Use Of Evidence In Policymaking Research Articles

Evidence – Informed Policy Formulation and Implementation: A case study of ‘Clean Air Policy’ in Punjab, Pakistan

Background: There has been an accelerating momentum globally, for the use of scientific research evidence to support public health policy formulation and implementation. Policymakers, nonetheless use a variety of information over and above research evidence in the process. A case study of ‘the Clean Air policy’ was undertaken to explore the Policy makers practices related to Evidence Informed Policy in Punjab, Pakistan. Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate policy makers’ perceptions regarding ‘evidence’ and how it is gathered and used in policy formulation and implementation processes Methods: The empirical data was collected by qualitative research techniques. Document review and semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 87 purposively selected policymakers between December’22-October’23. Data Analysis was guided by principals of grounded theory. A conceptual model for Evidence Informed Policy Formulation and Implementation (derived from the Frameworks of Bowen and Zwi and Dodson et al.) was experientially applied to organize the data. Results: The case study of the ‘Clean Air Policy’ of the Govt. of Punjab highlighted that the policy had been formulated in a structured manner with incorporation of relevant evidence (research and other) at all stages of policy formulation. Policy makers considered ‘evidence’ as an expansive concept not limited to research evidence. Overall, the use of evidence for policy-making and implementation is rooted in complexities inherent to the local context, policymakers understanding and organizational culture and processes. Conclusion: The study contributed to understanding the arena of Evidence Informed policy practices in Pakistan. Addressing the highlighted challenges can inform strategies for enhancing evidence use in policy processes for improving health system performance.

Improving the influence of evidence in policy creation: an ethnographic study of the research-to-policy collaborative

Background:Despite the known need for empirical research-to-policy studies, little is known about the factors and conditions needed to support meaningful evidence use or how to intervene to promote quality evidence use. Aims and objectives:To study research-policy processes empirically and descriptively, we conducted an ethnography that focused on the impact of the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) on legislator and researcher evidence use or policy engagement, including whether and how researchers and policymakers created and sustained meaningful relationships. Methods:The ethnography included participant observation as well as pre- and post- semi-structured interviews from policymakers (n=17), researchers (n=23), and RPC staff (n=5). The team attended relevant events as well as observed the formal and informal ways research is used in policymaking. Findings:In the paper, we describe how 1) legislative priorities were identified; 2) networks were established and maintained; 3) trainings evolved over time; 4) relationships between RPC staff, congressional staff, and researchers were facilitated; and 5) RPC followed up with policymakers and researchers. Discussion and conclusions:We 1) describe the experiences of participants and whether involvement in the intervention changed attitudes or behaviours about evidence use in policy; 2) describe the RPC process in practice, and how it was implemented and evolved over time; and 3) better understand the conditions supporting evidence use in policymaking. We conclude with the value of the RPC as a resource to fill a niche within the evidence and policy space, as well as suggestions for future research-to-policy programmes and practices.

Promoting the use of evidence in health policy-making in the economic commission of the West African States Region: Exploring the perception of policy-makers on the necessity of an evidence-based policy-making guidance.

The West African Health Organization (WAHO) is promoting the use of evidence in policy-making within West Africa. The need for increased understanding of the complexities of the evidence-to-policy process among policy-makers in West Africa necessitates the development of evidence-based policy-making (EBPM) guidance. The purpose of this study was to interact with policy-makers from West African countries to identify the necessity of EBPM guidance for the subregion. A cross-sectional qualitative study design was used to elicit the views/opinions of senior health policy-makers from across the 15 West African countries on why an EBPM Guidance is necessary for the subregion. The policy-makers were engaged during WAHO-organized regional evidence-to-policy meetings on the improvement of maternal and child health outcomes held in Senegal in 2019. Face-to-face, one-on-one interactions, interviews, and deliberations during the meeting plenary sessions were held with the policy-makers, who participated in the regional meeting. Up to 23 policy-makers representing 15 West African countries participated in the study. Policy-makers who took part in the study supported the development of an EBPM Guidance to facilitate evidence-to-policy process. Among the identified reasons why an EBPM Guidance for West Africa is a necessity were to understand: (i) how to deal with barriers and facilitators that influence evidence to policy process; (ii) how to acquire, access, adapt, and apply available research evidence in policy-making; (iii) how to deal with contextual issues and broad range of evidence; and (iv) how to engage parliamentarians and policy legislators to promote policy development. An EBPM is a valuable tool that can provide health sector policy-makers the needed guide on the evidence-to-policy process. Studies that will evaluate the impact of EBPM guidance on the policy-making process in low- and middle-income countries are advocated.

