Knowledge translation for childhood poverty

Nicola Jones, PhD. Cairo, Jan 2009

Overview: 1. Knowledge translation principles

2. Child-sensitive knowledge translation 3. Four case studies

4. Conclusions

Tackling the invisibility of childhood poverty

• Childhood poverty is routinely marginalised in debates on development and poverty alleviation

• Persistent knowledge and awareness gaps of ways macro development and poverty-reduction policies directly and indirectly affect children’s experiences with poverty, and contribute to life-course and inter-generational poverty

• However, childhood poverty/ vulnerability is not only more severe than that of adults, but also conceptually distinct

Poverty Incidence for all and for children aged 5-10. Selected African countries

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

per

cen

tag

e

Poverty Headcount

Poverty headcount children 5-10

National poverty lines based on minimum calorie intake.

Indicator is adult equivalent household expenditure (adjusts for age and sex of household members and for numbers in household)

Kakwani and Soares IPC Working Paper 9 Nov. 2005

Policy engagement based on best practice in knowledge translation

• Key principles of knowledge-development policy interface: – Non-linear and dynamic process– Researchers and development intermediaries need intent to

promote pro-poor change – Evidence needs to be robust and policy-relevant in design – Knowledge needs to be distilled and framed in context-sensitive – Context resonant framing of messages are key – Communicative or argumentative approaches to policy advocacy

can be taken

Knowledge to action cycle

But policy engagement also needs to be child-sensitive and requires:

1. an understanding of the specificity, multi-dimensionality and dynamic nature of childhood poverty

2. an appreciation of direct and indirect effects economic as well as social policies can have on childhood poverty and conceptualising target audiences accordingly

3. a recognition of children’s particular depth of voicelessness and the importance of monitoring commitments towards children

4. a commitment to supporting children’s participation through ‘extensions and supplements’ (White, 2007)

5. an appreciation of the relational nature of childhood poverty and the often close linkages between gendered poverty and childhood poverty

6. a recognition of weakness of child-related govt agencies and a commitment to capacity building and partnership to overcome this