(IGRs), Poverty and Social Impact Analyses (PSIAs), and Country Governance and Anticorruption (CGAC) Assessments<sup>4</sup> —can provide informative context on the policy landscape and a broad understanding of the political drivers of key policy reforms. The forms of qualitative stakeholder analysis that frequently underpin these approaches have mapped the behavior of interested actors at a single point in time in response to reform initiatives. But these qualitative approaches tend to be subjective and static, and they are inevitably overwhelmed by highly complex reform environments with large numbers of relevant stakeholders. These conventional instruments are easy to use but they do not exploit the rigor of cutting-edge political science methods now available to analyze how coalition dynamics affect the political prospects of specific interventions.

The Agent-Based Stakeholder Model (ABSM) moves beyond these traditional approaches to apply advanced political science techniques to stakeholder analysis. It offers a robust way to inject just-intime realism into the design of Bank operations, helping guide the reform support strategy toward achievable goals or, where appropriate, signaling when to jettison programs that are going nowhere politically. The ABSM was introduced in EAP in an experiment to elevate the sophistication, accuracy, and operational relevance of political analysis at the Bank. The model draws on leadingedge work in microeconomics and rational choice theory to analyze the preferences and behaviors of relevant decision makers on politically driven issues. The ABSM algorithm simulates the complex round-by-round bargaining dynamics among a large number of stakeholders in a given reform process. The model anticipates how these dynamics play out over time and provides an empirical assessment of the likely extent of reform and degree of stakeholder support for this outcome. While not a substitute for comprehensive understanding of a country’s political economy, the ABSM can add considerable value to other types of analysis (Table 1).

**Table 1:  ABSM Adds Value to Other Common Political Analysis Tools**

||**Informal political**<br>**intelligence**|**Political economy**<br>**macro-analysis**<br>**(e.g., CGAC, PSIA)**|**Qualitative**<br>**stakeholder**<br>**analysis**|**Agent-Based Stakeholder**<br>**Model**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|**What is it?**|Talking informally<br>with clients and<br>local observers<br>about political<br>trends and events|Understanding broad<br>political drivers of key<br>policy reforms|Static stakeholder<br>mapping based on<br>informed opinion|Quantitative simulation of<br>complex political bargaining<br>dynamics that predicts<br>stakeholder behavior in real<br>time|
|**Why do**<br>**we do it?**|Offers a quick take<br>on the political<br>landscape to help<br>Bank country teams<br>in daily client<br>interactions|Contextualizes policy<br>issues in political<br>reality; sheds light on<br>multiple factors behind<br>complex problems|Provides a broad<br>snapshot of where<br>stakeholders stand<br>on a key policy<br>issue|Provides a rigorous<br>understanding of complex<br>stakeholder coalitions and a<br>gauge of the political feasibility<br>of proposed reform<br>interventions|
|**When**<br>**should we**<br>**use it?**|To garner initial<br>views on political<br>events and identify<br>potential reform<br>allies|To inform country and<br>sector strategy<br>upstream and reassess<br>program<br>implementation in light<br>ofpolitical change|To gain an initial<br>sense of coalitions<br>supporting and<br>opposing reform<br>and the degree of<br>consensus|To identify fruitful entry points<br>for reform, build consensus,<br>and manage risks through<br>explicit testing of alternate<br>strategies|

> 4 Levy, Brian, and Nick Manning (2002) _Institutional and Governance Reviews – a new type of economic and sector work._ PREM Note No. 75. Washington DC: World Bank; World Bank (2007) _Tools for Institutional, Political, and Social Analysis of Policy Reform: A Sourcebook for Development Practitioners._ Washington DC: World Bank.

2