Is COVID-19 Ushering in a ‘Golden Age’ of Scientific Expertise in Policymaking?

One of the many consequences of COVID-19 has been a renewed emphasis on the role of scientific experts in policymaking. For those of us committed to improving the use of evidence in policymaking, it is tempting to hope that we may be achieving a substantive step forward with efforts to ensure policy decisions are, if not evidence-based, then at least evidence-informed.

Where evidence‐based policy meets research impact

AbstractThis paper explores the territory between the evidence‐based policymaking (EBPM) agenda and the research impact agenda. Although these two related agendas are typically considered in isolation, this paper provides an analysis dedicated to how they interact. It begins with a discussion outlining the origins of research impact and the use of evidence in policymaking. This is followed by an overview of the Australian policy context that shapes academic research and its impact. We argue that although the relationship between EBPM and research impact can be viewed as a symbiotic one, there are some tensions that arise in practice. Such difficulties can be further exacerbated when using research to inform policy in times of crisis, as illustrated by governing during the COVID‐19 pandemic. The insights provided contribute to our understanding of impact and are of value to policymakers and academic researchers as they help clarify the changing context within which they operate.

Policy dialogue to support maternal newborn child health evidence use in policymaking: The lessons learnt from the Nigeria research days first edition.

The use of evidence in decision-making and practice can be improved through diverse interventions, including policy dialogue. The Department of Family Health, Federal Ministry of Health of Nigeria initiated and organized the Nigeria Research Days (NRD), to serve as a platform for exchange between researchers and policymakers for improving maternal, new-born and child health. The study reports on the conceptualization, organization and lessons learned from the first edition. A cross-sectional study was designed to assess the effectiveness of a policy dialogue during the NRDs. Data were collected from the feasibility and workshop evaluation surveys. A descriptive analysis of data was performed. As a result, the Nigeria Research Days meets all the criteria for a successful policy dialogue. The participants positively rated the content and format of the meeting and made suggestions for improvement. They were willing to implement the recommendations of the final communiqué. The lessons learned from this first edition will be used to improve future editions.

A framework for implementing evidence in policymaking: Perspectives and phases of evidence evaluation in the science-policy interaction

The use of scientific knowledge in policymaking has been a subject of debate in the environmental sector. An essential task for the effective use of evidence in policymaking is for scientists and policymakers to share a common understanding of how evidence should be produced and used. The purpose of this study is to establish a reference framework that enables scientists and policymakers to align their sights to deal with evidence in policymaking. To develop the framework, we introduced five perspectives that cover the domains of science, policy, and the science-policy interface as: (1) methodological rigorousness; (2) consistency; (3) proximity; (4) social appropriateness; and (5) legitimacy. We then examined how the issues from these perspectives will transit through three phases of interaction between scientific investigation and political institutionalization via: (1) a pre-institutionalization phase, in which the academic and social framing of an issue was unclear; (2) a mid-institutionalization phase, in which the academic and social framing of an issue was established and institutionalization was advanced; and (3) a post-institutionalization phase, in which issues were recursively defined within the evidence evaluation system itself. The framework encourages scientists and policymakers to shift their perspectives to each phase of institutionalization. A case study on mercury pollution shows how the framework serves as a checklist for the comprehensive evaluation of evidence, which provides specific guidance that appropriately promotes evidence-based policymaking and its implementation.

