The role of innovative global institutions in linking knowledge and action

Abstract

It is becoming increasingly recognized that our collective ability to tackle complex problems will require the development of new, adaptive, and innovative institutional arrangements that can deal with rapidly changing knowledge and have effective learning capabilities. In this paper, we applied a knowledge-systems perspective to examine how institutional innovations can affect the generation, sharing, and application of scientific and technical knowledge. We report on a case study that examined the effects that one large innovative organization, The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, is having on the knowledge dimensions of decision-making in global health. The case study shows that the organization created demand for new knowledge from a range of actors, but it did not incorporate strategies for meeting this demand into their own rules, incentives, or procedures. This made it difficult for some applicants to meet the organization's dual aims of scientific soundness and national ownership of projects. It also highlighted that scientific knowledge needed to be integrated with managerial and situational knowledge for success. More generally, the study illustrates that institutional change targeting implementation can also significantly affect the dynamics of knowledge creation (learning), access, distribution, and use. Recognizing how action-oriented institutions can affect these dynamics across their knowledge system can help institutional designers build more efficient and effective institutions for sustainable development.aid financing | governance | HIV/AIDS | knowledge transfer | science-policy interface T he importance of flexible, adaptive institutions in tackling complex problems is becoming increasingly recognized, and there is a call for institutional change that highlights the key role of knowledge and learning in the context of action and implementation (1, 2). As a result, institutions for sustainable development are undergoing rapid change. Existing centralized international and state-based systems are increasingly being complemented and challenged by new forms of collaboration, including public-private partnerships, multisector collaborations, and demand-led funding mechanisms (3). These changes are largely driven by dissatisfaction with the perceived inability of traditional institutions to move toward more sustainable development trajectories (4, 5) and pose new opportunities to link knowledge with action.In this study, we examined how one innovative, action-focused organization has affected the dynamics of knowledge sharing, generation, and application across their network of stakeholders using a theoretical framing based on the concept of knowledge systems. Building on work by Cash et al. (6) and van Kerkhoff and Lebel (7) for this project, we defined a knowledge system as a network of actors connected by social relationships, formal or informal, that dynamically combined knowing, doing, and learning to bring about specific actions for sustainable development (8). We were in...

Strengthening the role of universities in addressing sustainability challenges: the Mitchell Center for Sustainability Solutions as an institutional experiment

“…The process by which specific projects were initiated was strongly guided by research on developing stronger connections between knowledge and action (Jacobs 2002, Cash et al 2003, Clark and Holliday 2006, van Kerkhoff and Lebel 2006, van Kerkhoff and Szlezák 2010, Clark et al 2011. We operationalized this guidance by issuing a request for proposals that offered potential funding to teams of faculty who were interested in developing a research project.…”

“…Solutions-driven sustainability science focuses on how different stakeholders interact with the research process and how they use the scientific information it generates in decision-making (Kates et al 2001, van Kerkhoff and Lebel 2006, Clark et al 2010, van Kerkhoff and Szlezák 2010. Thus, K↔A research is central to tackling sustainability challenges because it is explicitly focused on the processes that facilitate and hinder individual and institutional change.…”

On metrics and financing for the Sustainable Development Goals

“…The flexible choice of PRs and sub-PRs has allowed the Global Fund to operate effectively in a broad range of different operating environments. It has also fostered innovation in program design and delivery (van Kerkhoff and Szlezák, 2010).…”

“…Other interventions, such as artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT), long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LINs), or rapid diagnostic tests for malaria (RDTs), had yet to be developed or be deployed in developing countries, sometimes owing to their higher cost relative to less effective interventions (Mutabingwa, 2005;Noor et al, 2009;Zhao et al, 2012). The operational and managerial knowledge for how to design, implement, and monitor complex programs in different country operating environments was largely unavailable (van Kerkhoff and Szlezák, 2010).…”

“…Macro International (2009), French Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2013, Norwegian Min-istry of Foreign Affairs (2013), DFID (2016)). A substantial scientific literature, predominantly published in The Lancet, has covered different aspects of its business model, such as performance-based funding (Katz et al, 2010;Fan et al, 2013Fan et al, , 2014Glassman et al, 2013), its impact on health systems (Samb et al, 2009;Bowser et al, 2014), involvement of civil society (Harmer et al, 2012;Bridge et al, 2016), drug pricing (Stover et al, 2011;Zelman et al, 2014), its role in fragile countries (Bornemisza et al, 2010), and the promotion of implementation research and management learning (van Kerkhoff andSzlezák, 2006, 2010).…”