Setting research priorities across science, technology, and health sectors: the Tanzania experience

Abstract

BackgroundIdentifying research priorities is key to innovation and economic growth, since it informs decision makers on effectively targeting issues that have the greatest potential public benefit. As such, the process of setting research priorities is of pivotal importance for favouring the science, technology, and innovation (STI)-driven development of low- and middle-income countries.MethodsWe report herein on a major cross-sectoral nationwide research priority setting effort recently carried out in Tanzania by the Tanzania Commission for Science and Technology (COSTECH) in partnership with the Council on Health Research for Development (COHRED) and the NEPAD Agency. The first of its type in the country, the process brought together stakeholders from 42 sub-sectors in science, technology, and health. The cross-sectoral research priority setting process consisted of a ‘training-of-trainers’ workshop, a demonstration workshop, and seven priority setting workshops delivered to representatives from public and private research and development institutions, universities, non-governmental organizations, and other agencies affiliated to COSTECH.ResultsThe workshops resulted in ranked listings of research priorities for each sub-sector, totalling approximately 800 priorities. This large number was significantly reduced by an expert panel in order to build a manageable instrument aligned to national development plans that could be used to guide research investments.ConclusionsThe Tanzania experience is an instructive example of the challenges and issues to be faced in when attempting to identify research priority areas and setting an STI research agenda in low- and middle-income countries. As countries increase their investment in research, it is essential to increase investment in research management and governance as well, a key and much needed capacity for countries to make proper use of research investments.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-015-0002-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Implementing a national health research for development platform in a low-income country – a review of Malawi’s Health Research Capacity Strengthening Initiative

“…In response to a similar situation in the Western Pacific, Rani et al [ 10 ] called for substantial investment in “ essential health research and management functions ”, something which HRCSI did in the NCST. Further, HRCSI confronted the thorny “ research management and governance ” issues which de Haan et al [ 8 ] noted during research priority setting in Tanzania, and which Mills et al [ 19 ] noted during a mid-term review of the HRCSI sister body, the Consortium for National Health Research in Kenya.…”

“…As platforms for implementing research for development (R4D), such councils and their programs have faced challenges. Some challenges are inherent in the development of the broader national STI system [ 6 ], as exemplified by the experience of health research priority setting in Tanzania: “ As countries increase their investment in research, it is essential to increase investment in research management and governance as well, a key and much needed capacity for countries to make proper use of research investments ” [ 8 ]. Other challenges are more relevant to national health research system development efforts which must grapple with mapping existing health research capacity, aligning research allocations from multiple sources with national health needs, and balancing technology development versus health services research [ 9 ].…”

Best practices in nutrition science to earn and keep the public's trust

“…This state of affairs appears to hold throughout the research/knowledge generation process: from the point of otherwise robust priority-setting efforts (68) to trials designed to assess the effectiveness of putatively effective interventions when implemented at scale (69).…”

Governance of health research in four eastern and southern African countries

“…Past initiatives to improve NHRS in African countries have generally focused on strengthening governance mechanisms, capacity-building and funding [5][6][7][8]. These are frequently short-term initiatives, lacking sustained engagement and support.…”