Whiteside and Henry Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9(Suppl 1):S9 Page 2 of 10http://www.biomedcentral.com/1478-4505/9/S1/S9economy there were few hard data to back this up. The emergency thresholds, health, social indicators, orphans,people of Swaziland knew that they were attending coping mechanisms, economic growth and investmentmore funerals, agricultural production was declining, and agriculture. These were tracked over time. Forand the economy was in difficulty. However, no one had advocacy purposes Swazi data was compared with thatcollected data across all sectors and looked at the effects of Zambia and Malawi, poorer countries with lower pre-on the country as a whole. valence. The report painted a bleak picture showing that In early 2007 the terms of reference for a study to Swaziland is experiencing a humanitarian crisis compar-assess the impact of the AIDS epidemic across the able to countries besieged by conflict or struggling innation were drawn up. The ideas were developed pri- the wake of a severe natural disaster. AIDS has been amarily by Dr Derek Von Wissell, Head of the National slow-onset disaster, leading to a long-term catastrophe,Emergency Response Council on HIV/AIDS in Swazi- but requiring an urgent response.land (NERCHA) and Professor Alan Whiteside, Director The report spoke to two audiences. For Swazi’s it con-of the Health Economics and HIV/AIDS Research Divi- firmed that AIDS was indeed having a devastating effectsion (HEARD) at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. The on their nation. The same message was aimed at the inter-research was partly funded by HEARD and led by Amy national community. However it also urged the latter toWhalley, a former Overseas Development Institute Fel- re-examine the HIV and AIDS epidemic. It sought tolow who had worked with NERCHA and the Ministry of broaden the traditional consensus on what constitutes anHealth and guided by Whiteside and staff at NERCHA. emergency to include ‘long-wave emergencies’. EffectiveWhalley’s task was to gather and analyse information on interventions require both an immediate emergencywhat was going on across the nation using available response but also have to build capacity for long-term pro-data sets; to compare Swaziland’s situation with other grammes . In the course of the research the country’scountries and thus build advocacy material for use classification emerged as an important issue. As a lower-inside the country and with the international commu- middle income country Swaziland is not eligible for inter-nity. The write up was primarily by Whalley with major national development assistance (IDA) grants from theinput by Whiteside. In October 2007 the report, World Bank, and concessional-lending . The report‘Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland: Shifting the challenged the use of GDP per capita as an indicator to setParadigm in a New Era’, (here after called ‘Reviewing the status of a country and its access to support in the faceEmergencies’) was published , distributed and disse- of a generalised AIDS epidemic. It noted the global per-minated. In June 2008 the impact of the work was eval- ception of ‘middle-income countries’ is that they need lessuated and is the subject of the article. support and are somehow ‘less deserving’. (Figure 1)Reviewing Emergencies ReportReviewing Emergencies used key socio-economic indica- Methodstors from many sources to build a holistic and multidi- Assessing the impact: The research to policy interfacemensional picture of impact of HIV/AIDS in Swaziland. Much of SRH and HIV and AIDS research, particularlyInformation was obtained on demographic changes, in the development arena, aims to influence policy, it is Figure 1: Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland: Shifting the Paradigm in a New Era “Traditional humanitarian thinking focuses on the short term, and is often aimed at returning affected populations to ‘normality’. HIV/AIDS in Swaziland has been characterized by a slow onset of impacts [falling economic growth, increasing poverty, mortality and morbidity, and associated changes in the demographic structure of society] that have failed to command an emergency response. With insufficient resource allocation and a lack of capacity, slow onset events can become emergencies... The case of Swaziland emphasizes that emergencies can be long term, complex, widespread events that evolve over years.” . Figure 1 Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland: Shifting the Paradigm in a New Era
Whiteside and Henry Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9(Suppl 1):S9 Page 3 of 10http://www.biomedcentral.com/1478-4505/9/S1/S9“research committed to improvement” . Policy makers This article was developed from the assessmentare increasingly concerned to make policy choices assisted by a presentation given at the meeting of DFIDunderpinned by rigorous research. The research-to-pol- funded Research Programme Consortia on ‘Strengthen-icy interface is a fast growing area of study, particularly ing the research to policy and practice interface: Explor-in the SRH and HIV and AIDS research communities. ing strategies used by research organisations working onThe purposes are two fold: accountability of a research Sexual and Reproductive Health and HIV and AIDS’organisation, demonstrating achievement and value for held in Liverpool in May 2009; and through peer review.money for funders; and as a learning exercise, develop- In an ideal world an impact assessment should being a better understanding of the research impact pro- designed from the outset; this ultimately makes the pro-cess in order to enhance future impact . HEARD is cess of collecting information to track impact easier.an applied research organisation aiming to mobilise evi- This was not done due to lack of staff and time and isdence for interventions in health and HIV in the region acknowledged as a limitation. The lesson learnt is to. Only by identifying where change has transpired as plan dissemination and the evaluation of activities at thea result of its research, where it has not, and the reasons beginning of a project, and budget for this.for this, can it deliver effective research. Forward-tracking and attribution Impact assessment is an underdeveloped field of Two broad categories exist for impact assessments; for-study, in part due to the complex and dynamic nature ward-tracking, from research to outcome, and back-of research impacts and the consequent difficulty in wards-tracking, from decisions taken to potentialmeasuring them. Sumner, Perkins and Lindstrom research influence. Our impact assessment wanted to(2008, unpublished) identify a number of significant track from publication to outcome. However, forward-problems when attempting to track the impact of tracking approaches can have serious limitations .research: difficulty in determining conceptual influence They are often linear in approach, neglecting the com-(on opinion, attitudes and thinking); identifying plexity of the processes at work and the significance ofresearch users, timing of assessment; attributing impact context. The policy environment is influenced by socio-in the context of other drivers; and using qualitative cultural, political and economic factors and these mustand subjective data . Notwithstanding such issues, be acknowledged in order to understand why an impactif real understanding of research-to-policy interface is took place. Taking this into account, the assessmentto be achieved, an assessment must also explain why attempts to put identified ‘impacts’ into a relevantimpacts took place, going beyond just identifying them. context.Difficult as it may be, there are good reasons for The assessment cannot claim to fully understand theattempting to evaluate the impact of policy research influence of other ‘drivers’ on outcomes. Policy research. The assessment considered here offers an exam- is only one of many sources of information used in deci-ple of this work, in the context of a complex and sion making or to form opinion. To conceptualise themulti-player environment. counterfactual, and isolate the impacts of ReviewingMethodology and issues Emergencies alone, would be both resource intensiveIt seemed that the Reviewing Emergencies report had and difficult to determine. As a consequence, the impactbeen effective in influencing policymakers. We believed assessment could not claim outright attribution of policythe report had had an impact for Swaziland both con- impacts. It instead recognises impacts as contributionsceptually, on the way people think about HIV, AIDS to change, where the evidence supported such claims.and emergency responses and instrumentally, influen- This difficult methodological issue of attributing out-cing behaviour and policy. In mid 2008, the decision comes can result in a ‘shying away’ from impact assess-was taken to carry out an assessment of the impact of ments . However, with a pragmatic approach tothe report to determine the validity of this claim and understanding impact, based on evidence and informedunderstand what ‘worked’ and what ‘didn’t’. Fiona opinion, and understanding that impacts will rarely beHenry, who was awarded a fellowship by the University attributed solely to an individual publication or pro-of Edinburgh to work with HEARD, was tasked with gramme, an impact assessment can still be of value.leading the assessment. Conceptualising ‘impact’: A temporal approach The specific objectives were to: ‘Impact’ is used interchangeably with terms such as • Document the creation and dissemination of the ‘influence’, ‘outcomes’, ‘use’ and ‘uptake’, and a numberreport; of definitions exist in the literature . In the assess- • Identify and explain its impact; ment of the Reviewing Emergencies impact is defined • Identify any barriers and/or limitations to its impact; temporally, referring to ‘initial impact’, ‘long-term • Draw lessons for maximising the impact of future impact’ and ‘potential impact’. This is important. Firstly,research. initial impact refers to the ‘sticky messages’ of the
Whiteside and Henry Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9(Suppl 1):S9 Page 4 of 10http://www.biomedcentral.com/1478-4505/9/S1/S9report: what strikes the reader instantly about the report The methods consisted first of a literature review, toand its findings and the key messages that they come develop understanding of the background and terms ofaway with. Identifying those findings, statements or reference for the study. Relevant policy documents, arti-graphs that resonated with the reader would provide cles, op-eds and minutes of key meetings were reviewed.powerful tools for communicating messages of future A questionnaire with questions relating to influence toresearch. Secondly, impact was assumed to have a date, potential influence and barriers to influence acrosslonger-term element, influencing thinking and decision sectors was distributed to 50 individuals, in the five sec-making. This constituted the main body of the assess- tors. Questions asked the respondents to rank howment. ‘Long-term impacts’ are those conceptual and influential they thought the report had been in differentinstrumental impacts that change understanding and areas, from ‘no influence’ to a ‘very large influence’attitudes or contribute to a change in policy or beha- (including