Search

Background: Conceptualisations of what it means to use evidence in policymaking often appear divided between two extremes. On the one side are works presenting it as the implementation of research findings - particularly evaluations of intervention effect. In contrast stand theoretically informed works exploring the multiple meanings of evidence use, political complexities, and the constructed nature of research evidence itself. The first perspective has been criticised as over-simplistic, while the latter can make it difficult to answer questions of what might be good, or improved, uses of evidence in policymaking. Methods: To further debate, this paper develops a 'programmatic approach' to evidence use, drawing on theories of institutional decision making and empirical work on evidence use within 11 National Malaria Control Programmes in Africa. We apply the programmatic approach by investigating the key goals and tasks of programme officials, recognising that these will shape the routines and logics followed affecting evidence utilisation. We then map out the forms, sources, features, and applications of evidence that serve programme officials in their goals. Findings: In the case of malaria programmes, evidence use was understood in relation to tasks including: advocacy for funding, budget allocation, regulation development, national planning, and identification of information gaps - all of which might require different evidence sources, forms, and applications. Discussion and conclusions: Ultimately the programmatic approach aims to facilitate clearer understanding of what uses of evidence are appropriate to policymakers, while also allowing critical reflection on whether such uses are 'good' from both programme and broader social perspectives.

Despite global progress towards improving energy access, major challenges remain for closing the energy access gap between ultra-poor and better off households, and for reaching ultra-poor and last mile populations. Using data from Malawi, we explore the energy access gap between ultra-poor (N = 900) and better-off households (N = 2666) from the same communities. Compared to better-off households, ultra-poor households had significantly increased odds of having no lighting (OR = 1.58), and significantly reduced odds of having improved lighting (OR = 0.89), owning an improved firewood cookstove (OR = 0.90), and owning a charcoal stove (OR = 0.86). A sub-set of ultra-poor households in our sample received unconditional social cash transfer program (SCTP) payments from the Government of Malawi. Recipients of SCTP payments had significantly reduced odds of having no source of lighting in the household (OR = 0.21) and were more than three times more likely to own an improved cookstove (OR = 3.64) compared to ultra-poor households that have not received payments. The absolute value of per capita expenditures on energy related goods and services is statistically significantly higher for ultra-poor households that receive social cash transfers. We conclude that ultra-poor households experience greater depth of energy poverty compared to better-off households in the same communities. We also find that unconditional social cash transfer payments contribute to improved energy access for the ultra-poor, suggesting that they are a potentially important strategy for catalyzing energy transitions among the ultra-poor. • Ultra-poor households experience significantly greater depth of energy poverty than better-off households. • Receiving a cash transfer decreases the odds of having no lighting source, and increases the odds of owning an improved stove. • Households receiving cash transfers spend more money on charcoal, batteries, solar lanterns, and grid electricity. • Energy transitions require innovative and targeted strategies to reach ultra-poor and last mile populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Declining malaria prevalence and pressure on external funding have increased the need for efficiency in malaria control in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Modelled Plasmodium falciparum parasite rate (PfPR) maps are increasingly becoming available and provide information on the epidemiological situation of countries. However, how these maps are understood or used for national malaria planning is rarely explored. In this study, the practices and perceptions of national decision-makers on the utility of malaria risk maps, showing prevalence of parasitaemia or incidence of illness, was investigated. Methods: A document review of recent National Malaria Strategic Plans was combined with 64 in-depth interviews with stakeholders in Kenya, Malawi and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The document review focused on the type of epidemiological maps included and their use in prioritising and targeting interventions. Interviews (14 Kenya, 17 Malawi, 27 DRC, 6 global level) explored drivers of stakeholder perceptions of the utility, value and limitations of malaria risk maps. Results: Three different types of maps were used to show malaria epidemiological strata: malaria prevalence using a PfPR modelled map (Kenya); malaria incidence using routine health system data (Malawi); and malaria prevalence using data from the most recent Demographic and Health Survey (DRC). In Kenya the map was used to target preventative interventions, including long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) and intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp), whilst in Malawi and DRC the maps were used to target in-door residual spraying (IRS) and LLINs distributions in schools. Maps were also used for operational planning, supply quantification, financial justification and advocacy. Findings from the interviews suggested that decision-makers lacked trust in the modelled PfPR maps when based on only a few empirical data points (Malawi and DRC). Conclusions: Maps were generally used to identify areas with high prevalence in order to implement specific interventions. Despite the availability of national level modelled PfPR maps in all three countries, they were only used in one country. Perceived utility of malaria risk maps was associated with the epidemiological structure of the country and use was driven by perceived need, understanding (quality and relevance), ownership and trust in the data used to develop the maps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]