Research Highlights Evidence Use Among Nigerian Policymakers
Recent research indicates that senior Nigerian policymakers with doctoral degrees are significantly more inclined to incorporate diverse forms of research evidence into their decision-making processes compared to those without advanced academic qualifications. This finding emerges from a study published in February in the journal Policy Sciences, which surveyed approximately 196 senior policymakers across 13 federal departments and both houses of Congress.
Study Overview and Methodology
Entitled “Patterns of Evidence Use in Nigerian Policymaking: Insights from Latent Class Analysis,” the study categorizes evidence users within Nigeria’s policymaking landscape into three distinct groups. Researchers identified only 20 percent of respondents as “eclectic users,” who regularly engage with a broad spectrum of rigorous scientific evidence, including systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and peer-reviewed studies alongside other sources such as expert opinions and internal documents.
In contrast, 54 percent fell into an intermediate category, recognizing various types of evidence but primarily utilizing less systematic sources such as case studies and needs assessments. A further 25 percent were classified as “non-users,” indicating limited familiarity with most forms of evidence examined in the study, which included meta-analyses and news reports.
Profile of Survey Respondents
The research team, led by Toib Alem from the University of Vermont along with Travis Reynolds and Fritz Sager from the University of Bern, employed latent class analysis to delve deeper into how Nigerian policymakers interact with different types of evidence. Among the 196 respondents, 146 (78.1%) were male, and 121 (61.7%) were members of parliament, with 61% holding at least a master’s degree. The average respondent was approximately 46 years old and had an average of 16 years of service.
The researchers noted that all respondents from the ministries were senior officials, while most parliamentary respondents served as senior legislative assistants or legislative assistants.
Main Findings on Evidence Utilization
The study revealed that the most rigorous forms of evidence—such as meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and peer-reviewed surveys—were the least familiar and utilized by respondents. Instead, policymakers demonstrated a preference for relying on expert opinions, case studies, and internal policy documents. Officials in ministries showed a greater inclination towards systematic reviews, while those in Congress leaned more on news media, reflecting the differing demands of executive versus legislative policy-making.
Education as a Key Predictor
Among the examined factors—gender, age, education, experience, and workplace—education was identified as the strongest predictor of policymakers’ engagement with evidence. The findings suggest that holding a doctoral degree increased the likelihood of belonging to the moderate evidence user group by approximately nine times and the eclectic group by about 21 times compared to non-users. Additionally, each year of experience was linked to a 7 percentage point increase in the likelihood of being placed in the intermediate group, although it did not significantly affect eclectic usage.
Influence of Gender and Workplace
Interestingly, the study found no noteworthy differences in evidence use patterns between male and female policymakers or between departmental and legislative staff. This contrasts with previous studies in countries like Canada, where such factors impacted perceptions of scientific evidence. The authors posited that in Nigeria, access to evidence appears to be more closely tied to professional experience and educational background than to gender or workplace location.
Implications for Nigeria’s Policy Environment
Nigeria has long championed evidence-based governance, particularly since the civil service reforms of the 1980s initiated cross-ministerial planning efforts. Nevertheless, the study indicates a lack of formal requirements compelling policymakers to base their decisions on rigorous evidence. Although around 86% of respondents reported familiarity with evidence-based policymaking and 80% indicated using scientific evidence over the past year, engagement with more robust forms of evidence remains limited. Researchers recommend targeted training to bolster evidence use, particularly in systematic reviews and experimental research, and suggest that greater recruitment of highly educated individuals into policymaking roles could strengthen the evidence landscape.
Study Limitations and Future Directions
The authors acknowledged limitations in their study, including reliance on self-reported data, which may have led to overestimation of evidence use, and a sample size that constrained more detailed comparisons between ministries and sectors. They proposed including additional evidence sources in future research, such as monitoring and evaluation reports and public opinion polls, arguing that a clearer understanding of the patterns in evidence use will necessitate sustained institutional investment rather than fleeting interventions.