a ‘don’t know’ option). They were then askedviour. As the assessment took place about a year after to give examples or describe why they believed this levelthe launch of Reviewing Emergencies, ‘potential impact’ of influence had been achieved.considered the possibility of impact in the future. With Detailed interviews were conducted with five key peo-continued advocacy, and changes to the policy environ- ple who had significant involvement in the creation andment, potential impact outlines the ‘capability’ of the dissemination of the report. Twenty questionnaires werereport’s findings. It highlights areas in which to focus returned; unfortunately, given time restraints, a follow-advocacy efforts in the future. up of the original questionnaire to increase responseResearch users rates was not possible. In analysing feedback from ques-Policy research can be used for multiple, often unfore- tionnaires, the percentage of answers for each rankingseen, purposes . Tracking a research contribution, were calculated. Similar details or examples from bothespecially one that seeks conceptual change, is difficult. respondents and interviewees were grouped together toTaking a pragmatic approach, a good place to begin is find trends in opinion.identifying likely users of research. The impact assess- We recognised a positive bias could exist. Firstly, thement chose five sectors for analysis to try to encompass writing of the assessment assumed an impact hadkey actors. They were: donors; government; civil society occurred. To mitigate this problem, a ‘no influence’and non-governmental organisations; academia and the option was included in the questionnaire. Secondly, themedia. Identifying them helped to structure the analysis respondents that worked on creating the report, orand understand the different ‘uptake’ of the research. those in close partnership with the writers, may giveThe categories were purposefully broad in recognition optimistic estimates of the report’s impact to validateof the broad array of policy players, and to enable flex- their own work. For this reason, weight was given toibility in analysis; crossing national boundaries and disci- opinion that was reinforced with explicit examples, andplines. Lessons from Swaziland, we believed, would be to those highlighting barriers, limitations or negativeapplicable elsewhere in the region, especially in Lesotho, impacts of the report.Namibia and Botswana as these are all defined as lower-middle-income countries; have similar prevalence levels; Results and discussionand are members (with South Africa) of the Southern Key findingsAfrican Customs Union. It was also important as Minis- In the assessment the three elements (initial, long-term,tries of Health are often weak and in many African and potential) of impact were discussed for each of thecountries donor policies have a disproportionate influ- five sectors, providing a specific and detailed account ofence on health. ‘impact’ . See Figure 2 for an overview of these find-Data and measurement ings. The focus is not on the impacts, but on the find-‘Measuring’ impact posed some difficulty. Changes to ings which helped to explain them. It is these lessonsthinking and decisions are particularly hard to quantify. that are key to creating effective HIV and AIDS researchFor this reason a qualitative approach was used, asking in future.how and why people believed the report had altered The significance of communicationtheir approach to the Swazi epidemic, and what impact The questionnaire asked, “What is the single most strik-they believed the report had. Anecdotal evidence and ing aspect of the report (e.g. a graph, a statistic, a state-substantive examples were key to supporting such ment)?” The graphs were singled out by respondents.beliefs in the absence of quantitative evidence. Impact Where they were not specifically cited, the conceptswas ultimately considered against the aims of the report: they conveyed were seen as important. One respondentdetermining what was achieved as intended, what was answered, “A combination of statistics, graphical illustra-not achieved, and any unintended impacts. tions and words are used effectively to convey the
Whiteside and Henry Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9(Suppl 1):S9 Page 5 of 10http://www.biomedcentral.com/1478-4505/9/S1/S9 Figure 2: A Summary of ‘Impacts’ from ‘Assessing the Impact of ‘Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland: Shifting the Paradigm in a New Era’ “The paper has had the greatest impact to date on the donor community, as intended. An increased awareness of the gloomy outlook for Swaziland if nothing changes has been achieved, at least in part, amongst some key donors. This is exemplified by the World Bank fact finding mission to Swaziland following the presentation of the report’s findings, the resulting Interim Strategy Note (ISN), and the discussion of Swaziland’s plight at key high level meetings… Influencing the framework within which countries are assessed by income level has proved difficult. Despite the socio economic indicators in Swaziland that tell a very different story to its low middle income status, there has been little sign of change to this measure from the international community. The World Bank has recognised that the status masks severe poverty and inequality. However, it is not yet clear if this will result in a real change to the current system… Donors, academics and NGOs, such as The Red Cross, have all engaged with the debate on ‘emergencies’ partially as a result of the paper [in their 2008 ‘World Disasters Report’ they claim that one reason global, regional and national responses have, for the most part, been