Strengthening Evidence-Informed Policymaking: A Randomized Experiment on Capacity Building and Evidence Intermediation in Ethiopia

The experiment has two interventions.

Intervention 1: Capacity Building and Training (T1)

T1 is a structured training program on research-based evidence for policy decision-making, implemented by the African Leadership Excellence Academy (AFLEX). It targets directors at ministries and their accountable agencies, commissions, and institutes engaged in economic policy across key sectors, including agriculture, industry, trade, energy, transport, and labor and skills. The program addresses both demand-side constraints – such as limited awareness of evidence-informed policymaking, inadequate skills to access and interpret research, and weak trust in scientific evidence – and supply-side constraints related to limited investment in policy-relevant research. Training combines theoretical and practical modules that draw on real-world cases to illustrate the value of research evidence in policymaking, while building participants' capacity to commission, interpret, and apply evidence in their work. Sessions are facilitated by experts with demonstrated experience in evidence production, intermediation, and use.

Intervention 2: Capacity Building, Training, plus Evidence Intermediation (T2)

T2 combines the T1 training with evidence translation and intermediation service hosted at the Ethiopian Policy Studies Institute (PSI). The service responds to policymakers' requests by delivering rapid, systematic syntheses of existing research evidence on specific policy topics, communicated in accessible, targeted formats. Synthesis production is supported by AI tools to enhance efficiency and scale, with policymakers involved in co-creation where feasible.

T1 primarily addresses demand-side barriers through training alone; T2 tests whether pairing training with institutionalized, supply-side evidence intermediation support generates additional gains in evidence uptake and use.

2026-09-15

2027-08-16

Perceptions and attitudes: Policymakers' self-reported awareness, capacity, and trust regarding the value and use of research-based evidence in policy decision-making.

Behavioral demand for evidence: Stated and revealed demand for research evidence, captured through the number of evidence requests submitted, researcher engagement, use of evidence repositories, and reference to evidence in policy processes.

Organizational procedures and processes: Extent to which policymakers establish or strengthen institutional procedures – including evidence review processes, policy option evaluation frameworks, and research partnerships – to support evidence-informed decision-making.

Policy outcomes: Development of new policies, legislation, or strategies, and concrete revisions to existing policy documents or resource allocation decisions, that are demonstrably informed by research evidence.

Preferences and willingness to pay: Policymakers revealed preferences for specific evidence attributes (accessibility, timeliness, source) and their incentive-compatible willingness to pay for research evidence.

The study uses an individual-level randomized controlled trial (RCT) in which approximately 360 senior policymakers are randomly assigned, stratified by ministry, to one of three arms:

(i) Control (C): no intervention;
(ii) Capacity Building (T1): training on research evidence awareness, interpretation, and use; and
(iii) Capacity Building + Evidence Synthesis (T2): T1 training and access to evidence synthesis service with opportunities for co-creation.

This design supports three causal comparisons – T1 vs. C (effect of training alone), T2 vs. C (combined effect of training and evidence supply), and T1 vs. T2 (marginal effect of the evidence synthesis service conditional on training) – enabling identification of both demand- and supply-side barriers to evidence use in policymaking.

Not available

Randomization will be done in office by a computer.

Individual policymaker

No

0

360

120 policymakers’ control, 120 policymakers receive training on evidence-based policymaking, 120 policymakers received training plus evidence synthesis