USAID

FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

THINKING AND WORKING POLITICALLY

THROUGH APPLIED POLITICAL ECONOMY ANALYSIS

A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS

Center of Excellence on Democracy, Human Rights and

Governance
 DCHA BUREAU CENTER OF EXCELLENCE ON DEMOCRACY,
USAID
FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
HUMAN RIGHTS AND GOVERNANCE

THINKING AND WORKING POLITICALLY THROUGH

APPLIED POLITICAL ECONOMY ANALYSIS:
A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS
Authors: Alina Rocha Menocal, Marc Cassidy, Sarah Swift, David Jacobstein,
Corinne Rothblum, Ilona Tservil

INTRODUCTION BOX 1: WHAT IS PEA?

This guidance provides information on how USAID can Have you ever done everything right in a development
think and work in ways that are more politically aware program — followed every technical best practice — but
— an approach known as “thinking and working still missed the mark? When this happens, it often relates
politically” (TWP) 1 — through the use of applied to factors in the context beyond any external
political economy analysis (abbreviated PEA; see Box development actor’s ability to control. PEA is an analytical
1). PEA is a structured approach to examining power approach to help understand the underlying reasons why
dynamics and economic and social forces that influence things work the way they do and identify the
development. Through programming that seeks to incentives and constraints impacting the behavior of
more rigorously respond and adapt to these realities, actors in a relevant system. By helping identify these
Bureau
USAID is working to improve the effectiveness and influences — political, economic, social and cultural —
sustainability of its international development efforts. PEA supports a more politically informed approach to
PEA can help to operationalize the process of thinking working, known as “thinking and working politically”
politically, while USAID’s initiative on Collaborating, (TWP). Through TWP, USAID seeks to better
Learning and Adapting (CLA), described later in this understand the systems where we work and to identify
guide, supports the operationalization of working sustainable, locally generated solutions.
politically. Together, they can add significant value to a Characteristics of PEA include:
mission’s strategy, projects and activities — offering
the potential to address development challenges in all  A concern with the role of formal and informal
sectors. This guide follows the definition of politics as “rules of the game.”
the process of determining “who gets what, when and  An analysis of power and the processes of
how.” contestation and bargaining between economic
and political elites.
USAID is working to build a culture where staff and  A focus on the interests of different groups.
partners continuously explore the context of a given  An analysis of how these interests impact
system, to adapt programming according to realities
development outcomes, at times to the
on the ground and opportunities and barriers that
detriment of broader development objectives.
emerge. This work is not simply about a particular
analytical product; perhaps more importantly, it’s also Sources: DFID 2009; Rocha Menocal 2014
about a mindset. This requires development

1 This term was originally coined by the Thinking and Working Politically Community of Practice. For further information see
the TWP Community of Practice website: https://twpcommunity.org.

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 1

practitioners to undertake a deliberate and continuous process of understanding domestic dynamics, and of
inquiring how our interventions — or prospective interventions — may interact with and influence those
dynamics. USAID’s Applied PEA Framework is thus intended to be used in an iterative and ongoing manner to deepen
understanding of the context, and then reflect upon the implications of this understanding for adjusting and adapting
programs as the context changes or new information becomes available. The framework outlines an analytical approach
(or the “thinking” component in TWP) to help explore a question or puzzle that USAID staff would like to
understand in greater depth. This involves reflection on: foundational influences (such as history or geography); the
impact of immediate events and actors (such as leadership changes or natural disasters); and the institutional
framework (encompassing formal laws and informal practices) that shapes the behaviors and outcomes observed.
Considering all of these dynamics, incentives and interests, PEA investigates where locally driven opportunities for
change may emerge and where constraints to such change may need to be addressed. For example, PEA may guide
an exploration of the kinds of changes that may be possible when new leaders who espouse a commitment to
combatting corruption gain power in a system that has historically been grounded in patronage. Finally, the PEA
framework guides USAID staff to reflect on how insights emerging from the analysis might help inform operational
practice. To clarify terminology used in this Guide, please see the Glossary of key PEA terms and concepts.

