Figure 1 - uploaded by Shyama Kuruvilla
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Overseas Development Institute 111 Westminster Bridge Road London SE1 7JD UK ODI is Britain's leading independent think tank on international development and humanitarian issues. Our mission is to inspire and inform policy and practice which lead to the reduction of poverty, the alleviation of suffering and the achievement of sustainable livelihood...
Similar publications
ODI is a leading independent think tank on international development and humanitarian issues. Our mission is to inspire and inform policy and practice which lead to the reduction of poverty, the alleviation of suffering, and the achievement of sustainable livelihoods in developing countries. We do this by locking together high quality applied resea...
Citations
... However, there is limited empirical research on NGOs to assess whether or when their service delivery experience does lead to relevant research. Literature on NGO involvement in research is growing, but detailed studies are scarce and there have been calls for further work [7,10,[20][21][22][23][24][25][26]. Within existing literature, the role of service delivery as a source of research questions is often noted briefly, with little information on the way relationships between NGOs' service delivery and research agendas operate in practice. ...
Background
There has been growing interest in the contribution of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to international health research. One strength that NGOs may bring to research involves the potential value of service delivery experience for indicating relevant research questions, namely through their involvement in service delivery, NGO staff may be aware of frontline knowledge gaps, allowing these staff to identify questions that lead to research with immediate relevance. However, there is little empirical evidence on research agendas within NGOs to assess whether their service delivery experience does lead to relevant research or conditions that affect this. This article examines the identification and selection of research questions within NGOs to explore the role of their service delivery experience in generating relevant research agendas.
Methods
The article reports comparative case study research on four NGOs in Malawi, including two international and two Malawian organisations. Each NGO conducts research and undertakes service delivery and advocacy. Data collection included interviews, focus groups, observation and document review. Analysis involved thematic coding and use of diagrams.
Results
The case NGOs’ experiences suggest that using service delivery to identify research questions does not always match NGOs’ aims or capacities, and does not guarantee relevance. First, NGOs do not want to rely only on service delivery when developing research agendas; they consider other criteria and additional sources of ideas when selecting questions they see as relevant. Second, service delivery staff are not always well-placed to identify research topics; indeed, involvement in hectic, target-driven service delivery can hinder input to research agendas. Third, NGOs’ ability to pursue questions inspired by service delivery depends on control over their research agendas; relationships with external actors and financial autonomy affect NGOs’ capacity to undertake the research they see as relevant. Finally, the perceived relevance of research findings varies between audiences and depends on more than the research question.
Conclusions
The findings suggest limits to the value and feasibility of a research agenda based on service delivery experience. Based on the analysis, the conclusion outlines strategies to support an effective role for NGOs’ service delivery experience in development of research agendas.
... In the past years the concept of lay expertise seems to have received official approval through growing institutional support of participatory research. Internationally, the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has provided an important underpinning for steps in this direction (Kuruvilla, 2005). In the UK, the NHS INVOLVE programme was established in 1996 in order to help enhance the increased lay participation in research supported by the health service. ...
... It has been argued that within global health arena, NGOs and private foundations with their superior funding are supplanting the role of national governments and eroding democratic accountability for national decision making (Dodgson et al., 2002;McCoy, 2009). Reviews of the involvement of CSOs in health research, and policy and service provision, highlight the absence of frameworks and tools for the systematic evaluation of the impact that these organizations have on health improvement in recipient countries (Kuruvilla, 2005;Thue et al., 2002;Lowenson 2003). There is often lack of transparency in their funding and operations, and accountability remains an issue that needs to be addressed. ...
... Civil society has historically been considered weak and fragmented [24], but in the case of the Kenyan response to NCDs, despite the obvious fragmentation encountered due to the different disease entities and cause-definitions pursued by the different civil, professional and patient groups, their attempt at amalgamation of exertion in advocacy, however challenging, has been a key driving force in NCDs. Furthermore, in resource-poor countries, civil society has been a strong partner in supplementing government activities, a finding in keeping with the Kenyan NCD context. ...
... While civil society participation is largely encouraged, there should be an awareness of pitfalls such as -development ventriloquism‖, a phenomenon where civil society experts base research and advocacy on their own objectives and from their point of view, overlooking the needs of the society in which they participate [24]. ...
Kenya is a developing country in sub-Saharan Africa, facing a triple disease burden, with an increase in non-communicable diseases (NCDs); uncontained infectious diseases; coupled with significant morbidity and mortality from environmental causes such as droughts and flooding. The limelight has been on infectious diseases, leaving few resources for NCDs. As NCDs start to gain attention, it is becoming apparent that essential information on their epidemiology and risk factor trends—key in evidence-based decision-making—is lacking. As a consequence, policies have long relied on information derived from unreliable data sources such as vital registries and facility-level data, and unrepresentative data from small-scale clinical and academic research. This study analyzed the health policy aspects of NCD risk factor surveillance in Kenya, describing barriers to the successful design and implementation of an NCD risk factor surveillance system, and suggests a strategy best suited for the Kenyan situation. A review of policy documents and publications was augmented by a field-study consisting of interviews of key informants identified as stakeholders. Findings were analyzed using the Walt and Gilson policy analysis triangle. Findings attest that no population baseline NCD burden or risk factor data was available, with a failed WHO STEPs survey in 2005, to be undertaken in 2013. Despite the continued mention of NCD surveillance and the highlighting of its importance in various policy documents, a related strategy is yet to be established. Hurdles ranged from a lack of political attention for NCDs and competing public interests, to the lack of an evidence-based decision making culture and the impact of aid dependency of health programs. Progress in recognition of NCDs was noted and the international community and civil society's contribution to these achievements documented. While a positive outlook on the future of NCD surveillance were encountered, it is noteworthy that overcoming policy and structural hurdles for continued success is imperative.
