Abstract
Abstract
Background
The unprecedented amount of resources dedicated to humanitarian aid has led many stakeholders to demand the use of reliable evidence in humanitarian aid decisions to ensure that desired impacts are achieved at acceptable costs. However, little is known about the factors that influence the use of research evidence in the policy development in humanitarian crises. We examined how research evidence was used to inform two humanitarian policies made in response to the Syrian refugee crisis.
Methods
We identified two policies as rich potential case studies to examine the use of evidence in humanitarian aid policy decision-making: Lebanon’s 2016 Health Response Strategy and Ontario’s 2016 Phase 2: Health System Action Plan, Syrian Refugees. To study each, we used an embedded qualitative case study methodology and recruited senior decision-makers, policy advisors, and healthcare providers who were involved with the development of each policy. We reviewed publicly available documents and media articles that spoke to the factors that influence the process. We used the analytic technique of explanation building to understand the factors that influence the use of research evidence in the policy-development process in crisis zones.
Results
We interviewed eight informants working in government and six in international agencies in Lebanon, and two informants working in healthcare provider organizations and two in non-governmental organizations in Ontario, for a total of 18 key informants. Based on our interviews and documentary analysis, we identified that there was limited use of research evidence and that four broad categories of factors helped to explain the policy-development process for Syrian refugees – development of health policies without significant chance for derailment from other government bodies (Lebanon) or opposition parties (Ontario) (i.e., facing no veto points), government’s engagement with key societal actors to inform the policy-development process, the values underpinning the process, and external factors significantly influencing the policy-development process.
Conclusions
This study suggests that use of research evidence in the policy-development process for Syrian refugees was subordinate to key political factors, resulting in limited influence of research evidence in the development of both the Lebanese and Ontarian policy.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health(social science)
Reference55 articles.
1. Mahmood J, Ngom M, Delargy P, Tambashe B, Jongstra E, Oussein S. Guidelines on data issues in humanitarian crisis situations. New York: UNFPA; 2010.
2. Blanchet K, Roberts B, Sistenich V, Ramesh A, Frison S, Warren E, et al. An evidence review of research on health interventions in humanitarian crises. Final Report. 2013.
3. Grais RF, Strebel P, Mala P, Watson J, Nandy R, Gayer M. Measles vaccination in humanitarian emergencies: a review of recent practice. Confl Heal. 2011;5(1):21.
4. El-Jardali F, Hammoud R, Fouad F, Bou KL. K2P Briefing Note: Promoting Access to Essential Health Care Services for Syrian Refugees in Lebanon. Beirut: Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center; 2014. p. 6.
5. Ostrand N. The Syrian refugee crisis: a comparison of responses by Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. J Migr Hum Secur. 2015;3(3):255–79.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献