PEA can be initiated at any stage in the program cycle and is intended to guide adaptive management of smart,
dynamic, locally owned and sustainable interventions. This guide describes how the use of applied political
economy analysis can support more politically informed ways of thinking and working, with core resource
documents and supplemental reference materials intended to support staff in operationalizing the process most
effectively. This version of the guide updates the 2015 version.

1. WHY PEA AND THINKING AND WORKING POLITICALLY?

Institutions and Politics Matter for Development

One of the most important lessons to emerge among international development practitioners over the past two
decades is that institutions (understood here as the formal and informal “rules of the game” that shape behavior in
economic, social and political life) matter for development, and that behind institutions lie politics and power.
Despite vast support from the international assistance community, increased resourcing and improved formal
policies and systems, many developing countries struggle to adequately provide for the well-being of their people.
From this, we understand that the challenge of development lies less in what needs to be done (whether it’s
building schools or providing vaccinations) and identifying the right “technical fix,” but rather in how it is done (the
processes and actors that facilitate or obstruct change). Getting to the “how” requires a solid understanding of the
politics at work: Development actors need to understand the incentives, and the formal and informal power
structures, in the contexts where they work (Rocha Menocal 2014).

This is potentially a major paradigm shift in international development — an “almost revolution,” as Thomas
Carothers and Diane de Gramont (2013) have called it. But what does it mean to “take politics seriously”? At one
level, thinking and working politically may involve engaging in explicitly political goals, such as elections that are free
and fair. Yet, even when addressing goals that are explicitly political, development actors often approach them
from a technical perspective that is based on idealized, “best practice” models of change. Political and contextual
realities are also critical to effectively advance goals and objectives that are not explicitly political in nature. Finance
of health care, education and market regulation, for instance, are political issues in that reforms will create winners
and losers. Thus, taking politics seriously needs to be about thinking and working in ways that are politically aware
— whether working toward explicitly political objectives (like elections) or traditionally socioeconomic objectives
(like health and education). Table 1 includes further reflections on how politically aware approaches may differ
from traditional practice (Rocha Menocal 2014).

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 2

 TABLE 1: MORE TRADITIONAL VERSUS MORE POLITICALLY AWARE
WAYS OF WORKING

More Traditional Approaches More Politically Aware Approaches

Institutions, power dynamics and incentives that are

Problem Technical problems due to lack of resources
not aligned with reform efforts; problems are
Definition and or technical capacity. Problems are identified
identified, debated and refined by domestic actors in
Identification through an orderly top-down process.
an ongoing process of reflection and learning.

Vision of Change More normative, based on what ought to be. More strategic and pragmatic, based on what exists.

“Best practice” based on a pre-established “Best fit” grounded in contextual realities, more
Changes Sought understandings or blueprints, top-down organic change and “good-enough” reforms based on
diffusion of innovation. what is politically feasible as well as technically sound.

Linear, rational sequencing in fixed annual Iterative cycles of planning, action, reflection, revision
Implementation work plans and results frameworks; fidelity (drawing on local knowledge). Explicit attention to
Approach to plan, with more limited attention to risk, risks, which are managed by making “small bets.”
uncertainty and the potential of failure. Incrementalism based on trial and error.

Provision of expert technical assistance and Facilitating, convening and brokering partnerships and
Ways of
capacity development within limited spaces for collective action based on long-term
Working
timeframes. engagement, with focus on local ownership.

Ways of Rapid cycles of learning and reflection throughout

Periodic formal evaluation.
Learning program implementation.

Traditional donor stakeholders, including Greater attention to stakeholders outside the

government institutions at different levels, traditional comfort zone of donors, including
Key Partners
regulators, service delivery civil society “development entrepreneurs”, local chiefs and power
organizations, etc. brokers, youth leaders, religious leaders, etc.

Process-based indicators, with focus on fostering

Indicators of Easily quantifiable (and usually short-term)
relationships and building trust, as a measure of
Success outputs aimed at higher-level outcomes.
gradual progress toward higher-level outcomes.

