Search

Advocacy actors play a unique role in promoting changes in policy, legal, and social environments for sexual and gender minorities in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). However, their efforts may be hampered by limited incorporation of evidence because there is a massive gulf between what researchers focus on and what evidence users need. Together with fifty key stakeholders across SSA, we—a team of researchers and policy engagement specialists—co-created a research agenda and identified policy goals and research priorities to support evidence-informed policy and advocacy that can foster social inclusion of sexual and gender minorities in the region. We identified six research priority areas: (1) The history of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans people and people whose identities do not conform to typical binary notions of male and female, or identify themselves using other categories to describe sexuality (LGBT+) in Africa and their lived realities; (2) Cost of non-inclusion and benefits of inclusion; (3) Strategies fostering inclusion; (4) Challenges and needs of LGBT + people; and (5) Implementation science on the effectiveness of provisions in sexual and reproductive health and HIV strategies or guidelines; and (6) Understanding the existing policy and legal architecture. This co-created research agenda can guide the generation of policy-relevant evidence, increase collaboration between researchers and policy actors, and increase research uptake to support efforts toward inclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A key obstacle to advocacy efforts to promote legal and policy reforms that ensure women's and girls' access to comprehensive abortion care (CAC) is the lack of relevant and timely evidence. This commentary outlines a research agenda-setting initiative that identified research priorities to support evidence-informed policy and advocacy for CAC access in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). It involved three phases: 1) a landscape analysis; 2) research agenda co-creation with stakeholders, and 3) a validation exercise on research priorities. Overall, the priority evidence needs included 1) estimating the incidence and magnitude of unsafe abortion and related costs; 2) examining the role of abortion laws and policies in facilitating or inhibiting access to CAC; 3) developing and documenting successful approaches for addressing societal barriers to the provision of CAC, and fostering a more inclusive and liberal abortion environment, and 4) documenting practice-based evidence on the provision of legal abortion services as well as for advocating for CAC. Various stakeholders, including researchers, policymakers, civil society organizations, and funding agencies, will find the agenda useful as they engage, at different levels, for the full domestication and implementation of forward-looking commitments on access to CAC in SSA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]