only fitfully successful is that HIV is rarely referred to as an emergency (The Red Cross 2008: 61)]. Further advocacy and research will be necessary to continue this debate, and to see a shift in the current paradigm of thinking on what constitutes an ‘emergency.’” . Figure 2 A Summary of ‘Impacts’ from ‘Assessing the Impact of ‘Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland: Shifting the Paradigm in a New Era’message”, illustrating the clear use of these tools in the equivalent burden there would be nearly 11.5 millionoriginal report. British citizens infected. When presenting these data, it The demographic implications of the HIV and AIDS would be tailored to the audience – for example talkingepidemic on the Swazi population had a significant in Sweden the presenter said ‘Swaziland’s prevalenceimpact on the readers. In particular respondents cited would be equivalent to 1.75 million Swedes being‘Figure 8: Swaziland Population Pyramids’, in Whiteside infected’.and Whalley 2007 (shown below) and the concept that a It is unsurprising that such dramatic predictions of thepermanent alteration of the structure of Swazi society effects of the epidemic on the structure of the popula-has occurred. (Figure 3)  tion would strike the reader. It demonstrates the neces- The application of Swaziland’s HIV prevalence rate to sity of clearly reiterating and educating about the long-western countries, in Table 2 (page 8) of the report term consequences of the epidemic. Shortly after the‘stuck’ with some. This table shows if the UK had the publication of Reviewing Emergencies the government Figure 3: Swaziland Population Pyramids 2000, 2025 and 2050 1. US Census Bureau International Database 2007. [www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/] Figure 3 Swaziland Population Pyramids 2000, 2025 and 2050
Whiteside and Henry Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9(Suppl 1):S9 Page 6 of 10http://www.biomedcentral.com/1478-4505/9/S1/S9released preliminary data from the national 2007 census academics and businesses. Informally, according to Vonshowing a decline in the population - 17, 489 fewer Wissell, many others have discussed the report, includ-Swazis than in 1997 . The serendipitous release of ing numerous missions, delegations and envoys. Thethis data helped give Reviewing Emergencies report was made accessible online by HEARD  andmomentum. NERCHA as well as UNAIDS , Relief Web , Successful dissemination was crucial, but wide disse- Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysismination is not the same as wide impact, and it cannot Network  and Aidsportal. (Table 1)be assumed that the former naturally or inevitably leads HEARD and NERCHA co-ordinated their efforts into the latter . The communication and advocacy communicating the findings. The delivery of the mes-efforts surrounding a message help facilitate impact and sage itself was particularly significant. It had a coherenceare important to understanding where, how and why achieved by using the same slide set – presenters wereimpact was achieved. ‘singing from the same song sheet.’ However, presenta- The report was presented and formally discussed at a tions were tailored to the audiences; Von Wissell pre-consultation in July 2007. It was available in print from sented to Swazi audiences in SiSwati; in Scandinavia theOctober 2007, and a core set of power point slides was importance of donors was stressed.developed and presented to a range of organisations An example of the impact achieved by this dissemina-inside and beyond Swaziland. The audiences included tion process was exemplified by the visit of representa-civil servants, politicians, the donor community, NGOs, tives of the World Bank. In November 2007, the HumanTable 1 The Dissemination of “Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland”, July 2007 to April 2008 Presentation of ‘Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland’Month Government Donors NGOs Institutes of Education BusinessJul - Drafts circulated for comment to UNAIDS and US Government among others. In August some of the content exposed to NERCHASep AGM which is attended by many local stakeholders and donors2007Oct SIDA Reference Group, Lusaka2007 World Bank, including Vice President of the World BankNov Cabinet and OCHA/RIASCO, Johannesburg2007 Principle Secretaries in SwazilandDec Parliamentary HIV/AIDS and Development. A2007 Portfolio Case Study from Swaziland AIID Committees for Workshop, Amsterdam PM’s Office and Health Swaziland Partnership Forum on HIV/AIDSFeb NERCHA Council AIDS and Development: The Church Forum, Swaziland2008 case of Swaziland’ Rockefeller Brothers Foundation, Cape TownMar The Donor Forum, The AIDS, Development The AIDS, Development Royal Swazi2008 Swaziland Emergency, Conundrum: A Case Emergency, Conundrum: A Case Sugar Company Study of Swaziland’ Medicine Study of Swaziland’ Institute of and surrounding Sans Frontiers, Brussels Tropical Medicine, Antwerp companiesApr April ‘AIDS impact on economic ‘Rethinking Emergencies: ‘Rethinking Emergencies: Federation of2008 and other development Swaziland a Case Study’, Swaziland a Case Study’, Harvard Employers and indicators: the case of Population Council Seminar School of Public Health Seminar, Chamber of Swaziland’ UNAIDS Meeting New York Cambridge MA USA Commerce Executive Director of the ‘Rethinking Emergencies: ‘Rethinking Emergencies: Global Fund and delegation Swaziland a Case Study’ IFPRI, Swaziland a Case Study’ South Washington African Reading Group, New York Law School, New YorkPresentations in bold were conducted by Dr. Derek Von Wissell, Director of NERCHA, and those in italics by Professor Alan Whiteside of HEARD.
