Research Matters has launched a web resource for knowledge brokers and intermediaries, which includes those who are interested in knowledge translation and how research evidence can influence decision making. The forum is a shared space for knowledge brokers and intermediaries, people involved in knowledge translation and peers interested in the subject. It is designed as a space where they can access and share resources on the strategic, practical and technical aspects of knowledge brokering and intermediary work, learn from a global community of peers working in the field and share experiences with others. In addition to providing a space for discussions, requesting peer advice and posting knowledge translation-related blogs, the forum will be hosting regular themed discussions, including how evidence is used in the development of policy and practice and what this means for knowledge brokers and intermediaries, how to conduct knowledge brokering and intermediation on issues where opinion divides sharply, and how to measure the effectiveness of knowledge brokering and intermediation.
Useful Resources
The Equity-Oriented Toolkit is currently in the process of being updated and expanded. It is based on a needs-based model of health technology assessment (HTA). It provides tools that explicitly consider health equity at each of the four steps of HTA: burden of illness, community effectiveness, economic evaluation, knowledge translation and implementation. It also incorporates concepts of health impact assessment within the HTA process. The World Health Organization is seeking suggestions on validated and widely disseminated HTA tools that explicitly consider health equity and that are relevant to the toolkit. These tools may be specific analytical methods such as the Disability-Adjusted Life Years, checklists such as the Health Impact Screening Checklist, software programmes such as the Harvard Policy Maker, databases such as The Cochrane Library. Visit the website to make your suggestions.
In 1970, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 2626 (1), which pledged for the first time that developed nations would provide 0.7% of their wealth in foreign aid. Forty years later this pledge has yet to be realised and currently looks unlikely to be met. On the 40th anniversary of the Resolution, Action for Global Health has launched an ‘Action Tracker’, an online tool that tracks the contributions that European Union (EU) member states make to improve health in developing countries. It determines whether or not these states are actually providing 0.7% of their wealth for development aid, and calculates how much of this aid is devoted to health. So far the Action Tracker has data on about half the countries in the EU, but will develop over time to include all 27 EU member states. It will also assess to what extent they are implementing their commitments to make this aid more effective and ensuring their other policies support health in developing countries.
The Global Health Diplomacy Network (GHD.Net) brings together researchers and practitioners with the common goal of improving capacity for health diplomacy (GHD). GHD.Net defines ‘global health diplomacy’ as the policy-shaping processes through which States, intergovernmental organisations and non-State actors negotiate responses to health challenges or utilise health concepts or mechanisms in policy-shaping and negotiation strategies to achieve other political, economic or social objectives. GHD.Net’s mission is to increase knowledge about GHD, improve training and education for those who engage in GHD, and innovate in the provision of advice into GHD processes. Through its website, publications, and other activities, it aims to put in the public domain up-to-date information on research and training in this field. It will also track and report on current diplomatic negotiations that have direct or indirect impact on health policy and health. It has four functions: to act as a clearinghouse for GHD-related information; to enhance connectivity among network participants; to develop content for research, training and education; and to build capacity, especially in partnership with interested institutions and individuals in low-income countries. GHD.Net will also identify the characteristics of health as a foreign policy and diplomatic issue and provide research, training, and policy-relevant inputs to contribute to improving the protection and promotion of health through foreign policy and diplomatic means. It offers training and regularly calls for submission of research papers.
The INDEPTH Network has conducted two INDEPTH Health Equity studies. Study Phase 1, which is leading to a monograph, demonstrated that large disparities exist in terms of health outcomes among different socio-economic subgroups among populations in INDEPTH sites that cover small geographically defined populations. These sites include two countries in southern Africa - Tanzania and South Africa. With this evidence, the Network decided to move to the next stage, Study Phase 2, to develop intervention studies or manipulate existing interventions to have a pro-poor focus in order to inform policy. The Network has also developed a tool for measuring socio-economic status, which is available on their website.