From Thinking Politically to Working Politically

The experience of donors over the last 10 years makes clear that taking politics seriously involves more than
strong political economy analyses. Thinking and working politically is intended to be an ongoing process of engaging
with and addressing development challenges. Until very recently, however, international development actors have
been much more focused on the thinking component of TWP, often reducing the process to the production of a
specific output or piece of political economy analysis. Acting on the insights and operational implications that
emerge from such analysis—or the working differently component of TWP—has proven much more challenging.
Working in a more politically aware manner entails asking more searching questions about how programmatic
decisions are taken: what assumptions ground interventions; what activities should be undertaken and why; how
activities are funded, and through which modalities; how progress is measured and risk is assessed; and what kinds
of skills, relationships and networks are needed to deliver progress. Moving away from a focus on reports toward
a culture of ongoing analysis, understanding and action is essential. Among other things, this shift calls for:

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 3

● Developing in-depth knowledge of the context and the multiple dynamics at work;
● Recognizing the complexities of development outcomes, resulting from inherently political processes, in which
multiple contending actors seek to assert their interests in diverse societal arenas;
● Engaging with a diverse array of relevant actors (including those outside donors‘ traditional comfort zones),
identifying areas of shared interests and building coalitions to support shared positive outcomes;
● Focusing on more strategic policy formulation and contextually grounded programming supporting
sustainability, even where this entails compromises with respect to ideal technical solutions or immediate
outputs;
● Embracing (by USAID and other development actors) a role beyond mechanism management, including active
partnership in enhancing policy dialogue and facilitating domestic processes of change; and
● Identifying entry points to support reform efforts, even if long-term or “against the odds.”

At USAID, these changes have significantly advanced through efforts such as the Local Systems Framework which
defines sustainability in terms of a local system; the introduction of Collaborating, Learning and Adapting (CLA) as
a framework for improving development effectiveness; and the mainstreaming of both within the updated Agency
program cycle guidance, as defined through the Automated Directives System (ADS) 201 and associated
supplemental guidance.

2. APPLIED POLITICAL ECONOMY ANALYSIS (PEA) AT USAID

The Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance (DCHA) Center of Excellence on Democracy,
Human Rights and Governance (DRG Center) has developed an applied political economy analysis (PEA)
methodology to operationalize a more politically informed approach to working, and to help USAID interventions
recognize and respond more effectively to contextual realities. The components are explored in further detail
below, while the “Applied PEA Framework” document provides guidance on the kinds of questions that need to be
addressed as part of each component.

FIGURE 1. USAID’S APPLIED PEA FRAMEWORK

PURPOSE

Foundational
Factors
'
ANALYSIS
Rules of
the Game
Here
and Now

Dynamics

IMPLICATIONS

The USAID Applied PEA Framework builds on methodologies developed by other donors (most notably the
Netherlands, the European Union, the United Kingdom and Australia) to better understand the politics and power
structures in a given setting and how those shape development prospects. The framework consists of three main
components: purpose, analysis and implications, as Figure 1 illustrates.

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 4

Purpose

The purpose defines the reasons for conducting a particular PEA. What are the main questions that the PEA seeks
to address, and at what level? The purpose will shape the framing questions, methodology and reporting of findings
and their ultimate intended use.

Analysis

The analysis provides the lens through which the questions outlined in the purpose will be explored. It consists of
three main pillars and a crosscutting consideration of how the factors identified through those pillars are
interacting, or may change in a way that affects the questions identified in the proposed purpose.

● Foundational Factors: These refer to deeply embedded, longer-term national, subnational and international
structures that shape the character and legitimacy of the state, the political system and socio-economic
structures. These tend to be fixed or slow to change, such as geography, borders with conflict-affected
countries, natural resource endowments or class structures.

● Rules of the Game: These are the formal and informal institutions (rules and norms) that shape the quality of
governance and influence actors’ behavior, their incentives, relationships, power dynamics and capacity for
collective action.2 This encompasses both the formal constitutional and legal frameworks, as well as informal
norms, social and cultural traditions that guide behavior in practice and the extent to which state, civil society
and private sector institutions work according to known rules (in predictable ways).

● The Here and Now: This refers to how current events and circumstances influence the objectives and
behavior of key actors /stakeholders, and how they respond to opportunities for or impediments to change.
This could include leadership changes, scandals, or natural disasters.