Whiteside and Henry Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9(Suppl 1):S9 Page 7 of 10http://www.biomedcentral.com/1478-4505/9/S1/S9Development Vice President and Country Director from with whom HEARD and NERCHA had establishedthe World Bank visited Swaziland to assess first-hand links. As one respondent commented, “The wide net-the country’s situation in human development and HIV work of individuals, organisations and donors withand AIDS. They met with key government officials whom HEARD and NERCHA are affiliated were key toincluding the Minister of Finance, and Von Wissell. It its wide reception”. The effectiveness of historic rela-was here that Von Wissell presented Reviewing Emer- tionships such as these, built on both individual andgencies. One World Bank official described the effect of institutional credibility cannot be underestimated. Forthis by saying, “It was NERCHA’s presentation that example Whiteside had served on a UN Commissionbrought home the gravity of the HIV/AIDS situation in with the Deputy President of the World Bank, and is aSwaziland”, and subsequently the World Bank sent a Governor of a school in Swaziland; Von Wissell heldmission to Swaziland to explore next steps for the Bank. the position of Minister of Trade and Industry and Min-The presentation of the report’s findings was critical to ister of Health in previous governments. The messagethis decision. was delivered by people driven to see change and whoEngagement, timing and credibility could speak with authority. Both NERCHA and HEARDThe work built on a long-term engagement of Whiteside are known as being responsive to need and based onand HEARD with Swaziland. This historical background principled operations. In addition, the involvement ofis particularly important to both locate the research and NERCHA - a Swazi based and Swazi run body - createdthe response to it. The timeline below shows the pro- an ‘ownership’ of the research and a further credibilitygression of HIV/AIDS in Swaziland through significant to its message.events and statistics, simultaneous to key examples of Terminologyresearch conducted on the epidemic by HEARD and The specific terminology used in research can both helpassociates. As the timeline shows, Reviewing Emergen- and hinder the impact of a message. In Reviewing Emer-cies built on three major reports in 1994, 2003 and gencies the term and concept of a ‘long-wave emergency’2006, which illustrated there was something going ser- was particularly significant. A media respondent explainediously wrong. Its message was credible - based on a his- the term ‘emergency’ acted as a “hook”, giving journaliststory of research and evidence. It used good and an attention-grabbing story, substantiated by genuine andinformative scientific indicators to build a body of evi- shocking statistics. Titles such as ‘‘Swaziland: Declaredence difficult to refute. Furthermore, it was it was writ- HIV/AIDS a “humanitarian emergency”’  and “Whenten at a critical time in Swaziland: with unusual levels of is HIV/AIDS a disaster?”  exemplify how the termdeath; increasing numbers of orphans; and tuberculosis renewed interest in the epidemic in Swaziland.emerging as a major killer, the grim predictions of pre- Conversely however, concerns over the term ‘emer-vious publications were no longer speculative, but reality gency’ were discussed at length at the Low-Middle-. (Figure 4) Income Countries meeting hosted by HEARD in Febru- The timeline illustrates the progression of HIV/AIDS ary 2008. One respondent explained, “There is somefrom Stage 1 to Stage 5 in less than 20 years using the reluctance on the part of donors/NGOs/civil society/concept idea of ‘Stages of the HIV/AIDS epidemic’ government to call HIV/AIDS an ‘emergency’ becausedeveloped by Barnett and Whiteside (2002) . As one there seems to be fear that terming it so will result ininterviewee reflected, “While, in many ways, Swaziland’s short-term funding for a long-term problem. The sus-response has been admirable and unique, it is clear that tainability of the HIV/AIDS effort is seen as underthe HIV prevention programmes have not worked thus threat with short-term language.” This meeting con-far, and more importantly, that the social and economic cluded there was a need to marry the urgency of the cri-implications of the epidemic have not been adequately sis with a long-wave understanding of the future impactthought through.” Reviewing Emergencies tried to of HIV/AIDS on the country, and that ‘emergencies’explain the significance of the latter, hence filling a cru- may not be the best term to represent this . A keycial gap in the research arena. message of the report is the long-wave nature of HIV Significantly, the report was disseminated into a recep- and its impacts should be included in a new kind oftive network of researchers, policymakers and associates thinking on emergencies. This debate will continue. Figure 4: HIV and AIDS in Swaziland and Key HEARD (or associated) Research 1986-2008 Figure 4 HIV and AIDS in Swaziland and Key HEARD (or associated) Research 1986-2008
