanks
Businesses: local businesses and employers, national and multinational corporations
This list includes those who benefit from the status quo, those who would benefit from the change and groups that might be affected – even if we don’t yet know how each group would benefit or lose out.
Identifying whom to lobby is just as important as deciding the issue itself. You need to know everyone who has the power to influence your cause and help make a change. But how do you decide whom to talk to? The decision generally depends on your overall lobbying and communication plans. Should it be the elected politicians, the career civil servants or the political appointees who are working the issue and may have sway?
You should gather information about their personal background and their role in relation to the issue – who is responsible for drafting a policy proposal? Who manages the team promoting an initiative? If you target an elected official, you should find a way to involve at least one of her constituents. Their involvement means she is more likely to listen to your plea.
ACTIVITY 5 – Identify Lobbying Target(s)
List all the major stakeholders in relation to your battle. In particular, list the people who have the power to make the change you want to see and the individuals/groups who can influence them.
TIP 8 – Stakeholder Profiling
When identifying stakeholders, it can be useful to profile each one. You may want to model the profile on the following criteria:
mission (social justice, women’s rights, etc.);
funding (industry funded, foundation, member fees, etc.);
demographics (age, race, gender, ethnicity, religion, education);
stance (how do they perceive the issue? Are they passive or proactive?);
geography (local, national, international; urban or rural);
media habits (list the media most used by that organisation).
This profiling will be very useful when you come to devise the lobbying plan (Step 4), build a coalition (Step 5) and create the communication plan (Step 7).
Map Your Stakeholders, Allies and Opponents
Within each of these categories of people – decision-makers, supporters and opponents – there might be great diversity. In my alcohol marketing action, both the decision-makers and public health advocates support change. But they do it with varying intensity and, as a result, they carry different weight in the campaign. So you need to unpack and visualise their exact position on the issue – which you can do by mapping them on a power matrix. This graph allows you to visualise how power is distributed and thus will help you decide on whom to focus your energy.
Draw a horizontal and a vertical axis on a large sheet of paper. Map the list of stakeholders you have identified as follows:
© Alberto Alemanno
The vertical axis indicates individuals’ or groups’ level of influence on your path to achieving your campaign goal, from most influential (top) to least influential (bottom). The horizontal axis indicates whether they are likely to oppose (left) or support (right) your action. This map captures each stake-holder’s level of support and level of influence in the context of your campaign.
Your lobbying target will generally stand in the upper boxes of this matrix, but, depending on their stance towards your proposed change, they might be on the left quadrant (oppose) or the right (support). Your supporters and allies stand on the right side of the matrix, and will be in the upper or lower quadrant depending on their influence.
There are three important caveats. Firstly, while it is usually easy to find out what each actor stands for, sometimes it is not. In these circumstances, you may want to map them as neutral. To do so, you might place that stakeholder in the middle of the oppose-support horizontal axis, and then situate them along the vertical axis (depending on their influence/power). In this case, you may want to ensure that this person or organisation does not step forward and l
ean left in response to your campaign.
Secondly, be aware that none of your stakeholders is a monolith. This is because your interlocutor may not be an individual with a singular opinion but rather an organisation with a multitude of contrasting opinions. As a result, within any government (your lobbying target) you might get different reactions, some friendlier than others. The same applies to an NPO that might agree to team up with you. To remedy this risk of internal fragmentation within a given interlocutor, you may want to understand not only the formal organisation but also the informal one.12 This is the network of relationships that the internal actors form across functions and divisions to accomplish tasks quickly or to slow them down.
Thirdly, opponents are not a given. Indeed, you should not always assume that your action will face major opposition. Sometimes your issue may attract general empathy. Who doesn’t want to help disabled people, or take action against paedophiles? Yet you still have to map all the stakeholders to identify those you will need to prompt to act.
ACTIVITY 6 – Draw a Power Map
Copy the power map onto a piece of paper. Place all the actors you have previously listed onto the map: lobbying target(s), supporters (and potential allies), opponents, influencers.
Lobbying for Change Page 12