By Jim Kaketch
“What happens when policy makers, research community and governance institutions from across Africa come together to reflect and learn from each other? Powerful insights, deep connections and a renewed commitment to influencing policy, practice and decision making through co-creation of evidence in Africa”
During the Utafiti Sera Inter-House Learning and Sharing convening (October 1 – 3, 2024), Lusaka, Zambia became a hub for evidence ecosystem enthusiasts from the Utafiti Sera Houses (research policy communities) who champion for the culture of evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) in Africa. The convening was organised by the Partnership for African Social and Governance Research (PASGR). The participating Utafiti Sera Houses were; Urban Governance and City Transformation house Kenya; Youth Employment Creation house Kenya; Urban Governance and City Transformation house Rwanda; Universal Health Coverage house Zambia. PASGR use the concept of house to denote the platform/avenue/space/vehicle where both research and policy communities come together to discuss, access, and appraise evidence with aim of addressing specific national policy issue of interest. Utafiti Sera Houses have supported meaningful, and equitable participation of diverse stakeholders in the EIDM process. Through continuous systematic policy-driven stakeholder engagements and deliberations, have created a continuum for researchers, policy actors, decision makers and other stakeholders to collaborate and advance policy formulation and action in Africa. The main objective of the Utafiti Sera Houses is to institutionalize evidence use in policymaking process through co-creation of evidence, knowledge transfer and the documentation of policy cultures across Africa’s diverse landscapes. The convening was a powerful reminder, that cross-learning from each other’s successes and challenges is key to transforming EIDM, igniting collaboration and collective action. From this important convening, the following were five key insights and collective reflections from Utafiti Sera Houses.
Takeway #1: Understanding the uptake environment
What are the enablers for evidence uptake in policy making?
One of the key enablers for evidence uptake in the policy-making process is taking cognizance of the local set-up. Having deep understanding of the surrounding political economy and knowledge systems context is useful in connecting local evidence with larger research systems, fostering more adaptable, data-driven responsive policies. Secondly, the accessibility of evidence. The format and content of evidence facilitate evidence uptake, when presented concisely, succinctly, and in a format that highlights how findings affect specific groups. Thirdly, aligning research findings with current policy issues and priorities fosters greater uptake of evidence. Policy-makers are more likely to pay attention if they see the relevance to their immediate needs. When the issue is important to policymakers and their constituents or when the issue resonates with research evidence, it enhances policy uptake and action. Fourthly, Good communication strategy is another enabling factor that guarantees that evidence produced is taken into account. Finally, achieving political acceptability and securing buy-in at all levels of leadership is another critical enabler that can influence new policies and practices from the outset. Therefore, it’s important to build long-lasting relationships with policy-makers, grounded in trust, mutual respect, and flexibility to change.
Takeaway #2: Seizing the windows of opportunity
It is important to bear in mind that evidence is more likely to influence policymakers when it’s presented to them at the right time. In policymaking process, the timeliness of research evidence would enable effective response to emerging issues and adapt to changing circumstances thus enhancing its utilization. This is often referred to ‘windows of opportunity’. In other words, we need to be strategically opportunistic by identifying key moments, such as when programmes or policies are being discussed, during budget development or outcome monitoring. This way, we ensure evidence is not out of sync with the policy cycle and the policymakers are more likely to be motivated to act on it. As timing is usually an issue in the policy making process, it can lead to evidence being underutilized because it tends to be unavailable at the right moment or it does not always coincide with the demand for it.
Takeaway #3: Stakeholder relations and partnerships
Building relationships with policymakers is crucial for evidence to influence policy formally and informally as well as achieving consensus and buy-in on policy issue of interest. Understanding stakeholders as evidence users and not passive recipients of evidence should be the starting point. They generate, engage with, learn from and disseminate different forms of evidence. They are at the nexus of the conversation. Their active involvement exemplifies the emerging interest in community-led learning ecosystems, which integrate the practical insights and lived experiences of local communities. Continuous engagements with policymakers in the research process foster collaboration, build trust, and enhance the use of research evidence. Resolving policy prioritisation challenges hinges on achieving a shared understanding among all critical stakeholders about the nature of the problem and the best approaches to address it. Therefore, engaging in long-term partnerships with government agencies, academic or research institutions, and civil society organizations are essential for institutionalizing evidence use and driving policy impact. Furthermore, ordinary citizens (policy beneficiaries) are increasingly seen as key stakeholders in policy design, implementation and evaluation, facilitating their entry into places and spaces that were traditionally closed to researchers.
Takeaway #4: Effective communication of evidence
Effective communication of evidence requires a deep understanding of what needs to change, who can achieve this change, and how we can translate the evidence into knowledge-based influencing outputs (e.g. policy briefs or social media posts). Firstly, anticipating socio-political and economic sensitivities by staying informed of stakeholder challenges, needs, interests and priorities at the time, evolving political dynamics and cultural contexts. Consequently, communicating evidence in a way that accounts for these factors helps build a solid foundation for localized messaging. Secondly, successful communication requires clarity, accessibility, and relevance, ensuring that evidence is not only understood but also seen as actionable by stakeholders. Thirdly, timing evidence at the most opportune moments ensures it aligns with key policy discussions. Fourthly, leverage on narrative framing to maintain a consistent positive narrative around a policy issue of interest, emphasizing how these actions are situated towards long-term sustainable reforms to improve policy outcomes. For instance, the Urban Governance and City Transformation house embraced a positive narrative of infrastructure development that is not merely about the engineering (road construction) intervention, but an intricate social intervention with implications for democracy, governance and inclusive social order. The last tactic is to combine evidence with additional influencing strategies. These include helping social movements or neglected issues get onto the policy agenda.
Takeaway #5: Re-thinking the future of the Utafiti Sera approach
Are there opportunities for scaling evidence use within different policy spaces that could contribute to achieving better evidence-based policy outcomes?
There are many opportunities to scale evidence use across various policy spaces to foster better evidence-informed policy outcomes. Key opportunities include enhancing cross-sector learning, leveraging technology for evidence sharing, and promoting inter-organizational collaboration. In the evidence-informed decision-making ecosystem, mutual learning across sectors is vital. Utafiti Sera Houses, however, tend to be individually focused on their specific policy issues, overlooking the broader landscape where insights from other organizations could enhance policy programming. A key opportunity to address this gap is the creation of Digital Repositories[1] that serve as a centralised hub for gathering, organising, and accessing evidence. These repositories would enable different Utafiti Sera Houses to share insights, learn from each other, and identify relevant cross-sectoral lessons to improve policy impact and program design. Repositories are valuable tools for supporting evidence-informed methods, sharing knowledge, encouraging collaboration, influencing policy, and evaluating their programs. They also serve as a go-to for policymakers who need evidence to make informed decisions. The ability of Utafiti Sera engagement to have such a resource readily available for policymakers increases the potential for policy impact.
There is a critical need for continuous, collaborative partnerships among stakeholders within the evidence ecosystem. This approach can ensure that diverse perspectives and expertise from different Utafiti Sera engagements are harnessed to inform policy outcomes. Working in coalitions can create strong advocates for evidence use who feel motivated to initiate and lead change, enabling more robust and impactful policymaking. Additionally, it is essential to identify and empower policy champions within the evidence ecosystem, giving them visibility, and influence. Recognizing champions in this way incentivizes their continued support and embeds evidence-informed practices more deeply within policy processes, ultimately enhancing the sustainability and effectiveness of policy outcomes.
[1] Digital repositories are databases or platforms that store and provide access to information and resources pertinent policy development, implementation and evaluation. These platforms compile, and categorize quality of evidence, making it accessible for informed decision making.