Whiteside and Henry Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9(Suppl 1):S9 Page 8 of 10http://www.biomedcentral.com/1478-4505/9/S1/S9Barriers and tensions A number of significant international barriers threa-Our assessment identified five key limitations: the role tened the impact of the report and indeed the issue ofof government was not addressed; using Malawi and HIV/AIDS throughout Sub-Saharan Africa. Firstly, theZambia as comparator countries had mixed results; economic and political weight of Swaziland in the inter-issues around timing; the status of AIDS (and Swazi- national sphere is small. One frustrated intervieweeland) on the international agenda; and finally the calls described that “Swaziland is just not on the list”, as it isfor radical change may not be achievable. considered as insignificant by larger countries. Secondly, The report did not deal with the role of the Swazi HIV as a humanitarian emergency must compete forGovernment in the epidemic. This is significant since it funding with other important humanitarian issues, suchis ultimately government who guides and executed HIV as famine and natural disasters. One respondentstrategy in the country. The Government, along with described a ‘shift’ in global priorities to issues such asthe King, have faced criticism for their response to the climate change, terrorism and the rising price of food.epidemic . One respondent reminded us, the crisis Donors have finite resources and HIV and AIDS must“cannot be fixed with more funding alone.” Another dis- compete with other issues. HIV and AIDS was the glo-cussed the structural difficulties in addressing the crisis, bal health issue receiving the most attention and fund-including the ‘vertical’ response, exemplified by a sepa- ing but this will change, already a gap exists betweenrate AIDS response council (NERCHA) which, it was pledges and funding .claimed, failed to join up a national response. Finally, the report called for a change within the fra- The historic and legal relationship between HEARD, mework that international organisations use to identifyNERCHA and the Swazi Government restrained the countries’ level of development - that of income classifi-report’s ability to criticise. Prescribing how Swaziland cation. It further calls for a shift in the paradigm ofshould respond to the crisis was never the intention of thinking on emergencies. “Effectively what this reportthe paper. Whiteside argued that attempting to change says is that it can’t be business as usual”. Changingthe behaviour of the Swazi Government was beyond the entrenched ways of thinking is a major task .scope of what a researcher from outside of the countryshould attempt: “That is for the people of Swaziland to Conclusionsdo.” Working with the government in a ‘strategic alli- ‘Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland’ argued thatance’, rather than against is more productive. Strategi- socio-economic indicators show that the Swazi popula-cally limiting the scope of what, and whom, research tion is experiencing a humanitarian crisis comparable totries to influence can be a wise decision when trying to countries besieged by conflict or struggling in the wakeachieve impact within a complex policy arena. of a severe natural disaster. In the short-term, the report The report made comparisons between Swaziland and aimed to focus attention on Swaziland and what AIDSZambia and Malawi, in order to demonstrate the scale was doing to the country. It contributed to raising theof the emergency facing Swaziland. Despite the compari- profile of the plight of the Swazi people amongst donorsson having the desired effect of emphasising the scale of and policy makers, described by one interviewee as athe Swazi’s crisis - some respondents referenced these “catalyst for re-engagement”. In the medium-term, thecomparative graphs as a striking and influential tool - it report aimed to influence debate on the classification ofalso had unintended consequences. Zambia and Malawi low-middle income countries. This has proved more dif-are both countries that, like Swaziland, compete for the ficult. In the long-term, the report has seen some suc-attention of donors and development aid. By focusing all cess in opening the debate on HIV/AIDS as a ‘long-attention on Swaziland, the report appeared to belittle wave emergency’. Likening HIV/AIDS to a large scalethe issues faced by both Malawians and Zambians. humanitarian disaster helped fuel a debate on the need ‘Time’ is no doubt a barrier to the impact of the for urgency combined with long-term responses to thereport, since research is usually most influential when epidemic. Donors, academics and NGOs have allfirst published. The challenge to HEARD and NERCHA engaged with the debate, but further advocacy andwas to continue the momentum behind