I'd be very suspicious about Governmental offices' (Sweden SIDA and so on) reporting about their own activities abroad. The money spent abroad are usually the less transparent. The way of artificial governmental solution of the problem is perfect for the  officials. Regular people in underdeveloped countries (Bangladesh including) would benefit from well tested natural solutions: competitive democracy encourages politicians to narrow the gap at least before elections. Competitive media - market (not Public TV) makes policy-making more transparent. Competitive democracy and free competitive media market together prevents personal rights violations, private business abuses, so creates opportunities for lasting economic growth (see for ex. my report http://ssrn.com/abstract=2495839). Economic growth enhances opportunities to broaden financial support of the candidates, the parties (if extremely dangerous initiatives like limiting private funding for candidates, or Hate speech or Public TV wouldn't be realized - poor countries w/o democratic tradition just can't afford all these nonsense). 

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2236320

I'd be very suspicious about Governmental offices' (Sweden SIDA and so on) reporting about their own activities abroad.

I dont understand how how this reply relates to the material I put up. I was interested in  the issue of polices and distance from people as users or shapers of policies.

People have the only reliable way to shape policy and to keep policy-maker accountable: to be informed and to change government by voting. People in the poor educated India enjoy "shorter distance" and better opportunity to shape the policy than in better educated Russia or Mexico. So, Idea to shorten the distance artificially, by means the educational project financed by foreign government doesn't looks promising. I failed to find in the article any evidences it could work. I understand, that advocacy of this sort of spending looks "progressive" but I saw by my own eyes how the similar project to enhance people's participation failed in Russia. The key argument - to consider incentives of voters, elected politicians and foreign officials. If the voter is experienced to cause rotation of power by his choice - technical solution how to narrow "the distance" would be problem of newly elected politician inspired by desire to be reelected again. If the voter can't to cause rotation of power - one could invest trillion dollars without measurable impact at all. My personal experience proves, foreign grantor using budget money is not interested in real impact, but pretty interested in new budget spending. So optimistic reports would be published irrespective of real achievements.

The same is more or less true about media resources. Investment in technical facilities and Public media development failed to preserve free speech in Russia. On the contrary, the private initiative in the Internet proved ability to preserve moderate opportunities for Russians to get access to alternative opinion, even under current crisis. So, no need to waste foreign taxpayers' money. 

Ok thanks, and totally agree with you. But in this case we are talking not about 'projects' but about donors such as Sida feeding their funds into an existing Bangladesh government health and education system (via a sector wide reform approach) and people do vote for the government and its policies on health and education. But more local democracy would allow people to better shape how these policies get implemented in local areas, and for people to have greater 'voice' to shape policy ideas. Which is of course the main issue ... thanks for responding so thoughtfully.

I think it also has to do with the overall policy architecture of a Country- what spaces exist for citizens participation in policy formulation in the first place? In cases where citizens at the very community level are offered spaces to contribute to the policy formulation, there is a good likelihood that a feeling of ownership and responsibility can be generated among actors in the policy enterprise along the chain- that can close gaps.

Shaping public education could also help- the more citizens are aware of their special role, responsibility and expectation in the policy space, the more they are likely to play roles that close the their gap with policymakers/implementer

Governments and NGOs in many developing country context has not done particularly well in this area- many local communities see the service provision role of GOs/NGOs as acts of charity and benevolence. this could limit the extent to which the 'beneficiaries' can question or contribute effectively to the process- Thinking deeply about different tools that can give more information/knowledge, rights & responsibilities and roles of all actors in shaping the discourse, letter and content of policy will go along way in closing the gap between development policy makers and people....

Godfred - how nice to hear from you.  Good point. One of the issues from the reality check in Bangladesh is that citizens need to feel that getting involved might actually lead to positive change. Often they don't, and with good reason. For example, the 'citizen charter' written up on the wall of a government hospital states that patients will be treated with respect by hospital staff - but often they are not. But don't feel there's any point in challenging behaviour in case they lose access to treatment and get pushed to the back of the queue.

This effort is indeed laudable and appears effective. However, in parallel, it is crucial that the training curriculum including pedagogic content, process and exams of professionals involved in writing and delivering/actualising policy needs an overhaul so that the voices of the communities they serve are integrated into their texts and training. This might help sustain the Reality Check programme. See Jain & Jadhav (2009): Pills that swallow policy: clinical ethnography of a community mental health programme in Northern India. Transcultural Psychiatry, 46, 1, 60-85.

Lewis:

Thank you for introducing me to 'reality-check (RCA)'!

The RCA is a powerful tool for improving the connection between pro-poor policies, their implementation and the people that such policies are supposed to serve. Through both retrospective and longitudinal ‘Listening studies’ RCA offers donors and governments an opportunity to shed light on whether policies and interventions carried out in the name of the poor, translate into tangible improvements in the lives of targeted individuals.

http://reality-check-approach.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/AusAID-ID-Reality-Check-2010.pdf

http://reality-check-approach.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Sida-BD-Reality-Check-Reflection.pdf

http://reality-check-approach.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/RCA-REPORT-FINAL.pdf

Thanks - laudable, but sadly not particularly effective ... Yet! Curriculum reform and new  forms of teacher training are included in the SWAPs, but having teachers implement this  is proving very tricky. 

Policy if followed by plan and action by the authorities would bring the connections with the people again. In most of the cases the agencies are different between policy formulation and implementation. The people's participation can be done effectively during the action plans and implementation. Who owns the policy, the international organisation or the people. The series of organisation often based on their understanding impose the policies when out of context with place and people often misplace the agenda. The people are not articulate and learned enough to understand the policy prescription including their representatives who must be made to participate in formulation. 

Reality check shows that policy makers never read the communication from the citizens. In fact, under this New Public Management, they treat the citizens as customers. Therefore, when the citizen's request help, they always send them to the customer service agents or other "John Doe." Policy works are contracted out to the think tank groups that have connections with the politicians. If you want to close the gap between policy makers and the citizens: 

First, they have to treat the citizens as citizens, not customers.

Second, policy works should not be contracted out to the private parties or the think tank groups. The quality of the policy work done by these groups is questionable, tend to be one sided and short-minded.

Third, the policy makers should be the doers of the tasks, not simply giving out policy ideas orally then argue and debate in the chamber.

Fourth, but the most important is the policy makers must go through special training for policy work. They do not have the intellectual training for policy work and do not have job descriptions. They also do not have training about the government, its roles and functions. In order to close the gap, they must go through the development process and learn about the government and its roles and functions.

In Eastern societies, the gap between politicians and people can not be reduced because of the lack of a political mindset that meets the wishes of the people. I think that Bangladesh has been influenced by the British concept of governance and politics.