The Canadian Institute of Health Research Institute of Gender and Health (IGH) Cochrane Corner is a new online resource that highlights reviews pertinent to gender, sex, and health questions. It aims to introduce those working in gender, sex, and health to the methods of the Cochrane Collaboration and, reciprocally, to bring awareness of sex- and gender-based analyses to the Cochrane community. The Corner will provide a range of knowledge users with a gender- and sex-focused entrée into the collection of research evidence provided through the Cochrane Library. By creating a focused collection of systematic reviews relevant to gender, sex, and health, the IGH Cochrane Corner will be a valuable tool for knowledge translation in the field. The Corner also features an original series of columns, which highlight methodological, substantive, or newsworthy issues related to sex, gender, health, and systematic reviews. The columns reflect current knowledge and activities in the field.
This paper discusses the need for specific pro-poor measures to ensure water service provision to poor urban populations. Given the proven importance of pro-poor measures for urban water service delivery and viability, the question arises as to why such measures are not undertaken by utilities as normal practice. Although financial constraints matter, they do not constitute the only barrier. The report argues that the missing ingredient needed in order to reach poor people is accountability to the people, which necessitates the meaningful involvement of users in the planning, delivery and monitoring of water services. This increases the chances of delivering reliable, sustainable and affordable water services to more urban inhabitants. The engagement of users in utility reforms and ongoing service improvement processes is crucial, since reforms to improve efficiency (inevitably the main driver for reforms) do not necessarily translate into geographical equity or a commitment to serve the poor. Without incentives, a clear mandate to serve the poor or a ‘champion’, companies chase markets that are ‘easy’, offer the highest returns and do not require subsidies. However, user engagement is far from simple and its outcomes far from predictable. The paper draws on a variety of literature, as well as a series of key-informant interviews.
The One World Trust, with support from the International Development and Research Centre, has created an interactive, online database of tools to help organisations conducting policy relevant research become more accountable. The database provides an inventory of over two hundred tools, standards and processes within a broad, overarching accountability framework. With a dynamic interface and several search functions, it allows users to identify aspects of accountability that interests them, and provides ideas to improve their accountability in this context. Each tool is supported by sources and further reading. The site also encourages engagement with and discussion on the database content, through allowing users to comment on individual tools, or to submit their own tools, processes and standards for inclusion. The database is an output of a three-year project, titled ‘Accountability Principles for Research Organisations’. Working with partners across the globe, the project has generated an accountability framework which is sufficiently flexible to apply to many contexts and different organisations.
The Rural Health Advocacy Project (RHAP) was launched in August 2009 in response to the specific health challenges in rural areas. The RHAP believes that a focus on rural health is key to improving national health outcomes and achieving progress towards the millennium development goals. This is because rural communities have poorer health status, less access to health care facilities, fewer resources, less information and fewer health care professionals than their counterparts in urban areas. The RHAP believes that for South Africa to improve its health outcomes, the problems faced by rural communities need specific attention. The RHAP is a partnership between the Wits Centre for Rural Health (CRH), the Rural Doctors Association of Southern Africa (RuDASA) and SECTION27, incorporating the AIDS Law Project. The website contains news items and papers by researchers on various topics regarding rural health, such as health worker retention, health services and health financing.
This Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA) manual aims to systematically identify, predict and respond to projects' potential impacts on human rights. The goal of this methodology is to assist in the creation of valid, useful and ultimately meaningful human rights impact assessments. The process of creating and using HRIA is still in its early phases, the manual observes and their relevance will depend on a continuing improvement of method, capacity and result which can only be accomplished through the sharing of experience and information between companies and assessors. The methodology looks at HRIA assessment sources, goals, and types. It covers basic concepts and looks provides five steps for implementation: gather project contexts and company information; drawing up a preliminary list of impacted rights; drawing up a preliminary list of impacted right holders; special topics; and inquiry guided by topic catalogue. The manual offers recommendations for policies, procedures, structures and action. It also provides an appendix of other tools and selected best practices.