The Sanitation and Hygiene Applied Research for Equity (SHARE) Research Programme consortium is a programme funded by the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) that aims to contribute to achieving universal access to effective, sustainable, and equitable sanitation and hygiene worldwide. The capacity development component is an important pillar for this programme and different strategies were designed and implemented during the various phases of SHARE. This paper describes and reflects on the capacity-building strategies of this large multi-country research consortium, identifying lessons learnt and proposing recommendations for future global health research programmes. In the first phase, the strategy focused on increasing the capacity of individuals and institutions from low- and middle-income countries in conducting their own research. SHARE supported six PhD students and 25 MSc students, and organised a wide range of training events for different stakeholders. SHARE peer-reviewed all proposals that researchers submitted through several rounds of funding and offered external peer-review for all the reports produced under the partner’s research platforms. In the second phase, the aim was to support capacity development of a smaller number of African research institutions to move towards their independent sustainability, with a stronger focus on early and mid-career scientists within these institutions. In each institution, a Research Fellow was supported and a specific capacity development plan was jointly developed. Strategies that yielded success were learning by doing (supporting institutions and postgraduate students on sanitation and hygiene research), providing fellowships to appoint mid-career scientists to support personal and institutional development, and supporting tailored capacity-building plans. The key lessons learnt were that research capacity-building programmes need to be driven by local initiatives tailored with support from partners. We recommend that future programmes seeking to strengthen research capacity should consider targeted strategies for individuals at early, middle and later career stages and should be sensitive to other institutional operations to support both the research and management capacities. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12961-019-0478-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

This article is based on qualitative field research carried out in Ha Noi, Viet Nam, in 2013 for an MA dissertation in Education and International Development at the UCL Institute of Education. It analyses interpretations of education for sustainable development (ESD) in Viet Nam, relating these to key debates around instrumental and democratic approaches. In order to understand and analyse ESD in the Vietnamese context, interviews were conducted in Ha Noi with university student volunteers who create and implement ESD activities. Students were part of NGO-led networks or universitybased clubs. Their activities targeted peers, children, and local communities. NGO staff working on youth-related ESD were also interviewed. The institutional structure in which these youth-led projects operate strongly determined their approach, revealing a focus on behaviour change. This links closely with core debates within the ESD canon on instrumental and participatory approaches. Youth activities generally align with the instrumental approach, however, participant experiences also contained elements associated with the participatory approach. These included critical thinking, personal development, and engagement with complex cross-cutting issues such as climate change. The research presents an example of ESD practice that combines the democratic and instrumental approaches within the unique cultural, social, and political context of Viet Nam.

This article analyses outcome mapping monitoring data to identify which strategies were effective for engaging practitioners and policymakers with research projects in four countries-Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania and Zambia. It applies a qualitative thematic approach to analyse and code monitoring data against research into use strategies. The article identifies and discusses three emerging themes: early engagement, using existing and new forums and seizing opportunities. It discusses the contextual difference and the relevance of the outcome mapping methodology for research into use and is relevant for those seeking to engage and influence stakeholders with their research and programmes.