- Poster presentation
- Open Access
Participation of policy actors in the development of health policies in India and Nigeria and the implications for the role of evidence in policy-making
BMC Health Services Research volume 14, Article number: P27 (2014)
Policy-making can be described as a complex decisionmaking process involving different actors engaged in negotiating their interests  and promoting different types of evidence. Policy informed by research evidence is widely seen as a good thing. However Monaghan  indicated that ‘Policy-makers may fish for evidence, select the beneficial bits and throw back those that are un-required’. This discretion in evidence and policy (EaP) processes and the selected participation of policy actors is inherently political. Our research analyses the participation of actors in EaP processes in India and Nigeria.
Materials and methods
We examined three policies in each country: internationally-prominent; internationally-neglected and health systems policies. The study was guided by a conceptual framework linking EaP processes. Qualitative data was collected using documents review and in-depth interviews and analysed using framework approach.
We identified seven groups of actors involved in EaP processes with different and specific evidence preferences. The executive branch of government and civil servants were leading policy development, while legislators and judiciary appeared to be absent in both countries. Academics with limited power provided research evidence and participated in all policies except for tobacco control, where the tobacco industry was involved. Health workers were less visible in both countries. CSOs played a prominent role in India advocating for vulnerable people and contributing context-specific evidence. Development organisations played a powerful role providing expertise and resources for the production of evidence except for the policy on social activists in India. The media played no significant role in both countries except for the Indian AIDS policy.
The participation of powerful actors in EaP processes can influence the contribution of evidence in policy-making. The involvement of diverse policy actors in EaP processes may ensure a wider array of evidence types, promote social learning and ultimately strengthen policy and practice.
Sound Choices: Enhancing Capacity for Evidence-Informed Health Policy. Edited by: Green A, Bennett S. 2007, Geneva: Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research
Monaghan M: Evidence Versus Politics: Exploiting Research in UK Drug Policy Making?. 2011, Bristol: The Policy press
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
About this article
Cite this article
Huss, R., Das, M., Ebenso, B. et al. Participation of policy actors in the development of health policies in India and Nigeria and the implications for the role of evidence in policy-making. BMC Health Serv Res 14 (Suppl 2), P27 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-S2-P27
- Social Learning
- Research Evidence
- Civil Servant
- Powerful Actor
- Tobacco Control