communicating evidence and policy to different audiences ... filepolicy to different audiences:...

Communicating evidence and policy to different audiences: Presenting inconvenient truth

Gabriel Bianchi - Slovak Academy of Sciences

Laura Smillie – JRC

JRC Summer School 2017 - Senec, Slovakia

"Hello"

Communicating factual evidence that impacts

belief systems: Strategies for success

Laura

The 5 foundations of morality (Haidt, 2012)

• 1. Care / Harm

• 2. Fairness / Cheating

• 3. Loyalty / Betrayal

• 4. Authority / Subversion

• 5. Sanctity / Degradation

The 5 big personality traits

• 1. Openness to experience

• 2. Agreeableness

• 3. Conscientiousness

• 4. Extraversion

• 5. Neuroticism

Frames & Emotions 1. 2 most common perceived threats:

2. Economic – material interest & economic well-being

3. Cultural – distinctive social & cultural identity

4. 4 most common news fames for migration across EU:

5. Emancipation - society, diversity, respect, dialogue, and participation

6. Multicultural - participation, integration, and emancipation

7. Assimilation - integration, social cohesion, unity, and naturalization

8. Victimisation - inequality, disadvantage, foreigner, and victim

Emotional response to Positive Framing Emotional response to Negative Framing

Contentment Intolerance

Compassion Authoritarianism

Enthusiasm Pessimism

Hope Vigilance

Vicious circle

• - Threats are most likely to cause attitudinal and behavioural change when framed negatively

• - Negative framing increases negative perceptions

• - Asymmetrical polarisation

- Non-issue for supporters of migration

- Political initiative tends to falls to opponents

Public / Political discourse hugely

influenced by public opinion

Recommendations

• 1. Build an open, balanced & comprehensive

• migration discourse

• 2. De-politicise the debate & address the

areas of concern

• 3. Work together with the media to support balanced reporting

• 4. Acknowledge migrants as active communication agents

Stakeholder Mapping

Gabriel & Laura

Prioritisation of efforts

Influence

Interest

Case studies Over to you!

By the end of this interactive session, you should have gained some practical experience in:

• Prioritisation

• Stakeholder definition

• Provision use and responsibility of evidence

• Use of deliberative techniques

• Tailoring messages

When applied in:

• Global, national (critical and non-critical) contexts

Case 1 – Integrating migration & demography into global systemic thinking

• 1 billion migrants worldwide

• 1 person in 7 is a migrant

• 250 million migrants

• Of which 17 million are refugees

• South / South migration

• Forms 38% of total migration

• Migrants sent USD 432 billion to developing countries in 2015

•

UN's Sustainable Development Goals

• On 27 September 2015, the UN General Assembly agreed on an ambitious global agenda on sustainable development for the next 15 years comprising 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

• Eradicating extreme poverty and inequality and promoting environmental sustainability are the key pillars of the new agenda.

• It includes important references to migration and as a result makes migration part of mainstream global development policy for the first time.

Case 1 - The issue

• Colleagues working in the thematic SDG areas may not be aware of the correlation between their work and migration-related issues

• The inconvenient truth: only with the incorporation of migratory issues in at least 9 of the 17 SDGs will the global objectives be achieved

Case 1 - Your challenge

• How would you ensure that migration-related issues are incorporated into your country's SDG-related efforts?

• Prioritisation – Where to start?

• Stakeholders definition


• Use deliberative techniques


Case 2 – Perception vs. reality

Source: International Migration Outlook 2017, OECD


• Many people in the high income countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) consider immigration to be the most important challenge their countries face

• Opinion polls indicate that many people believe that immigrants make up a higher share of their country’s population than the actual numbers

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

UnitedStates

France Spain UnitedKingdom

Perception

Reality

% immigrants in total country population


• Another critical perception is the negative impact of migration on labour-market outcomes for natives, while the academic evidence is mixed

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

UnitedKingdom

UnitedStates

Spain Italy France Germany

% critical perception of the impact of migration on labour-market outcomes for natives

Case 2 - The Issue

• Understanding the potential social and economic benefits of strong national migration policies that stimulate integration, policy-making colleagues may want to implement strategies that do not conform with public perceptions

• The inconvenient truth: (mis)perceptions often shape the political debate and policy outcomes related to migration


• Providing accurate evidence, analysis, and information and well-articulated outreach is a proven way to counter national misperceptions.

• What actions would you take to ensure that migration policy is evidence-informed rather than perception-led?






Case 3 – Cultural integration, the role of national museums

Case 3 – Cultural integration, the role of national museums

• The International Council of Museums, describes museums as non-profit institutions “in the service of society and its development”.

• Our society today is shaped by people with a wide variety of lifestyles and backgrounds, therefore, cultural diversity leads to new perspectives and new directions in museum work.

Case 3 – The Issue

• To enable people to participate in the everyday cultural life of a city or community, cooperation projects need to be developed that enable a concrete form of collaboration. Museums have to actively approach potential cooperation partners, for example autonomous migrant organisations, charities, other social interest groups, associations and schools. In practical terms, this means developing initiatives outside of the museum as well.

• The inconvenient truth: Evidence shows that when managed well, such initiatives are very successful, however many museums are perceived as "belonging" to natives and in times of economic difficulties this may not be a priority


• Improving quality of life, supplementing education and enhancing community spirit have manifold benefits.

• What actions would you take to encourage the uptake of non-critical policy measures?






30

References:

• John S. Dryzek, 2002, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestation. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford

• Michael Rabinder James, 2004, Deliberative Democracy and the Plural Polity. Lawrence, The University Press of Kansas.

• Amy Gutmann a Dennis Thompson, 2004, Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, Princeton University Press.

• Adolf G. Gundersen, 2000, The Socratic Citizen: A Theory of Deliberative Democracy. Lanham, Lexington Books.

• Robert B. Talisse , 2005, Democracy after Liberalism – Pragmatism and Deliberative Politics. London, Routledge,

• Benjamin Barber, 2003, Strong Democracy, Univ of California Press, Berkeley.

• Samantha Besson, 2006, Deliberative Demoi-cracy in the European Union: Towards the Deterritorialization of Democracy, in S. Besson and José Luis Martí, eds, Deliberative Democracy and Its Discontents. Aldershot, Ashgate, str. 181-214)

Thank you!

Gabriel Bianchi: [email protected]

Laura Smillie: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

communicating evidence and policy to different audiences ... filepolicy to different audiences:...

Documents