... The civil society organization needs to ask itself with what legitimacy it is seeking to infl uence the policy-making agenda, and then build its advocacy strategy around the answer to that question. The literature identifi es several possible bases of legitimacy for civil society organization advocacy with respect to health policy(Kuruvilla 2005).■ Moral. ...
Elected national representatives make decisions to fund health programmes, but may lack skills to interpret evidence on health-related topics. In 2011, we surveyed the 61 members of Botswana's Parliament about their use of epidemiological evidence, then provided two half-days of training about using evidence. We included the importance of counter-factual evidence, the number needed to treat, and unit costs of interventions. A further session in 2012 covered evidence about the HIV epidemic in Botswana and planning the best mix of interventions to reduce new HIV infections. The 27 respondents reported they lacked good quality, timely evidence, and had difficulty interpreting and using evidence. Thirty-six, including seven ministers, attended one or both trainings. They participated actively and their evaluation was positive. Our experience in Botswana could potentially be extended to other countries in the region to support evidence-based efforts to tackle the HIV epidemic.Journal of Public Health Policy advance online publication, 10 July 2014; doi:10.1057/jphp.2014.30.
... CSO engagement in health research has been considered, through a literature review, in the developing world [18], described models for undertaking health science and framing evidence, the opportunities for CSO engagement in priorities, commissioning and communication, the use of research evidence for policy, and also the different methods that CSOs might bring to researchincluding documentary methods such as photography and individual narratives. A Canadian study [19] within an international health research system perspective described CSOs contributing in advocacy for research, promoting priorities, reviewing ethical frameworks, mobilisation of resources and use of knowledge use. ...
Civil society organisations (CSOs) are not-for-profit organisations working for the public interest with concerns complementary to public health. We investigated the contribution of CSOs in public health research.
Within a European project STEPS (Strengthening Engagement with Public Health Research), CSOs with interests in health were identified in the new member states of the European Union (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria, Malta, and Cyprus) and workshops organised, held in their own languages. The reports of the workshops were translated into English and drawn together through a framework analysis.
CSOs can contribute in all stages of the research cycle, through championship, priority-setting, capacity building and generation of resources, sharing and application of the research results, and dissemination across their network of contacts. There have been successful CSO-researcher collaborations in public health fields. Funding is important, and ministries of health and public institutions should interact more with CSOs. Barriers include attitudes, technical understanding across public health fields.
There is little European empirical literature linking health CSOs and research: our results indicate benefits and further opportunities. In contrast to biomedicine's link with industry, public health research can align with civil society in not-for-profit research. CSOs are important for European integration, and their contribution should be better recognised at international level.
... In a political climate of 'evidence-based decision-making', health promotion cannot offer the kinds of causeand-effect research outcomes that are valued in the 'hard' sciences. However, participatory forms of research have contributed to the generation of new data, more sensitive and knowledgeable stakeholders, increased advocacy , and more meaningful, sustainable policy change (Kuruvilla, 2005). Most university-based research centres do not have stable, long-term funding. ...
Over the past 20 years, the federal government and universities across Canada have directed resources towards the development of university-based health promotion research centres. Researchers at health promotion research centres in Canada have produced peer-reviewed papers and policy documents based on their work, but no publications have emerged that focus on the specific roles of the health promotion research centres themselves. The purpose of this paper is to propose a framework, based on an in-depth examination of one centre, to help identify the unique roles of health promotion research centres and to clarify the value they add to promoting health and advancing university goals. Considering the shifting federal discourse on health promotion over time and the vulnerability of social and health sciences to changes in research funding priorities, health promotion research centres in Canada and elsewhere may need to articulate their unique roles and contributions in order to maintain a critical focus on health promotion research. The authors briefly describe the Atlantic Health Promotion Research Centre (AHPRC), propose a framework that illustrates six essential roles of health promotion research centres and describe the policy contexts and challenges of health promotion research centres. The analysis of research and knowledge translation activities over 15 years at AHPRC sheds light on the roles that health promotion research centres play in applied research. The conclusion raises questions regarding the value of university-based research centres and challenges to their sustainability.
... The civil society organization needs to ask itself with what legitimacy it is seeking to infl uence the policy-making agenda, and then build its advocacy strategy around the answer to that question. The literature identifi es several possible bases of legitimacy for civil society organization advocacy with respect to health policy(Kuruvilla 2005).■ Moral. ...
This Review addresses a mismatch between what is known about how to respond to particular health problems in poor economies and what is actually done about them. It focuses on one cause of the problems that ensue from the mismatch – capacity constraints. Weak capacity at a number of levels in the institutions and interfaces between knowledge generation and use in policy-making has been identified by the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research (HPSR) as a key strategic issue in addressing health care in low-income countries. This review explores capacity issues underlying different aspects of the relationship between two key groups – policy-makers and researchers – using a new conceptual framework. Accordingly, the analysis focuses on capacity constraints in research priority-setting; generation and dissemination of knowledge; filtering and amplification of evidence; and policy processes. The framework could be applied to analyse critical areas for capacity development in-country.
... For some campaign evaluations it may be necessary, as Kuruvilla (2005, pp v and 9) argues for pro-poor policy to go beyond traditional scientific evaluation criteria to "determine consciousness about inequalities and injustices, representations of the perspectives of the less powerful, clear historical and values contexts, and consequential validity of the research". ...