The final aspect of the analytical process is to draw from the three pillars above to consider:

● Dynamics: This references the dynamics and interactions between foundational factors, rules of the game and
here and now. How do they affect each other, and how do they influence/shape prospects for change? For
instance, what features are in flux and may drive an opening or closing of space for change? What international
or domestic drivers of change are acting on the state, society and markets already? What levels of complexity
and uncertainty are there in any potential changes that are identified? What are the incentives and
disincentives for change; who are the potential champions and spoilers; and what kinds of alliances and
coalitions can be encouraged to overcome resistance to change and promote reform?

Implications

Beyond the analysis described above, it is critical to consider potential implications for USAID engagement. This
includes decisions on the timing, type and level of assistance most likely to maximize returns on investment,
specifically the content of programming (e.g., focus and approach, the relevance and applicability of theories of
change and embedded assumptions); and the selection of modalities (e.g., procurement mechanisms, budgets and
procedures, partners or personnel involved). The analysis directs attention to deep structures and informal
institutions (foundational factors and rules of the game) that shape the incentives and behavior of current actors,

2 Collective action refers to the work of a group to advance a shared interest. In development, one frequently confronts
“collective action problems” — or cases in which many would benefit from an certain action, but the cost of the action makes
it implausible that any individual would undertake it, and where the group faces challenges (such as size, geographic dispersion
or social cleavages) to working together.

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 5

and help explain how governance works and impacts development performance. This can provide new insights into
opportunities and threats faced by development actors. Box 2 outlines how PEA (and TWP more generally) can
surface operational implications for USAID programming.

BOX 2: ASSESSING IMPLICATIONS FROM PEA ANALYSIS: QUESTIONS THAT APPLIED

PEA AND ONGOING TWP CAN HELP YOUR MISSION ADDRESS
● How do the political economy dynamics of a given country, sector, or problem shape opportunities and
challenges for development?
● What is the role and influence of USAID (and the U.S. Government more broadly) in a setting? Given this,
how is USAID positioned to respond to identified opportunities and constraints?
● What contextual factors may pose risks to current or potential programs and activities?
● Are current programmatic objectives, partners, approaches, indicators and expected outcomes appropriate
and reasonable given the local political economy?

While important throughout the process, the engagement of USAID staff in deriving implications relevant to their own
programming is critical. Experience indicates that the most relevant and useful implications are identified when USAID
staff—who know the type of information they need to inform programming—drive the process. While this is an argument
for conducting PEA entirely with USAID staff, external consultants can still play a supporting role. See Section 4 for more
detail on how to conduct a PEA and how to involve USAID staff in the process.

3. WHEN TO CONDUCT A PEA

The USAID PEA Framework is designed for use at any stage of the USAID program cycle: This includes, for
example, when designing a new country strategy or a new sector
program or project, or when seeking additional information about a BOX 3: KEY PEA TEAM
particular development challenge, or when there is a desire to test CAPACITIES AND ASSETS
assumptions undergirding the theory of change of a given  Experience with applied PEA
intervention. As such, a PEA can be conducted at different levels of
 Strong network of key stakeholder
analysis:
in the sector (e.g., from a Foreign
Service national)
1. Country Level: To investigate the political economy factors
 Local subject matter expertise (e.g.,
driving development progress. At this level, PEA most often
from a local researcher)
informs or updates broad strategic planning efforts.
 Expertise from key mission technical
2. Sector level: To consider the key actors, incentives, sectors and embassy staff
relationships and resources at play within a given sector, such as  Logistical support
water, health, education, environment, climate change, justice,  DRG technical knowledge
etc. Sector-level PEAs inform strategies, or come into play prior
 Writing capacity appropriate to
to new or large investments in the sector.
desired deliverables
3. Problem or issue level: To analyze the forces that create a
specific developmental or governance challenge. Examples include fisheries management, wildlife trafficking,
HIV/AIDS, environmental impact assessments and public service reform. Problem/issue-level PEAs often focus on
the project/activity level and can be undertaken at the design or implementation stage.

“PEA Levels of Analysis” provides greater detail on these levels of analysis and their advantages and limitations. In
the end, the best level to focus on will depend on the intended purpose of a given PEA, the kinds of questions it
seeks to address and when within the program cycle strategic PEA inputs or programmatic adjustments are sought.

