Document Type : Short Communication
Authors
1
Cluster for Global Health, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
2
Centre for Epidemic Interventions Research, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
3
Independent consultant, Port Harcourt, Nigeria
4
Venezuelan Breast Cancer Research and Education Foundation (FUVEICAM), Caracas, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
5
School of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana
6
Independent Patient Advocate, Calgary, AB, Canada
7
Geneva Foundation for Medical Education & Research (GFMER), Geneva, Switzerland
8
George Institute for Global Health, Hyderabad, India
9
Department of Health and Functioning, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway
10
School of Pharmacy, College of Health Sciences, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana
11
External Consultant, National Health Systems Resource Centre, New Delhi, India
12
Department of Health Sciences Ålesund, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Ålesund, Norway
13
Health Economics Research Unit, KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya
14
Discipline of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Health Sciences, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
15
Madhira Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
16
Discipline of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal (Westville Campus), Durban, South Africa
17
National Health Service (NHS) Lothian, Edinburgh, UK
18
Healthcare Information For All, Chipping Norton, UK
Abstract
Civil society actors are widely recognized for advocating the public interest in health policy. However, their role in contributing different types of evidence to inform policy is less explored. To explore this topic, members of the Healthcare Information for All (HIFA) online forum and the Supporting Inclusive and Accountable Health Systems Decisions for Universal Health Coverage (SUPPORT-SYSTEMS) research project conducted a four-week online discussion. The discussion focused on defining civil society, its role in health policy, the types of evidence it provides, and how this evidence is used and valued. Weekly focal questions encouraged HIFA members to share experiences of civil society engagement and the use of evidence in health policy-making. The thematic analysis identified four key messages. First, defining civil society requires critical reflection, as actors differ significantly in their interests, political ties, and influence. These distinctions affect how representative their evidence is and whether it reflects vested interests. Second, policy-making structures can support meaningful civil society participation, thereby strengthening the use of evidence and the legitimacy of policy decisions. Third, civil society provides valuable local and tacit knowledge that complements scientific evidence, though safeguards are needed to prevent bias or misrepresentation. Fourth, political economy factors—such as power imbalances, gatekeeping, and funding constraints—shape the influence of civil society evidence on policy. Overall, the discussion highlighted the diverse roles civil society can play in health policy and the importance of institutional mechanisms to support responsible evidence use. Thematic discussions in communities of practice (CoPs) like HIFA offer a dynamic and inclusive approach to engaging stakeholder knowledge in research projects.
Keywords
)