Leveraging the research continuum with early, continuous, responsible engagement between policy makers and academia enhances HIV-prevention evidence uptake

ID: 

19122

Session: 

Long oral session 23: Engaging with policy and practice

Date: 

Saturday 16 September 2017 - 14:00 to 15:30

Location: 

All authors in correct order:

Koch J1
1 EHPSA programme Mott MacDonald, South Africa
Presenting author and contact person

Presenting author:

Josee Koch

Contact person:

Abstract text
Background: The utilisation of research enhances the quality of policy discussions and potentially HIV policy outcomes (Datta & Jones, 2011). There are an increasing number of initiatives encouraging evidence use in HIV policy. However, evidence on the effectiveness of these approaches is unclear (Langer et al. 2016). Contextual cues, social norms and politics can be barriers to the uptake of evidence generated through operational research.

Objectives: EHPSA is a regional (ESA) HIV-prevention research programme for adolescents, LGBT and prisoners, with concurrent Evidence into Action (EiA) objectives. EHPSA’s EiA approach works on evidence supply and demand simultaneously, by generating new evidence and stimulating early engagement to encourage robust debate.

Methods: EHPSA leverages the evidence process by systematically attaching various modalities to the research continuum; stakeholder-engagement plans (SEPs), technical fora (TF), regional symposia (RS), fellowships (FS) and knowledge management (KM). EHPSA’s work on early, continuous, responsible engagement strengthens linkages and trust between academia and policymakers, improving the quality of HIV policy debates.

Results:
• SEPs promote implementation of EiA activities across research stages, closing the gap between academic and policy spaces.
• RS and TF promote evidence-informed decision making through common regional platforms for academics and policy influencers to interact face-to-face and debate evidence implications.
• FS sustain a 'buddy' system between academics and policymakers. EHPSA built on existing relationships and responded flexibility to opportunities. The matching calibre of fellow and policymaker, attention to contextual matters and joint work on policy relevant matters in Swaziland contributed to the success.

Conclusions: The EHPSA approach ensures that evidence uptake does not only take place after peer review and publication. Early engagement and investment in stimulating debates increases the chances of evidence uptake once the body of research is disseminated into the policy and practice domain. EHPSA’s approach is replicable but has to be resourced.