Strengthening international evidence-informed policy making: lessons from the Global South.

Evidence-informed policy-making in Africa: the role of institutions in bridging the gap between research and policy

Global Agendas, Local Realities: Reassessing the Effectiveness of Western‑Driven Policy Frameworks in African Development Context

This essay interrogates the limitations of universal policy transfer models by examining how the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) travel from Western institutional architectures into the governance realities of the Global South (Sierra Leone as a case). Drawing on policy transfer, translation, and mobility scholarship, it argues that the success of global frameworks does not hinge on similarity between contexts as (Dolowitz and Marsh, 1996) suggest, but on the capacity of domestic actors to reinterpret, hybridise, and embed external ideas within their own political, cultural, and institutional logics. The analysis shows that Sierra Leone’s SDG adoption is shaped by structural constraints, weak data systems, donor-driven incentives, and deep historical legacies, producing incomplete and often misaligned transfers. Yet, the case also reveals meaningful adaptive strategies: localisation through the Sierra Leone Medium-Term National Development Plan (SLMTNDP), consultative voluntary reviews, and hybrid governance arrangements that negotiate global norms with local priorities. Ultimately, the essay positions Sierra Leone as emblematic of wider African experiences where global development agendas collide with and are reshaped by fragile institutions, informal economies, and entrenched social norms. It concludes that policy transfer in such settings is neither linear nor replicative but a contested, negotiated process in which agency, translation, and contextual sensitivity determine outcomes. This reframing contributes to contemporary debates on decolonising global governance and designing development frameworks that recognise complexity rather than impose one-size-fits-all models.

A New Frontier of Upscaling? Implementation Challenges for Local Governments in Climate Governance from a Latin American Perspective

Research on climate action increasingly highlights the multilevel dynamics of policymaking, with upscaling—the expansion, adaptation, and sustainability of policies across contexts—emerging as a central concern. While European studies stress communication channels, financial resources, political leadership, party strength, and civil society engagement, this article argues that perspectives from Latin America can enrich the analytical framework of climate governance. The study examines Chile's Framework Law on Climate Change (No. 21.455), focusing on the Municipality Climate Change Action Plan (PACCC). This hierarchical upscaling initiative struggled to move beyond pioneering municipalities, as most local governments were unable to meet the initial legal deadline. Using a mixed‐methods approach—combining a database of subnational climate policy plans and 15 semi‐structured interviews with local officials—the article asks what multilevel governance factors account for the difficulties in the hierarchical upscaling of local climate action in Chile? The analysis identifies three key factors that are broadly relevant to upscaling. First, limited state capacity constrains policy implementation. Second, uneven decentralization across political, administrative, and economic dimensions deepens disparities between municipalities. Third, middle managers emerge as pivotal actors who, alongside mayors, foster innovation and offset weak technical expertise. By clarifying the barriers and enablers of upscaling in the case, the article contributes to international debates on climate action and the dynamics of multilevel policymaking in the Global South.

Governance failures in indigenous policy: Scientometric evidence from research, 1997–2023

This study analyzes research trends and substantive developments in scholarship on policies concerning indigenous peoples using a scientometric approach, with particular attention to debates on the recurring failure of indigenous public policies (Figueroa Huencho, 2022), Data were collected from the Web of Science database with the keyword “indigenous policies fail”, yielding 137 articles published between 1997 and 2023 in categories representing social, political, economic, environmental, and sustainability dimensions. Bibliometric analysis is employed to map publication dynamics, author collaboration networks, and key research themes, which is then complemented by qualitative content analysis of the abstracts to interpret patterns of policy failure and the recommendations proposed. The main findings indicate that the failure of indigenous policy is driven less by resource constraints than by weaknesses in policy design that tend to be ahistorical and technocratic, unequal power relations in implementation, and the limited recognition of indigenous agency and knowledge systems. The reviewed literature also underscores the urgency of adopting place-based approaches, knowledge co-production, stronger indigenous leadership, and institutional reform to ensure state accountability and a more equitable distribution of access to resources.

Beyond Summary: How Review Papers Shape the Future of Climate Change Research

Scientific knowledge advances through the continuous accumulation of primary research. However, its true value emerges when individual findings are synthesized, integrated, and organized into coherent conceptual frameworks that not only advance scientific understanding but also support evidence-based decision-making and policy development. Review papers play a central role by consolidating scattered findings, identifying patterns across studies, and providing interpretative frameworks that guide both research and policy. In rapidly expanding and highly interdisciplinary fields such as climate change science, review papers are not auxiliary products of scholarship but essential instruments for investigating and managing complexity, identifying knowledge gaps, highlighting uncertainty, and assessing scale mismatches. They are particularly important in translating heterogeneous evidence, from observational records, experiments, and modelling, into coherent narratives that can inform mitigation and adaptation strategies. Review papers vary widely in scope, methodology: some are narrative and expert-driven, while others adopt systematic or quantitative approaches such as meta-analysis. Each type serves a different purpose, and each carries specific strengths and limitations. Understanding these differences is essential for evaluating the scientific contribution of a review and for producing high-quality syntheses. This paper briefly discusses the scientific role of review articles, the diversity of review methodologies, and their specific relevance in climate change research. It also provides a detailed and practical discussion of how to design and write a review paper, emphasizing clarity of research questions, methodological transparency, critical synthesis, and conceptual innovation. Ultimately, this review argues that review papers are not secondary outputs of scientific research but primary engines of scientific progress, shaping conceptual frameworks, identifying critical knowledge gaps, directing future research agendas, underpinning global assessments, and translating scientific evidence into informed policy and societal action.

Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: Context-Sensitive Approaches to Local Government Improvement in Developing Countries

Although context-sensitive approaches to local governance have received increasing attention in development studies and comparative public administration, research integrating structural, relational, and normative dimensions across developing-country contexts remains limited. This study aimed to examine how contextual conditions shape local government improvement and to develop an integrative theoretical framework explaining variations in local governance outcomes across developing countries. A qualitative comparative theoretical synthesis was conducted using the literature compiled by de Vries, Reddy, and Haque (2008), supplemented by relevant empirical and theoretical studies published between 2008 and 2023. The analysis encompassed evidence from Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and South Asia and focused on three interrelated dimensions: structural conditions, relational dynamics, and normative conditions. The findings indicate that formal decentralization does not automatically produce equivalent improvements in local government capacity or performance. Instead, governance outcomes vary according to fiscal and administrative capacity, intergovernmental relations, territorial and institutional configurations, citizen participation, and the involvement of non-state actors. The synthesis further demonstrates that community-centred, state-centred, market-centred, radical, and network perspectives each explain important yet partial dimensions of local governance. Integrating these perspectives, the study proposes a multi-centred theory of local governance that combines local autonomy and accountability, context-sensitive central oversight, conditional market mechanisms, multi-actor collaboration, and sensitivity to institutional and territorial conditions. The study concludes that local government improvement requires governance reforms adapted to specific political, institutional, social, fiscal, and territorial contexts rather than the uniform replication of standardized best practices. This study contributes an integrative framework for comparative local governance research and provides practical guidance for policymakers and development institutions in designing context-sensitive decentralization and local government reforms. Future research should empirically test and refine the proposed framework across a broader range of local government settings.