the report. One research is necessary to continue this, and see a shift inrespondent warned that the report “may lack academic the current paradigm of thinking on what constitutes ancredibility if it is not followed up by further research ‘emergency.’that is able to collect primary data.” The report aimed Developing a better understanding of the relationshipfor both an immediate awareness of Swaziland’s epi- between research and policy impact is vital to advancingdemic, and a longer-term discussion on emergencies the influence of SRH and HIV and AIDS research.and low-middle income classifications. It is the latter of Tracking the impact of research, using one or manythese in particular that needs to be worked at or risk a case studies, can help facilitate this learning. Crucial to‘fizzling out’ as time marches on. this process is to not simply identify impacts, but to
Whiteside and Henry Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9(Suppl 1):S9 Page 9 of 10http://www.biomedcentral.com/1478-4505/9/S1/S9seek understanding of how and why they came about. a logical path. The sense of frustration and the need toOf particular use for developing effective research in the provide evidence led to this innovative work. It is ourfuture is identifying where intended impact has not belief that it achieved many of its goals and spurred anbeen achieved and why. The assessment of the impact international dialogue around the issues. The evaluationof Reviewing Emergencies attempted to do exactly this. taught us additional lessons, which can be applied to help Drawing from the assessment, the following lessons maximise the impact of research in the future.may help inform future SRH and HIV/AIDS research.Communication is critical. The original work - collect- Acknowledgements and fundinging existing data to tell one clear story - is a striking This work was supported by the DFID Research Partner’s Consortium (ABBA)way to demonstrate the reach and scale of disease and the donors of the Joint Funding Arrangement. The generous support ofimpact; the demographic implications of AIDS power- the staff of NERCHA is acknowledged. The responsibility for the contents and interpretation of the data remains with the authors.fully communicated the severity of the epidemic; a tar- This article has been published as part of Health Research Policy and Systemsgeted, tailored and cohesive dissemination effort helped Volume 9 Supplement 1, 2011: Strengthening the research to policy andfacilitate the impact of research; sustained advocacy practice interface: exploring strategies used by research organisations working on sexual and reproductive health and HIV/AIDS. The full contentswhich is vital in keeping momentum for a message, of the supplement are available online at http://www.health-policy-systems.should be reflected in planning and resources; further com/supplements/9/S1.publications validating and extending a message are a Author detailsgood way to do this; and terminology can help or hinder 1 Director and Professor, Health Economics and HIV/AIDS Research Divisionthe impact of a message. University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban. 2Visiting Fellow, Health Economics and Context and timing may be beyond the control of HIV/AIDS Research Division University of KwaZulu Natal, Durban.researchers but can significantly influence the uptake of Authors’ contributionsresearch. These include world events, developments AW conceptualised the paper, and was co-author to the original studywithin the policy arena, and specifically within the topic entitled ‘Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland’ (2007). AW also edited the manuscript. FH drafted the manuscript, with input from AW. FH was thearea. If these conditions align in the favour of the author of the study ‘Assessing the Impact of ‘Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ forresearch the impact may be much greater, therefore Swaziland: Shifting the Paradigm in a New Era’ (2008). Both authors readawareness of this, and careful timing of publications and and approved the final manuscript.advocacy efforts could maximise impact. Authors information The credibility of both evidence and researcher play AW is Director of the health economics and HIV/AIDS Research Divisionan important role in the use of research. Historical (HEARD) at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. He has an MA from the School of Development Studies at the University of KwaZulu-Natal and a D Econintegrity of the evidence and an established researcher from the University of Natal.