Keeping it Real: Using Mechanisms to Promote Use in the Realist Evaluation of the Building Capacity to Use Research Evidence Program

AbstractThis chapter explores the use of mechanisms within the realist evaluation of the Building Capacity to Use Research Evidence (BCURE) program, a £15.7 million initiative aiming to improve the use of evidence in decision‐making in low and middle‐income countries. The evaluation was commissioned to establish not just whether BCURE worked but also how and why capacity building can contribute to increased use of evidence in policymaking in the very different contexts in which the program operated. This chapter argues that using mechanisms helped provide nuanced and robust insights into these questions, while also strengthening the usefulness and policy relevance of the evaluation. Drawing primarily on qualitative data, including interviews with more than 500 stakeholders over 3 years, the evaluation explored the mechanisms that promote capacities to use evidence in decision‐making, through developing and testing realist context‐intervention‐mechanism‐outcome configurations (CIMOs). Uncovering the value of mechanisms for policy and program learning was not easy, and the chapter sets out some of the thorny challenges faced and how the BCURE evaluation navigated these. Ultimately, the use of mechanisms in the BCURE evaluation helped to generate practical and nuanced insights that fed directly into the design of a £17 million follow‐up program. The seven mechanisms uncovered are continuing to inform our own and others’ work on institutional capacity change in a wide range of fields.

Promoting the use of evidence in health policymaking in the ECOWAS region: the development and contextualization of an evidence-based policymaking guidance

BackgroundThe Economic Commission of the West African States (ECOWAS), through her specialised health Institution, the West African Health Organization (WAHO) is supporting Members States to improve health outcomes in West Africa. There is a global recognition that evidence-based health policies are vital towards achieving continued improvement in health outcomes. The need to have a tool that will provide systematic guide on the use of evidence in policymaking necessitated the production of the evidence-based policy-making (EBPM) Guidance.MethodsGoogle search was performed to identify existing guidance on EBPM. Lessons were drawn from the review of identified guidance documents. Consultation, interaction and interviews were held with policymakers from the 15 West African countries during WAHO organized regional meetings in Senegal, Nigeria, and Burkina Faso. The purpose was to elicit their views on the strategies to promote the use of evidence in policymaking to be included in the EBPM Guidance. A regional Guidance Validation Meeting for West African policymakers was thereafter convened by WAHO to review findings from review of existing guidance documents and validate the EBPM Guidance.ResultsOut of the 250 publications screened, six publications fulfilled the study inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Among the important issues highlighted include: what evidence informed decision-making is; different types of research methods, designs and approaches, and how to judge the quality of research. The identified main target end users of the EBPM Guidance are policy/decision makers in the West African sub-region, at local, sub-national, national and regional levels. Among the key recommendations included in the EBPM Guidance include: properly defining/refining policy problem; reviewing contextual issues; initiating policy priority setting; considering political acceptability of policy; commissioning research; use of rapid response services, use of policy advisory/technical/steering committees; and use of policy briefs and policy dialogue.ConclusionThe EBPM Guidance is one of the emerging tools that can enhance the understanding of evidence to policy process. The strategies to facilitate the use of evidence in policymaking outlined in the Guidance, can be adapted to local context, and incorporated validated approaches that can be used to promote evidence-to-policy-to-practice process in West Africa.

Lessons Learned from Strategies for Promotion of Evidence-to-Policy Process in Health Interventions in the ECOWAS Region: A Rapid Review.

Context:The West African Health Organization (WAHO) is vigorously supporting evidence-informed policymaking (EIPM) in the countries of West Africa. EIPM is increasingly recognized as one of the key strategies that can contribute to health systems strengthening and the improvement of health outcomes. The purpose of this rapid review is to examine two key examples of evidence-based strategies used to successfully implement health interventions in each of the West African countries and to highlight the lessons learned.Methods:A rapid review technique, defined as a type of knowledge synthesis in which systematic review processes are accelerated and methods are streamlined to complete the review more quickly, was used. A PubMed search was conducted using the combination of the following keywords: Health, policy making, evidence, plus name of each of the 15 countries to identify studies that described the process of use of evidence in policymaking in health interventions. Two examples of the publications that fulfilled the study inclusion criteria were selected.Results:Among the key processes used by the countries to promote EIPM in health interventions include policy cycle mechanism and political prioritization, rapid response services, technical advisory group and steering committees (SCs), policy dialog, capacity-strengthening mechanisms, local context evidence and operational guidelines, multisectoral action and consultative process.Conclusion:Various degrees of success have been achieved in by West African countries in the promotion of EIPM. As the science of EIPM continues to evolve and better understanding of the process is gained among policymakers, more studies on effective strategies to improve the evidence-to-policy process are advocated.