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 6

See also the “Applied PEA Framework” for guidance on the kinds of questions that can be asked at different levels
of analysis. As this guide has emphasized, applying PEA is not about producing a single report or output at a given
point in a program cycle. When conducting an applied PEA study for the first time, the goal is to help the mission
begin a regular exploration of development challenges from a more politically aware perspective, build this
perspective into ongoing learning and adaptation and offer new ideas to consider in adjusting a program to achieve
deeper or more sustainable results. The processes of understanding political dynamics, adjusting and tailoring
USAID practice accordingly, and learning and adapting are intended to be ongoing. Many missions have found that
an initial study that involves their team in field research and builds a shared understanding of a particular
development challenge can be of critical support to their ongoing efforts to think and work politically. Section 4
outlines the process for this initial study.

4. GETTING STARTED: CONDUCTING A BASELINE PEA STUDY

The applied PEA process begins with a mission team’s decision that they need to pursue a deeper understanding of
a development challenge — whether to inform strategic planning, a sector strategy, a project or activity design or a
specific issue that emerges in implementation. (Please also refer to “Pre-PEA Checklist”, highlighting issues and
questions a mission should keep in mind to
decide whether or not to embark on a PEA
BOX 4: RESOURCES REQUIRED
process.) Within the PEA framework, this is FOR A BASELINE PEA STUDY
framed as the purpose of the research, as
described above. A mission will then take the The time required for a baseline PEA depends on the nature
lead in writing a statement of work (SOW) of the topic(s) being addressed, the depth and rigor of the
reflecting this purpose, the questions to be research and the size and capabilities of the team, including
addressed, the methodology, the roles of their level of initial knowledge of the question. The overall
team members and the skill sets required to resource commitment can vary greatly depending on different
guide identification and recruitment of team models, and should reflect the intention for a PEA to launch
members, whether internal or external. an ongoing process, to reflect on rapidly changing dynamics.
(Supplemental reference materials include PEA costs include wages, travel, lodging, meals and
sample SOWs for PEA studies). Mission communications for researchers and logisticians, in addition to
engagement and leadership are essential mission staff time. While PEA leads are frequently ex-pats,
throughout the PEA process; although Box 3 where the capacity exists, working with a local PEA lead can
provides an illustrative list of the skill sets be an excellent lower-cost option. Examples of scopes of
required to conduct a PEA study, such a work with indicated level of effort (LOE) are available in the
“dream team” of expertise is not always Guide’s supplemental reference materials.
possible. The research team must, however,
include skills in applied PEA research, subject matter technical expertise, knowledge and access to relevant local
contacts and logistical support. See Box 4 for a general description of resources required for PEA baseline study.

A thorough literature review related to the questions under study is a critical component of an effective PEA
process. Synthesizing existing knowledge in a brief inception report ensures that team members have the basic
minimum knowledge, and identifies knowledge gaps for further research. Further guidance on conducting a
literature review is in the supplemental references to this document.

At the outset of fieldwork, the research team and key knowledgeable stakeholders should come together for a
workshop spanning one to three days to familiarize all participants with the methodology, finalize research questions,
develop an interview guide and plan for fieldwork — including, critically, team logistics. Fieldwork is likely to take
approximately two weeks, but could be shorter or longer depending on the scope and depth of the inquiry and the
resources available. The research question(s) should guide decisions about stakeholders to interview, with an ongoing
effort to incorporate new perspectives that collectively provide a balanced view of interests impacting a particular

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 7

development challenge. Throughout data collection, the team must analyze the incentives (implicit and explicit)
influencing the behavior of key actors. To build confidence in the data, the research team should meet regularly to
compare notes or “triangulate” information, and consider approaches (including follow-up meetings) to address areas
of disagreement. Different interpretations of data should be noted and recorded, as they may inform focal areas for
further learning over time.