(or institution) can foster confidence in the use of FH has an MSc Development Management at the Department ofresearch and increase the likelihood of it being used to International Development from the London School of Economics and MA Economics and Politics from Edinburgh University. She was a visiting fellowinform policy. Established relationships and networks to HEARD in 2008.between individuals and institutions can guarantee anaudience and encourage a dialogue on the findings. Competing interests This article critically reflects on a research project in which the authors have‘Ownership’ of research, by the people it affects, is a been involved.powerful way to ensure both credibility and drive behindthe message. Published: 16 June 2011 The impact assessment taught further lessons on how Referencesto conduct such a study. An assessment should ideally 1. Basu A, Srinivasan K: Foreign Direct Investment in Africa - Some Casebe planned in advance, facilitating the process of ‘track- Studies. Washington DC: IMF; 2002.ing’ and information gathering; careful attention should 2. Ministry of Health and Social Welfare: 10th Round of National HIV SeroSurveillance in Women Attending Antenatal Care. Mdabane:be paid to the measurement and analysis process – if Government of Swaziland; 2006.basing the study on qualitative data, how will this be 3. Whiteside A: HIV/AIDS: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxfordanalysed and how will the effects of bias be mitigated; University Press; 2008. 4. UNDP: Human Development Report 2006: Beyond Scarcity, power,the ‘net should be cast wide’ when considering areas of poverty and the global water crisis. New York: United Nations.potential impact, recognising both the multiplicity of 5. Whiteside A, Whalley A: Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland: Shiftingpolicy players and the potential for unintended impacts; the Paradigm in a New Era. Durban: HEARD; 2007. 6. World Bank Development Indicators 2007. [http://www.worldbank.org].understand that impacts may also change over time; and 7. Molterberg E, Bergstrøm C: Our Common Discourse: Diversity andultimately, to understand why an impact took place, the Paradigms in Development Studies (paper 1 of 2). Noragric, Workingsocio-cultural, political and economic context must be Paper Number 20 2000. 8. Davies H, Nutley S, Walter S: Approaches to assessing the non-academicconsidered. impacts of social science research: Report of the ERSC symposium on With hindsight the commissioning of, publication, and assessing the non-academic impact of research. University of St. Andrews;dissemination of the Emergencies Report seems to follow 2005.
Whiteside and Henry Health Research Policy and Systems 2011, 9(Suppl 1):S9 Page 10 of 10http://www.biomedcentral.com/1478-4505/9/S1/S99. Health Economics and HIV/AIDS Research Division. Annual Report Durban; 2008.10. Sumner A, Perkins N, Lindstrom J: Multiple perspectives on research influence: does development research make a difference? A review. 2008, Unpublished.11. Islam Y, Garrett J: IFPRI and the abolition of the wheat flour ration shops in Pakistan: A case study on policymaking and the use and impact of research. Impact Assessment Discussion Paper Number One. Washington DC: IFPRI; 1997.12. Davies H, Nutley S, Walter S: Approaches to assessing the non-academic impacts of social science research: Report of the ERSC symposium on assessing the non-academic impact of research. University of St. Andrews; 2005.13. Henry F: Assessing the Impact of ‘Reviewing ‘Emergencies’ for Swaziland: Shifting the Paradigm in a New Era. Durban: HEARD; 2008.14. US Census Bureau International Database 2007. [http://www.census.gov/ ipc/www/idb/].15. CSO: 2006-2007 Swaziland Demographic and Health Survey. Mbabane: Government of Swaziland; 2007.16. UNIADS. [http://data.unaids.org/pub/Report/2007/swaziland%20emergency %20report_final%20pdf_en.pdf].17. Relief Web. [http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/KKAA- 78W7DT?OpenDocument].18. FANRPAN. [http://www.fanrpan.org/documents/d00423/].19. Barnett T, Whiteside A: AIDS in the 21st Century: Disease and Globalisation. Basingstoke: Palgrave; 2002.20. IRIN News: Swaziland: Declare HIV/AIDS a “humanitarian emergency”. 2007 [http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=75165].21. Plus News: When is HIV/AIDS a Disaster? 2008 [http://www.plusnews.org/ Report.aspx?ReportId=78966].22. Low-Middle-Income Countries Meeting. Minutes of the Meeting. Durban: HEARD; 2008.23. BBC: Swazi girls burn sex-ban tassles. 2005 [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ world/africa/4175854.stm].24. Gladwell M: The tipping point: how little things can make a big difference. Boston: Little, Brown and Company; 2002. doi:10.1186/1478-4505-9-S1-S9 Cite this article as: Whiteside and Henry: The impact of HIV and AIDS research: a case study from Swaziland. Health Research Policy and Systems 2011 9(Suppl 1):S9. Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central and take full advantage of: • Convenient online submission • Thorough peer review • No space constraints or color ﬁgure charges • Immediate publication on acceptance • Inclusion in PubMed, CAS, Scopus and Google Scholar • Research which is freely available for redistribution Submit your manuscript at www.biomedcentral.com/submit