The strategic uses of evidence in UK e-cigarettes policy debates

Background Current debates on e-cigarette policy in the UK are highly acrimonious and are framed in terms of evidence-based policymaking. Aims and objectives The article aims to understand the use of evidence in policymaking in the context of both political controversy and limited policy-relevant evidence via a case study of UK e-cigarette debates. Methods The study draws on a series of semi-structured interviews with policy actors to examine their positions on e-cigarette policy process and their use of evidence to support this. Findings Policy actors articulate a strong commitment to evidence-based policymaking and claim that their positions are evidence-based. Some actors also claim emerging consensus around their positon as a rhetorical tool in the debate. Respondents argued that actors adopting opposing policy positions fail to follow the evidence base. This is attributed to a lack of understanding or disregard for the relevant evidence for political or ideological reasons. Discussion Respondents adhere to a rationalist understanding of policymaking in which policy disputes can be settled by recourse to ‘the evidence’. Interpretative policy analysis suggests that multiple legitimate framings of policy issues, supported by different bodies of evidence, are possible. Policy differences are thus not due to bad faith but to policy actors framing the issue at stake in different terms and thus advocating different policy responses. Conclusions Process of ‘frame reflection’ may help to overcome the acrimony of current policy leading to more effective engagement by public health actors in the e-cigarettes policy debates.

Research evidence supports cancer policymaking but is insufficient for change: Findings of key informant interviews from five countries

Evidence-based policymaking values the use of research in the process of developing, implementing and evaluating policy. However, there is limited research attempting to understand how cancer policymaking occurs and the role of evidence in this process. Our study aimed to provide a deeper understanding of levers and challenges to the development and implementation of large-scale, health service policies or programs in cancer care. Within a realist framework, we conducted a thematic analysis of interviews with 13 key informants from five countries: Australia, Canada, Scotland, Denmark and New Zealand. Results identified a complex array of program mechanisms and contextual factors influencing cancer health-service policymaking. Research evidence was important and could form a rationale for change, such as by identifying unwarranted variation in cancer outcomes across or within countries. However, other factors were equally important in driving policy change, including advocacy, leadership, stakeholder collaboration, program adaptability, clinician and consumer involvement, and the influential role of context. These findings resonate with political science theories and health service reform literature, while offering novel insight into specific factors that influence policymaking in cancer care, namely clinical engagement, consumer input and policy context. Although research evidence supports policymaking, the complex ways in which cancer policies are developed and implemented requires recognition and should be considered when designing new programs and promoting the use of evidence in policymaking.

It’s Not What You Nudge, It’s Who You Nudge: Communicating Evidence to Policymakers and the Public

The growth in applying behavioral insights toward addressing major policy challenges has only expanded in recent years. A common tool in this movement has been the use of reframing salient pieces of information, sometimes using visual messaging, as institutions seek to elicit socially desirable behaviors. So far, most emphasis in these approaches has been on public impact of such tools and less so about the influence on policymakers themselves. This paper seeks to contribute to the literature on the use of evidence in policymaking by demonstrating two different applications on related but parallel contexts. In the first, we explore public attitudes toward refugees in the United Kingdom. In the second, we explore policymaker opinion on mental health programming in Lebanon, in the context of a national reform influenced heavily by the influx of refugees from Syria. Using similar surveying methods focused on salient messages framed in various ways, the two studies yielded substantially different results. In the general public, informative patterns emerged, such as greater influence of various frames on young people. However, policymakers largely rejected any involvement when being asked the simplified scenarios. Instead, we found that they were generally distrustful of being asked to make decisions based on such messages, eroding relationships between researchers and policymakers. We utilize these insights to propose further considerations to improve communication between behavioral researchers and decision-makers, presenting two case examples of small trials with policymakers and the general public.