BOX 5: STEPS OF AN APPLIED PEA STUDY

PEA Step Time Required Staff Member

1) Identify purpose and prepare a detailed 12 – 8 weeks prior to field
Mission lead
statement of work. research
2) Confirm PEA team: mission staff,
USAID/Washington support, local experts, 8 – 6 weeks prior to field research Mission PEA team
logistical and support staff.
3) Conduct a literature review with initial
6 – 4 weeks prior to field research PEA team
analysis.
4) Produce initial draft agenda and proposed One -two weeks prior to field
PEA team
research questions/interview guide. research
5) Hold an applied PEA workshop in country Team member
1 – 3 days before field research
to finalize research agenda and questions. experienced with PEA
6) Conduct the field research. 2 weeks PEA team
7) Analyze and synthesize data. 2 days PEA team
After the conclusions of field
8) Brief mission and sector leadership on
research and prior to departure of PEA team
preliminary findings and discuss implications.
international team members
2 – 3 weeks following field
9) Report on preliminary baseline findings. PEA team
research
4 – 6 weeks following field
10) Prepare final report. PEA team
research
11) Consider implications and further learning. Ongoing Mission staff

Upon completion of field research, the team should meet to discuss findings, debriefing(s) (with the mission and
other stakeholders) and reporting. The latter can take multiple forms (standard report, PowerPoint, bulleted
findings, etc.) but should reflect the question(s), the strategic or programmatic need and the PEA framework. It
should address where learning from the PEA may inform these processes over time. Whatever the form of output,
it should be concise and clear to encourage reading and application. Reporting should be shared with key people in
the mission to serve as a baseline record for ongoing iterative PEA processes, to be discussed further below. Box
5 provides a brief outline of the steps and effort involved in conducting a baseline PEA study. Please see “The
Applied PEA Baseline Assessment Process” for a detailed description.

The ultimate strength of the PEA process depends heavily on the level of engagement of the USAID staff
commissioning the study, whose guidance will make the implications emerging from a particular study actionable or
practical. Ideally, these staff will assume a degree of leadership in the initial scoping workshop and participate in the
research team. By doing so, they learn directly about actors and interests that affect the potential for reform and
broaden their networks to update this understanding in the future. Second best, but far from optimal, they would
be involved in PEA planning and attend PEA out-brief meetings to discuss findings. Past experience with PEAs has
demonstrated that ultimate uptake of PEA findings in the planning, design or modification of development
interventions depends heavily on the extent to which USAID mission staffs understand and own the PEA research
process. While true of many assessment frameworks, it is especially important given that programming from PEA

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 8

findings can force a reconsideration of previous assumptions. Commitment to mission ownership of the process
and findings is a key aspect of planning to conduct an applied PEA.

5. INSTITUTIONALIZING PEA: RELATIONSHIP WITH CLA

AND ADAPTIVE
MANAGEMENT
While conducting a PEA can help USAID staff gain BOX 6: COLLABORATING, LEARNING
AND ADAPTING (CLA)
a deeper appreciation of the country, sector or
problem context in which they will make decisions USAID’s CLA is a process of strategic collaboration,
on how to invest USAID funds, it is just the continuous learning and adaptive management. CLA is
beginning of the process of thinking and working designed to facilitate adaptive management to ensure
politically. Working politically requires translating that progress toward development objectives is guided
insights from the PEA into their implications for by continuous learning, through analysis of a wide variety
USAID support, and adapting programs of information sources and knowledge. The intent is to
accordingly through an ongoing process of testing continuously assess the causal pathway to desired
and learning. USAID actively supports these more outcomes and adjust activities as necessary to yield the
flexible and adaptive ways of working through most effective course of action.
Collaborating, Learning and Adapting, detailed in Box
Given the similar methods and goals of PEA and CLA,
6 (right).
their combined use can enhance program effectiveness.
Even when an initial baseline PEA helps answer CLA can enhance iterative PEA by offering an ongoing
the questions under study, it is only a snapshot of monitoring, evaluation and learning system that Mission
a given moment. Changes in the operating and implementing partner staff can use simultaneously to
environment can — and often do — impact a operationalize thinking and working politically. This can
project or activity’s basic assumptions, theory of be achieved through indicator monitoring and analysis to
change and the efficacy of project/activity design investigate the suitability of indicators over time in
and technical approach. Moreover, as activities measuring outcomes. It can also be achieved through
are implemented, learning naturally emerges from learning agendas that focus on power relations and
other political economy dynamics.
challenges and successes. Planning systematically
to collect, organize, document and analyze a Iterative PEA can inform CLA processes through
stream of (relatively) real-time information to research on issues relevant to programs and the
monitor a project or activity’s progress — as convening of issue-based forums with partners to discuss
well as contextual factors that are likely to the possible strategies to achieve certain program
impact future progress — can help address outcomes. These activities are designed to keep
challenges more immediately and support partners aware and informed on key and unexpected
programmatic success. Working politically calls socio-economic and political developments and are
for a strong collaborative relationship between considered highly significant to achieving desired
key USAID mission staff and implementing
outcomes.
partners. See Box 7 for some key ingredients to
support working politically.

