Promoting the Use of Reproductive Health Research Results: A multi-sectoral workshop for priority-setting in Youth SRH research in Peru Carlos F. Cáceres, MD, PhD Director of Research, REDESS Jóvenes

Background n Consolidation of the view that the State has an obligation with youth health, through the provision of services n During the past decade, an increasing number of both programmes and studies has been observed n This is also true in Peru, but it is also clear that the relationship between research and programmes is limited

The workshop n In May 1999, in the context of a larger, Ford Foundation-supported project, REDESS Jóvenes (the Peruvian Network for Youth Education, Sexual Health and Development) organised a multi-sectoral and multi-disciplinary workshop for discussion and priority setting on youth SRH research in Peru for n Public sector, international agencies, universities, private and community-based organisations participated.

Objectives of the workshop n Discuss research priorities in youth SRH, based on the analysis of available information and of the foreseeable data needs for decision-making: –(1) Assess the availability of information –(2) Discuss the needs of production and/or utilisation of information –(3) Identify research priorities

Initial reflections n Non-existence of formal channels of diffusion of information to facilitate a dialogue between researchers and programme designers and managers n Limited interest in, or limited ability for, advocacy work among researchers n In academia, lack of a culture of broad dissemination of results among the public (including research subjects), beyond peer-reviewed publications

n Limited interest in, or ability for, utilisation of research results among programme designers and policy makers. n Inadequate planning or the processes of programme design, which relegates formative research and monitoring to a secondary level or priority. n Lack of a culture of public discussion of priorities n Lack of co-ordination among sectors (e.g. between universities and the pubic sector, so that graduate students can implement relevant research)

Panel presentation on recent relevant research on YSRH n Inclusion of: –Ministry of Health (RH Programme) –National Institute of Statistics and Informatics –Academia –NGOs –International Cooperation

Group work 1 n Available but not well-known information on youth SRH: –Substantial increase –Concentrated in urban areas –Knowledge and diffusion are limited - publication is uncommon or delayed –Utilisation is particularly limited regarding perception of adolescents on providers and vice versa.

Group work 1 n New information needed in : –Adolescents with incomplete abortions –Sexuality among non-sexually active adolescents –Interaction between youth and the media –Family violence and impact on youth –Political impact of content of youth SH programmes –Young men and sexuality –Youth and sexual identity –Life projects among the youth –Adolescent mothers and everyday life

Group work 1 n Improving the use of information –Broadly diffuse success stories –Budget for diffusion of results –Train professionals in inner parts of the country, working with local universities –Support networks of researchers –Build coalitions of universities, CBOs, municipalities, cooperating agencies –Learn how to facilitate use of research results among non-academics

Group work 2: Theme prioritisation n Demographic/Epidemiologic (adolescent pregnancy and attrition; adolescent abortion; sexual violence; family violence and gangs) n Cultural/social (sexuality and images of sexuality; sexuality among non-active youth; young men and sexuality; risk perceptions on pregnancy and STDs; youth sexual identity) n Services and programmes for change (impact evaluation; decision making in public policy; supply and reception of media messages among youth; successful alternative models; economic impact of YSRH problems)

Group work 2: 5 Priority Topics n Evaluation of services and programmes n Adolescent pregnancy n sexual violence and its impact on the future sexual experience n Mass media and urban culture n Legal and institutional framework

Group 2: Geographic priorities n Need to define difference regarding: –Rural/urban –Coast/highlands/jungle –Men/women –Age and ethnicity n In rural areas: Legitimacy of domestic violence n In urban areas: Migration, sex work, STD/HIV and social vulnerability

Outcomes of the workshop n Memories were published in a volume distributed free of cost in the academic milieu, the public sector and NGOs n The volume included a foreword by local authories (two women: the Second Vice-President of Congress, and the Director of the National Sex Education Programme) n No formal evaluation of the process was possible (the project was finishing)

Conclusion n The project was considered an innovative, pioneering activity, and is well considered among stakeholders n It remains difficult to analyse its impact in given the political changes experienced by the country, in the absence of a formal evaluation n We need more studies on the research- policy interface and policy change.