Do evidence summaries increase health policy-makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review.

Do evidence summaries increase health policy-makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review.

Development of a framework to improve the utilisation of malaria research for policy development in Malawi

BackgroundThe existing gap between research evidence and public health practice has attributed to the unmet Millennium Development Goals in Africa and consequently, has stimulated the development of frameworks to enhance knowledge translation. These efforts aim at maximising health research utilisation in policy and practice to address the world’s disease burdens, including malaria. This study aimed at developing a contextual framework to improve the utilisation of malaria research for policy development in Malawi.MethodsThe study used two approaches including: two case studies of policy analysis exploring the policy-making process in Malawi, utilisation of local malaria research, and the role of key stakeholders in policy formulation process; and the assessment of facilitating factors and barriers to malaria research utilisation for policy-making in Malawi.ResultsFrom the case studies’ lessons and elements identified during the assessment of facilitating factors and barriers, a framework is developed to promote an integrated approach to knowledge translation. In this framework the Ministry of Health is considered as the main user of knowledge from research through the demand created by the research directorate and the National Malaria Control Programme. Key documents identified as being particularly relevant to the Ministry of Health for purposes of knowledge translation include the National Health Research Agenda, Guidelines for Policy Development and Analysis, and Guidelines for Evidence Use in Policy-making. Institutions conducting academic and policy-relevant malaria research in Malawi are identified and a consolidation of their linkages with the users of research is established through the Knowledge Translation Unit, the Evidence Informed decision-making Centre, and the African Institute for Development Policy. Equally, key players in this framework are the funding partners for both research and programmes that need to see accountability and impact of their support. Independent advisors, partners, and consultants also have their vital role in the process.ConclusionThe framework offers a practical basis for the factors identified and their linkages to promote a co-ordinated approach to malaria research utilisation in policy-making. Its applicability and success hinges on its wider dissemination and ownership by the government through the National Malaria Control Programme.

Knowledge Translation Platform Increasing Use of Research Evidence in Physical Activity Policy Making - A Case Study in Finland

BACKGROUND: Knowledge Translation Platform (KTP) in partnerships between policymakers, stakeholders, and researchers was established in order to enhance evidence-informed policymaking on physical activity. The article aims to give answers to specific questions, such as what were the main knowledge translation tools to improve access to research evidence in physical activity policy in Finland; which factors facilitated the improvements in use of research evidence, and what kind of procedures were implemented to improve the use of research evidence in policy making.METHODS: The study triangulated qualitative data from documents, reviews and observations of meetings between 2012 and 2013. Purposive sampling of meeting documents was used and data was analysed using a thematic content analysis of documents.RESULTS: KTP contributed to an increased awareness of the importance of the use of research evidence in physical activity policymaking, and strengthened relationships between policymakers, stakeholders and researchers. Support from policymakers and professionals as well as a window of opportunity facilitated KTP activities. Based on the KTP experience, institutionalization within the government could help to keep the use of research evidence high on the agenda.CONCLUSIONS: The case study provided unique insights into what counts for developing use of research evidence in policymaking. The expectations of the public policy were to give a larger role to evidence-informed policymaking, but expectations conflicted between the interests of various stakeholders. The establishment of KTP was a promising development in supporting the use of research evidence in physical activity policymaking. Real-time lesson drawing from the experiences of KTP can support improvements in the functioning of KTP in the short term, while making the case for sustaining their work in the long term.

