Services
Policy, governance and systems analysis
We look at why a sound policy isn’t working. We map who decides, who has to act, and where things stall between federal, state and local levels.
Questions this answers
- Why is this policy not reaching people?
- Who decides, and who has to act?
- Where does implementation stall, and what would unblock it?
The kinds of policy and systems work we run
Most engagements combine two or three of these.
Policy and legal review
Reading the statutory law, and where relevant the customary and religious law, that actually governs an issue, not only the policy document that describes it.
Political economy analysis
Looking past the formal rules to the interests and incentives that decide whether they are followed.
Stakeholder and institutional mapping
Who has a formal role, who has real influence, and where the two do not match.
Federal, state and local coordination assessments
Where a policy agreed nationally has to pass through three levels of government to reach anyone, and where it stalls between them.
Assessment of how far states have adopted and enforce national laws
A national law is not a state law until a state assembly passes it and a governor assents. We check how far that has actually happened.
Analysis for sector strategies and programmes
Applying the same tools to a specific sector strategy or programme design, not only to a whole policy area.
How we analyse policy and systems
The approach changes what the analysis can tell you. We state ours in every proposal, adapted from a good-practice framework the World Bank wrote for its own teams.
Define the problem, not the reform.
We start from what is actually going wrong, in specific terms, before anyone proposes what to change.
Map who decides and who has to act.
The governance and institutional arrangements around the problem, not just the org chart.
Look at the incentives, not only the rules.
Why an actor with the formal power to act might not use it, and what would change that.
State what would have to change.
Options for action, not just a diagnosis, so the analysis can actually be used.
The three steps a problem-driven analysis follows
Adapted from the World Bank’s problem-driven governance and political economy framework, published in 2009 as good practice for its own teams (Fritz, Kaiser and Levy).
Define the problem
What is actually going wrong, described specifically enough to investigate, not as a general complaint.
Examine the governance and institutional arrangements
The formal rules, organisations and processes that are meant to govern the issue.
Examine the political economy drivers
The interests, incentives and power relations that explain why the formal arrangements are, or are not, followed.
What the gap between federal and state can look like
Published studyNigeria’s Child’s Rights Act was passed nationally in 2003, but children’s rights in Nigeria are governed at state level: each state assembly has to pass its own version, and its governor has to assent, before it applies there. In late 2022 the federal government reported that 34 of the 36 states had done so, nearly two decades after the national Act. In the states that held out longest, legislators objected to specific provisions, such as setting 18 as the minimum age of marriage. A sound national law, and state-level reasons it does not apply: that is the gap a policy analysis looks for.
Reading a stakeholder and institutional map
Illustrative| Actor | Formal role | Real influence |
|---|---|---|
| Example state ministry | Approves the implementing guidelines and releases funds | High: no step can start without its sign-off |
| Example local government chairman | No formal role in this policy | High: budget releases to facilities pass through this office informally |
| Example traditional ruler | No formal role | High: community uptake depends on public endorsement |
The formal role and the real influence do not match for two of these three actors. A stakeholder map that only lists formal roles would miss exactly the actors who determine whether the policy actually works.
Questions worth asking a policy and systems provider
We built five questions from the World Bank’s problem-driven approach, and we answer all five in every proposal.
Is the problem defined specifically enough to investigate?
Stated in the proposal in concrete terms, not as a general complaint about implementation.
Does the analysis cover the informal influence, not just the formal roles?
A stakeholder map that stops at an org chart is not political economy analysis.
Where exactly does implementation stall?
Named as a specific point — a level of government, an office, a step — not a general statement that “capacity is low”.
Does the analysis include customary and religious law where it governs the issue?
Stated explicitly where it applies, not assumed to be covered by statutory law alone.
Will the analysis take a position on the policy itself?
No. We report what the evidence shows about why something is or is not working, and leave the policy choice to you.
What you receive
An analysis with options for action, and a map of the actors involved.
The diagnosis
Where implementation actually stalls, and why, in specific terms.
The actor map
Formal roles and real influence, so you know who to engage, not only who to inform.
Options for action
What could unblock it, with what each option would require.
Questions people ask about policy and systems analysis specifically
What’s the difference between policy analysis and political economy analysis?
Policy analysis looks at what a policy says and whether it is well designed. Political economy analysis looks at why it is, or is not, followed in practice — the interests and incentives behind the formal rules.
Can you work across statutory, customary and religious law?
Yes, where an issue is actually governed by more than one, which is common in Nigeria. We say plainly which sources of law apply and where they may conflict.
Why does a well-designed policy sometimes fail to reach people?
Often because it depends on an actor, at some level of government, who lacks either the capacity or the incentive to implement it, and the policy document does not say so.
Will you take a position on our policy?
No. We report what the evidence shows about why something is or is not working, and where a question is contested we show the range of views rather than choosing one.
Trying to work out why a policy isn’t landing?
Tell us the policy and what you have observed. We will say what kind of analysis would explain it, and what it would take to find out.