Abstract
BackgroundThe Evidence-Based Policymaking (EBP) process in Nepal is rife with poor practices where often policymakers are portrayed as perpetrators for such practices. However, we need to think of the EBP as a two-sided coin where both research pull and research push play equally significant roles. This study aimed to assess the perception of Nepalese health policymakers and researchers on EBP and identify appropriate mechanisms to integrate evidence into policies.MethodsFollowing the constructivist philosophical paradigm, qualitative research design was used in the study with the grounded theory approach. Purposive sampling was performed, and the 12 in-depth interviews were conducted, where number of interviews was finalized using saturation theory. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, translated to English, coded line by line, and then developed into themes. Thematic analysis technique was used to manually analyze the data.ResultsStudy participants highlighted that evidence is being utilized during policy formulation but not in the amount it should be, with a preference for anecdotal evidence further reducing the chance. Apart from these barriers, poor credibility of information obtained, poorly targeted dissemination, inadequate policy-based researches, and policymakers and researchers operating within the spheres of their own with a feeble link to channel the flow of information between them were identified by participants. On the other hand, the publication of one-pager research brief, conduction of nationally representative surveys especially quantitative studies, the practice of cost-effectiveness study, and policymaker’s involvement during the research were some facilitators identified.ConclusionsMoreover, the study accentuates that better communication strategies such as the establishment of formal forums with policymakers and researchers, better-targeted dissemination, and identification of priority areas have wide potential to promote a unified front of health policymakers and researchers for EBP.
Highlights
The Evidence-Based Policymaking (EBP) process in Nepal is rife with poor practices where often policymakers are portrayed as perpetrators for such practices
The evolution of utilization of evidence in the policymaking process for any country usually follows a spectrum starting from evidence-free policy (EFP) to policy-based evidence (PBE) and to evidencebased policymaking (EBP) [1]
Health policymakers were defined as government employees in the capacity of a section or division chief (9th level officer and above), working currently or in the past, at the Ministry of Health and Population (MoHP) and its departments
Summary
The Evidence-Based Policymaking (EBP) process in Nepal is rife with poor practices where often policymakers are portrayed as perpetrators for such practices. The barriers created by policymakers are political use of evidence, low budget allocations and lack of technical competency among policymakers whereas researchers create barriers such as low availability of priority-based researches, use of jargons, and poor dissemination activities [3, 4, 6,7,8,9,10,11] These barriers lead to the formation of the evidence-free policy that does not address the population’s real needs and results in policy failures [2, 12, 13]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