How can USAID staff engage in applied PEA and

TWP as an ongoing and iterative process that does not begin and end with a single study? One option is to
conduct formal PEAs at various time intervals. While it offers a robust update of the understandings of the political
economy around particular issues, this kind of effort and engagement may not always be possible or desirable given
time constraints and other limited resources. A less onerous alternative is to carry out a simpler form of analysis

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 9

on a more regular basis. One example of this is the Everyday Political Analysis (EPA) tool developed by the
Developmental Leadership Program (Hudson,
Marquette and Waldock 2016), which is explicitly
BOX 7: INGREDIENTS TO SUPPORT
intended as a “practitioner-friendly” tool. Another
POLITICALLY INFORMED
light-touch strategy to keep up with shifting political
PROGRAMMING
realities is the “one-hour conversation” approach
Programming in a politically aware manner developed by the Effective States and Inclusive
incorporates ongoing learning related to relevant Development (ESID) Research Center to explore
political economy factors, along with headline questions related to areas of interest.
procurement instruments that enable sufficient
flexibility to respond to findings from this analysis. Ultimately, TWP — involving both PEA concepts and
CLA approaches — calls for a different relationship
Likewise, key USAID mission and implementing between USAID and the implementer. USAID staff
partner staff must: recognize the value of PEA must incentivize partners to continue learning about
processes; have the skills required to actively the environment, and to share that information in a
engage in learning, analysis and adaptive way that supports shifts in programming as possible and
management; and be incentivized to prioritize necessary. For the implementer, this means using public
these functions, including within job descriptions. events, training workshops, embedded technical
assistance, monitoring and evaluation data collection,
The resources required to maintain sufficient
etc., to gain a deeper understanding of the prospects
knowledge of the political economy vary. It may
for change and implications for the program outcomes.
require an investment in development of
analytical skills and allocation of time to engage
Key partner staff trained in PEA can compile and
and learn from stakeholders. Where this is
analyze issues affecting programing to be shared and
impractical, staff can work with partners and
discussed with key mission counterparts on a regular
implementers to supplement their internal
basis. This both builds understanding of the contextual
knowledge and analysis.
variations impacting targeted project/activity results
and supports a renewed relationship between USAID
and partners. More precisely, this can be achieved through the use of context indicators, updates on key PEA
questions/issues in quarterly reports, partners' meetings, annual reports, work planning and portfolio reviews.

Applied PEA represents an ongoing process of reflection and adaptation as contextual realities evolve or are better
understood and as lessons emerge about how interventions could be adjusted to make them more responsive to
conditions on the ground. In other words, applied PEA enables a process of thinking in a more politically attuned manner
and adapting our work in response. Since its introduction in 2015, USAID’s Applied PEA Guide has supported the
development of more contextually grounded programming in a range of sectors and every region where the
Agency operates. With the support of ongoing reforms to promote greater adaptability, flexibility and learning in
the way USAID works, including CLA and ADS 201, prospects are strong for continued progress around thinking
and working politically in the coming years.

For additional core resources and supplemental reference materials, please see:
https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/thinking-and-working-politically-twp-through-applied-political-
economy-analysis-pea-guide
For more information or to inquire about a PEA for your Mission or activity,
contact the Cross-Sectoral Programs Division at dcha.drg.cspmaillist@usaid.gov.

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 10

CORE RESOURCES

PEA Framework: Guidance on Questions for Analysis at the Country, Sector and Issue/Problem
Levels

The Applied PEA Baseline Assessment Process

PEA Levels of Analysis

Glossary

Pre-PEA Checklist for Missions

TWP THROUGH PEA: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS APRIL 2018 / PAGE 11