.png)
(A blog post drawing on the Evidence and Gap Map of Interventions to Promote Inclusive Governance for Underserved Populations in Sub-Saharan Africa)
Inclusive governance has become a central priority in development policy. This raises a crucial question: what types of interventions are being studied, and what implications do they have for real-world change?
In many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), underserved populations continue to face barriers to participation in decision-making processes. Interventions aimed at promoting inclusive governance strive to bridge these gaps by enhancing participation, improving transparency, and increasing accountability. However, without a clear understanding of the evidence base, it becomes challenging to identify which approaches are being tested, where progress is being made, and where gaps still exist.
At its core, inclusive governance encompasses systems that enable all individuals, especially underserved populations, including women and youth, to exercise authority in a way that enhances the government's responsiveness to their needs.
Our Evidence and Gap Map (EGM) provides a structured overview of interventions designed to promote inclusive governance, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa.
To understand what is actually being studied in the field of inclusive governance in Sub-Saharan Africa, this evidence mapping exercise systematically identified, screened, and coded studies across the region.
CSO advocacy dominates the evidence base. It is by far the most researched intervention category, reflecting broader research and funding priorities around the role of civil society in development. Within this category, studies concentrate most heavily on the active participation of women and youth, a signal that gender and generational inclusion within CSOs is increasingly recognised as a research priority. Alliance building, advocacy, and lobbying also feature prominently, alongside efforts to develop local philanthropic networks and initiatives.
Public policy and government agencies represent the second most studied area. Research here focuses predominantly on inclusive and responsive governance frameworks, examining how formal governance structures can be redesigned or reformed to be more participatory and equitable. Studies on creating public awareness of governance mechanisms and policies are less common, suggesting that the supply side of governance reform attracts more research attention than efforts to inform and engage citizens about what those reforms mean in practice.
Media interventions form a moderately studied cluster, with research concentrated on the liberalization of media spaces reducing monopolies, censorship, and barriers to independent broadcasting. Studies also examine efforts to diversify media programming and elevate the voices of underserved populations in news and public affairs coverage. However, research on building gender sensitivity culture within media institutions is remarkably thin, despite its direct relevance to whose stories get told and how.
Grassroots movements are represented by a body of research focused on developing and strengthening community-level organizing structures and supporting collective actions and campaigns. These studies tend to capture the process and texture of community mobilization, how organizations form, how communities engage in advocacy, and what conditions enable collective action. Evidence on mobilizing resources for movements and coalitions, however, is almost entirely absent, leaving a significant gap in understanding how grassroots efforts are sustained over time.
Capacity building initiatives are studied across two main areas: strengthening the organizational capabilities of grassroots groups and CSOs, and building the capacity of national, public, and local government agencies. The former tends to focus on organizational development, financial management, and advocacy skills, while the latter examines how government institutions can be equipped to design and implement more inclusive policies. Notably, capacity building and direct support for media personnel and journalists has received no research attention whatsoever which is a complete absence in a sub-category that sits at the intersection of two otherwise active intervention areas.
Access to information is the least researched intervention category in the entire map. Studies touch on the accessibility of local and national information and right-to-information policy, but evidence on making official documents and information available in local languages is almost entirely absent. This is a particularly important gap: the United Nations identifies access to information as a cornerstone of sustainable development, and yet it remains one of the most neglected areas in the governance evidence base.
Beyond the distribution of interventions, the evidence has notable structural limitations. The overall picture is of an evidence base that is wider than it is deep, one that has yet to answer the most important questions about what drives lasting, inclusive governance change.
Research has predominantly concentrated on civil society organization (CSO) advocacy, particularly regarding the active involvement of women and youth, as well as the dynamics of alliance building and lobbying. This focus reflects the essential role that civil society has played in governance initiatives throughout the region. However, it also results in an evidence base that is largely shaped by CSO perspectives, potentially overlooking the broader factors influencing political inclusion in practice.
Outside of CSO advocacy, the evidence becomes sparse. While grassroots movements, media interventions, and public policy reforms receive some attention, each area has significant blind spots. Research on resource mobilization for movements and coalitions is nearly nonexistent, creating a critical gap in understanding how community-level organizing is sustained. Additionally, the culture of gender sensitivity in media has not been adequately studied, despite its relevance to representation. There is a complete absence of research on capacity building for media professionals and journalists. Furthermore, access to information, deemed foundational for sustainable development by the United Nations, remains the least researched intervention category in the entire map.
The call to action stemming from this map is clear. Research investment is urgently needed in the intervention areas that have been systematically overlooked: access to information, media capacity building, resource mobilization for grassroots movements, and the less-explored aspects of governance reform.
This map does not serve as a judgment; rather, it documents where attention has been directed and highlights areas that have been neglected. The next steps involve acting on these insights by filling the gaps.
