How can we strengthen evidence ecosystems within governments to maximise uptake and buy-in? Insights from a high-level policy panel

Natasha Ahuja

Often efforts to scale evidence-based interventions within government systems fail. This suggests that producing evidence is only part of the solution—understanding how policymakers prioritise learning and how they interpret and use that evidence is equally important.

With this in mind, the What Works Hub for Global Education convened a high-level policy panel at its 2024 annual conference. The goal of the session was to open a rich conversation about how evidence ecosystems with and within governments can be strengthened. We gathered experts from various countries who are deeply engaged with the complexities of policy making and evidence use to share their insights on how we, as a Hub, can facilitate evidence uptake.

The panel (Image 1) featured Armando Ali (The People’s Action for Learning Network), Dhir Jhingran (Language and Learning Foundation), Maroof Syed (Centre for Economic Research in Pakistan), and Pauline Rose (REAL Centre, University of Cambridge), and was chaired by Judith Herbertson from the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office.

Image 1: High-level policy panel – Evidence ecosystems with and within governments (© What Works Hub for Global Education 2024)

Here are some of my takeaways from the discussion.

1. Politics and trust matter in evidence uptake

One of the central themes that emerged from the panel was the importance of trust and political context in shaping evidence use.  As Pauline Rose noted, policymakers are often pressed for time and have many competing priorities. Building trust through sustained engagement is therefore crucial to ensure that research is not only seen but used.¹

Moreover, the political environment matters. Policies related to education, especially foundational skills, don’t always receive the same attention as politically visible issues.² In many cases, learning is not a political priority because it is harder to measure and less visible in the short term. Recognising these political dynamics is crucial when working with governments on evidence-based reforms.³

2. Evidence must be simple and clear

Dhir Jhingran highlighted a recurring and familiar challenge: too often, research findings are presented in ways that are inaccessible or too technical for policymakers to use effectively. He emphasised the need for simplifying evidence without losing its rigour, so that it becomes directly relevant to decision-making.⁴

Jhingran pointed out that policymakers often base decisions on what seems feasible or what aligns with their immediate priorities, rather than on nuanced or evidence-based results. To bridge this gap, researchers must communicate evidence in ways that resonate with policymakers’ needs, ensuring that the evidence is not just understood but can be acted upon.⁵

3. Success stories give us reasons to hope

Despite the challenges, there are several examples of success where evidence has influenced policy. Armando Ali shared one such story from Kenya about citizen-led assessments, which were initially designed as a tool to fill data gaps about children’s reading levels.

There is evidence now that such assessments provide vital data for policymakers, helping to highlight learning gaps that traditional metrics overlook. These tools not only generate data but also foster accountability by involving communities in the process (R4D, 2016; Westbrook et al., 2013). Armando shared how the results from these assessments in Kenya sparked important discussions within the Ministry of Education, leading to shifts in government priorities.

This example illustrates that evidence can drive change when it is well-timed and aligned with local priorities. The key is not only generating evidence but ensuring it resonates with decision-makers and is presented in ways that can prompt real change.

4. Civil society and research institutions can play a vital, complementary role

There was also discussion on the role that external partners such as civil society organisations and research institutions play in the evidence ecosystem. Governments, by their nature, often have limited capacity to analyse data or pilot new interventions, but external actors can provide the necessary technical expertise and serve as ‘honest brokers’.

External partners can contribute not just by providing evidence but by training bureaucrats to use data more effectively, strengthening the government’s ability to make informed decisions. This complementary role is essential to strengthening the evidence ecosystem within governments. As Maroof Syed highlighted, successful partnerships between external actors and governments can lead to more effective use of evidence in policy, especially when external players focus on supporting government capacity.

5. Addressing gender and socially disadvantaged groups

The panel emphasised that the Hub has an important role to play in addressing inequalities in the countries where it operates, ensuring that gender and social inclusion are at the forefront of its work. Ensuring that these marginalised groups are prioritised in the scaling of evidence-based policies is critical to achieving meaningful and lasting change.

Efforts under Pauline Rose’s leadership will ensure that gender considerations are integrated into all stages of research and policy development, from identifying research questions to measuring cost-effectiveness with an equity lens. This approach will help ensure that the policies developed are not only effective but inclusive, reaching those most in need and addressing the structural inequalities that limit access to quality education.

Conclusion: Much to learn, much to do

The challenge at hand was very aptly summarised by Judith Herbertson:

“We know that research and evidence are only useful if they inform and change the way decision making is taken on policies and delivery for governments, donors, civil society organisations, and researchers themselves. And if this evidence is being used exclusively by those not running countries, it isn’t really landing where it needs to.”

As a Hub, we have the chance to play a crucial role in facilitating these processes by bringing together policymakers, researchers, and practitioners in ways that encourage long-term partnerships, foster trust, and prioritise the needs of governments.

The road ahead may be challenging, but it is full of opportunity. In the spirit of Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG4), we look forward to learning how we can make progress on strengthening these systems.⁶ The insights shared at this panel are just the beginning of what we hope will be an ongoing, evolving conversation.

Watch video of the full session on YouTube.

Footnotes

1. Research supports this, showing that evidence-based decision-making is more likely to occur when there is sustained interaction between policymakers and researchers. For example, Nutley, Walter, and Davies (2007) argue that strong relationships and regular exchanges between these groups lead to greater evidence use in policy.
2. For example Pritchett (2020) has pointed out that learning outcomes often have lower political salience compared to other issues like expanding access to education or improving infrastructure, which are more easily visible and quantifiable.
3. Research by Oliver, Lorenc, and Innvær (2014) highlight that the political and institutional context can significantly impact how evidence is perceived and used, meaning that policymakers are more likely to adopt evidence when it aligns with their political objectives and when they trust the sources providing the data. Therefore, engaging with governments requires not just good evidence, but also an understanding of their political realities and priorities.
4. This is supported by research on evidence-use in policy, which shows that simplicity and clarity in communication are critical for influencing policy (Cairney and Kwiatkowski (2017)).
5. This paper by Cairney and Oliver (2020) includes a summary of tips for engaging with policymakers from 86 publications across disciplines, and the points raised there are consistent with the issues the panel raised, including the importance of making research readable; policymakers tend to favour evidence that is clear, actionable, and fits within their broader political agenda.
6. Judith Herbertson, the chair of the session, reminded us in her closing remarks of the meta connection to SDG 4.

Ahuja, N. 2024. How can we strengthen evidence ecosystems within governments to maximise uptake and buy-in? Insights from a high-level policy panel. What Works Hub for Global Education. 2024/006. https://doi.org/10.35489/BSG-WhatWorksHubforGlobalEducation-BL_2024/006