This presentation on deliberative workshops as knowledge transfer tools was carried out by Christian Dagenais for a workshop being held as part of the Canadian Forum 2016. The presentation summarizess the reflections of the three researchers from the holding several deliberative workshops as part of a research project on health equity in Burkina Faso.

1. DELIBERATIVE DIALOGUES
AS A TOOL FOR
KNOWLEDGE
MOBILIZ ATION
R E F L E C T I O N S F R O M O U R E X P E R I E N C E I N A F R I C A
CHRISTIAN DAGENAIS, Ph.D
ESTHER MC SWEEN-CADIEUX Ph.D (cand.) & VALÉRY RIDDE, Ph.D
KM FORUM, TORONTO, 28 06 2016

2. « T h e d e l i b e r a t i v e d i a l o g u e s a r e
u s e d t o e x a m i n e r e s e a r c h d a t a
i n p a r a l l e l w i t h t h e
p e r s p e c t i v e s , e x p e r i e n c e s a n d
t a c i t k n o w l e d g e o f t h o s e
i n v o l v e d i n m a k i n g d e c i s i o n s o n
a h i g h p r i o r i t y t o p i c , o r t h a t
a r e a f f e c t e d b y s u c h d e c i s i o n s .
»
- L A V I S , B O Y K O , O X M A N , L E W I N ( 2 0 0 9 )

3. The ultimate goal of deliberative dialogue according
to all definitions is,
To inform policy
Policy dialogue should be seen as an
integrated part of the policy-making
process

5. CONSULTATION ON HEALTH EMPLOYMENT
AND ECONOMIC GROWTH
• More than a hundred representatives from 23 countries
attended the francophone consultation
• The two-day consultation was structured around five themes
included in the scope of the United Nations Secretary-
General’s High Level Commission
• Participants had to identify key messages across the spectrum
of these themes to transmit to the Commission

8. Lessons learned
from our experiences
What works &
What needs to be improved to
promote the use of knowledge?

9. KAYA’S
WORKSHOPC O N T R O L L I N G M A L A R I A I N B U R K I N A F A S O

10. KAYA’S WORKSHOP
• Research program on malaria in the Kaya region
• Objective of the workshop: Sharing implementation
challenges and see how interventions can take into
account these results to improve
• Format: 2 days. 16 presentations by researchers on
different components of the research program.
• Policy briefs (10) distributed to participants at the
workshop.
• Participants: 40 people (DRS, NGOs, health workers,
CSOs)

11. WORKSHOP IMPACT
• Research confirmed their own beliefs or field observations
• Acquisition of new knowledge for all participants
• No change for policy makers, but local actors have identified
some changes in their practice
• Intends to share the research results in district committees or
meetings with health professionals ...

12. POSITIVE POINTS
• Credibility of the results presented and high quality of the
studies
• Friendly context allowing exchanges and comments from
participants
• Bringing together several categories of stakeholders
appreciated: researchers, NGOs, practitioners
• Clarity of recommendations and proposed solutions to
problems

13. NEGATIVE POINTS
• Too many details on the scientific approaches and methods for
the uninitiated
• Language too specialized for the actors of the public
administration, the general public and local health workers
• Absence of senior decision makers perceived as a limit
• Lack of concrete discussion on actions to be taken

14. Very limited impact of a traditional feedback
workshop
Need to develop the skills of researchers to share
their knowledge to an audience beyond academic
Strategic analysis of key players to involve in the
process

15. OUAGADOUGOU’s
WORKSHOPI MPROVING ROAD SAFETY I N BURKINA
FASO

16. • Research program on road accidents injuries in the capital
Ouagadougou (mapping of accident sites, care of the wounded …)
• Workshop’s goal: involve stakeholders in order to propose an action
plan and recommandations for road safety improvement
• Format: 1 day, 5 presentations by researchers; Policy briefs (3)
distributed to participants
• Participants: approximately 70 people (police departments, health
professionals, CSO)

17. IMPROVED ASPECTS
since Kaya’s workshop
• Emphasis on the involvement of participants for developing an
action plan during the workshop
• Very few scientific presentations (without jargon) and more time
granted for sub-group work (PM)
• Policy briefs were distributed in advance and revised in order to
make them accessible

18. • Preparing a policy brief that is distributed in advance
• Provide a common ground to start a dialogue based on
evidence ...
A POLICY BRIEF SHALL BE USED TO
PREPARE THE DIALOGUE

19. CONTENT OF A POLICY BRIEF
-Description of the problem or issue under consideration
-Proposal of different options to solve the problem according
to the latest evidence
-Identification of potential barriers to the implementation of
these options and propose strategies to overcome these
barriers
-Recommendations for actions

20. GET EVERYONE'S COMMITMENT
Focus on commitment to undertake concrete actions ...
Set well-defined roles and responsibilities for each actor
Propose a timetable for concrete actions
Ensure that all commitments are described in detail
(WHO DOES WHAT? AND WHEN?)

21. 21

22. 22

23. PRELIMINARY RESULTS FROM THE EVALUATION
• The workshop had many positive consequences: learning new
knowledge about road safety, behavior awareness, creation of
post-workshop collaborations and opportunities to learn from
one another
• Main obstacles mentionned : limited presence of political
figures, lack of committment from participants for the action
plan and difficulty to form a follow-up committee

24. IMPORTANCE OF THE DELIBERATIVE ASPECT
• First time that all actors were sat together to discuss: creation of a
desire to collaborate
• Actors on the field want this type of event to reoccure: need to be
trained and supported to pass knowledge to the community
• To make this kind of event useful: need for a follow-up committee and
involvement of local leaders for implementation of actions

25. Appreciation of the participatory
aspect of the workshop

26. BURKINA FASO’S CONTEXT
• Participants were not expecting to take decisions/having to
commit for any kind of follow-up; regular research
presentations usually being limited to presenting results
• The majority of participants mention that restitutions are
useless and that this deliberative process should be repeated

27. IF WE HAD TO START OVER…
A knowledge broker would have been useful to
conduct the follow-up committee and other needs
Starting the discussions between groups of
stakeholders (eg Police, CSO) before the workshop
would help
Improve the preparation and process of the plenary
deliberations