Improving maternal and child health policymaking processes in Nigeria: an assessment of policymakers\u2019 needs, barriers and facilitators of evidence-informed policymaking

BackgroundIn Nigeria, interest in the evidence-to-policy process is gaining momentum among policymakers involved in maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH). However, numerous gaps exist among policymakers on use of research evidence in policymaking. The objective of this study was to assess the perception of MNCH policymakers regarding their needs and the barriers and facilitators to use of research evidence in policymaking in Nigeria.MethodsThe study design was a cross-sectional assessment of perceptions undertaken during a national MNCH stakeholders’ engagement event convened in Abuja, Nigeria. A questionnaire designed to assess participants’ perceptions was administered in person. Group consultations were also held, which centred on policymakers’ evidence-to-policy needs to enhance the use of evidence in policymaking.ResultsA total of 40 participants completed the questionnaire and participated in the group consultations. According to the respondents, the main barriers to evidence use in MNCH policymaking include inadequate capacity of organisations to conduct policy-relevant research; inadequate budgetary allocation for policy-relevant research; policymakers’ indifference to research evidence; poor dissemination of research evidence to policymakers; and lack of interaction fora between researchers and policymakers. The main facilitators of use of research evidence for policymaking in MNCH, as perceived by the respondents, include capacity building for policymakers on use of research evidence in policy formulation; appropriate dissemination of research findings to relevant stakeholders; involving policymakers in research design and execution; and allowing policymakers’ needs to drive research. The main ways identified to promote policymakers’ use of evidence for policymaking included improving policymakers’ skills in information and communication technology, data use, analysis, communication and advocacy.ConclusionTo improve the use of research evidence in policymaking in Nigeria, there is a need to establish mechanisms that will facilitate the movement from evidence to policy and address the needs identified by policymakers. It is also imperative to improve organisational initiatives that facilitate use of research evidence for policymaking.

Interpretation and use of evidence in state policymaking: a qualitative analysis

IntroductionResearchers advocating for evidence-informed policy have attempted to encourage policymakers to develop a greater understanding of research and researchers to develop a better understanding of the policymaking process. Our aim...

Factors affecting evidence-use in food policy-making processes in health and agriculture in Fiji

BackgroundThere is limited research on the use of evidence to inform policy-making in the Pacific. This study aims to identify and describe factors that facilitate or limit the use of evidence in food-related policy-making in the Health and Agriculture Ministries in Fiji.MethodsSemi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with selected policy-makers in two government ministries that were instrumental in the development of food-related policies in Fiji designed to prevent Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs). Snowball sampling was used to recruit, as key informants, senior policy-makers in management positions such as national advisors and directors who were based at either the national headquarters or equivalent. Interviewees were asked about their experiences in developing food-related or other policies, barriers or facilitators encountered in the policy development and implementation process and the use of evidence. Each interview lasted approximately 45–60 minutes, and was conducted in English. Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed, thematically coded and analyzed using N-Vivo 8.0 software.ResultsThirty-one policy-makers from the Ministry of Health and Medical Services (MoHMS n = 18) and the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA n = 13) in Fiji participated in the study. Whilst evidence is sometimes used in food-related policy-making in both the Health and Agriculture Ministries (including formal evidence such as published research and informal evidence such as personal experiences and opinions), it is not yet embedded as an essential part of the process. Participants indicated that a lack of resources, poor technical support in terms of training, the absence of clear strategies for improving competent use of evidence, procedures regarding engagement with other stakeholders across sectors, varying support from senior managers and limited consultation across sectors were barriers to evidence use. The willingness of organizations to create a culture of using evidence was reported as a facilitator.ConclusionThe use of evidence in policy-making will only become a reality in Fiji if it is a formalized part of the government’s policy-making systems. A systems approach to food-related policy-making and implementation may achieve this by helping Ministries manage the complex and dynamic nature of food-related policy-making in Fiji.

Navigating the Unknown: Barriers to Evidence-Based Defence and Security Policy in the European Union

At a time when Europe faces numerous crises, there is a real need for rigorous evidence to underpin effective policymaking. However, a gap between academia and policy creates clear obstacles in the use of evidence in policymaking. Many of these enduring obstacles are manifest in the inherent differences between separate communities: academics have difficulty communicating research in an applicable manner, and policymakers, in turn, tend to focus on operational motivations. The gap widens considerably when foreign, security and defence policy within the complex institutional structures of the European Union is considered. In addition to these well known barriers to evidence-based policy, there are two more obstacles in the defence and security space: sovereignty and dispersed decision-making. A dialogue of best practices must be opened up to broker knowledge in the EU context.