Elevating pro-democracy voices and balancing risk in repressive and conflict environments

Abstract Information: Like many international organizations, the International Republican Institute (IRI) and Internews work in countries that are considered “Not Free” according to Freedom House’s Freedom in the World Index. The “Not Free” countries are characterized by non-democratic governments that use a mix of violence, repression, and elaborate propaganda to keep their populations in submission. Dissenting pro-democracy voices, be it political opposition, independent media, or civil society, are subjected to considerable psychological, legal, social, and often physical pressure to either silence themselves or flee overseas. While designing evaluative activities that are responsive to operating environments hostile to democracy, we must also center partner safety and security. Together, these intertwined challenges make elevating voices difficult but not impossible. IRI and Internews have developed and tested creative, rigorous and ethical MEL approaches to ensure that the voices that non-democratic governments seek to silence, especially those still located “on the inside,” are heard. During this session, IRI and Internews staff will share their experience conducting MEL activities in a variety of restricted contexts. The highlighted cases include a needs assessment, a political economy analysis, and a summative evaluation using outcome harvesting and Most Significant Change participatory methods. Presenters will discuss creative sampling techniques deployed in response to the safety considerations and easily compromised communication channels, selection of data sources, secure data validation approaches, careful tailoring of data collection tools, logistical arrangements for data collection, capacity building of local partners to conduct research, analysis considerations, and safeguarding the data. In addition, IRI will discuss how such activities can incorporate trauma-informed evaluation guidance to minimize the risk of additional or secondary trauma for local stakeholders as well as IRI staff. The attendees will leave this session with practical lessons learned and a set of ethical, methodological, and logistical issues one should consider for conducting DRG-themed research and evaluation in a repressive political context.