Factors Affecting the Use of Evidence in Public Sector Programmes in South Africa
A Systematic Review of Outcome 8 programmes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59490/dgo.2025.1024Keywords:
Evidence-based policy-making, public sector programmes, Outcome 8, National Development Plan, South Africa, human settlements, evaluation findings, systematic reviewAbstract
The effective use of evidence is crucial for improving public sector programmes' design, implementation, and outcomes, particularly in addressing the complex challenges developing countries like South Africa face. Outcome 8 of the National Development Plan (NDP), which aims to transform human settlements and improve the quality of life for South African citizens, has been the subject of multiple evaluations since its introduction in 2010. Despite the availability of extensive evaluation data, integrating findings into policy and practice has often been inconsistent, with recurring issues identified across various evaluation cycles. This study systematically reviews the factors affecting the use of evidence generated from these evaluations in Outcome 8 programmes, specifically focusing on evaluations conducted from 2010 to the present. The review synthesizes government evaluations, policy reports, and academic literature to identify key barriers and facilitators in using evidence for policy-making and programme implementation. The findings reveal several barriers to evidence use, including political interference, which often influences the prioritization and implementation of evidence-based policies; limited capacity within government departments, hindering the interpretation and application of evaluation findings; and challenges in data consistency across national, provincial, and local government levels. Additionally, the review identifies that public sector programmes often rely predominantly on quantitative metrics, which may overlook the value of qualitative insights that could offer more context and a deeper understanding of policy impacts and outcomes. On the other hand, facilitators of evidence use, such as establishing strong institutional frameworks, forming evidence networks to promote knowledge exchange, and enhancing collaboration between evaluators and policymakers, were also highlighted. These facilitators help create an environment where evidence is more likely to inform policy decisions, leading to more effective governance and better programme outcomes. The review concludes by recommending strategies to address these barriers and improve the integration of evidence into policy-making and programme implementation. Key recommendations include strengthening the capacity of public sector officials to interpret and apply evaluation findings, promoting collaboration between evaluators and policymakers, and institutionalizing the use of evidence across government departments. Overcoming these challenges is crucial for improving the effectiveness of Outcome 8 programmes, advancing the broader goals of human settlement transformation in South Africa, and enhancing the impact of public policies.
Downloads
References
Nutley, S., Walter, I., & Davies, H. (2007). Using evidence in public management: The role of evidence-informed policy-making. Public Management Review, 9(4), 425-444.
Cairney, P. (2016). The politics of evidence-based policymaking. Palgrave Macmillan.
Head, B. W. (2008). Three lenses of evidence-based policy. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 67(1), 1-11.
Parkhurst, J. O. (2017). The politics of evidence: From evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence. Routledge.
Weiss, C. H. (1977). Research for policy’s sake: The enlightenment function of social research. Policy Analysis, 3(4), 531-545.
Cairney, P., & Geyer, R. (2017). Evidence-based policy: A critical view. Policy Studies, 38(1), 1-9.
South African Presidency. (2011). National Development Plan 2030: Our future – make it work. Pretoria: South African Government.
Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME). (2011). National Evaluation Policy Framework (NEPF). Pretoria: DPME.
Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME). (2014). The Use of Evidence in Public Sector Programmes: A Review. Pretoria: DPME.
Stewart, R. (2015). Evaluation of Evidence Use in Policy Change: A South African Case Study. Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg Press.
Department of Human Settlements (DHS). (2013). Monitoring, Evaluation and Impact Assessment Framework. Pretoria: DHS.
Department of Human Settlements (DHS). (2014). Rapid Appraisal of Outcome 8. Pretoria: DHS.
Department of Human Settlements (DHS). (2016). Impact Evaluation of Affordable Housing Approaches. Pretoria: DHS.
Department of Human Settlements (DHS). (2019). Performance Evaluation of Outcome 8 Programmes. Pretoria: DHS.
Department of Human Settlements (DHS). (2021). Baseline Evaluation of Informal Settlements Upgrading. Pretoria: DHS.
Goldman, A., et al. (2015). Evaluation of Evidence Utilization in Housing Policy. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
Hedayatipour, M., et al. (2024). Systematic review methodologies in public sector evaluations. Journal of Public Policy Analysis, 32(1), 19-34.
Page, M. J., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71.
Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. (2012). Beyond PICO: The SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qualitative Health Research, 22(10), 1435-1443.
Methley, A. M., et al. (2014). The SPIDER tool for qualitative research: A systematic review. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 17(4), 351-363.
Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. Sage Publications.
Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2007). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. Springer Publishing Company.
Dixon-Woods, M., et al. (2005). Synthesizing qualitative research: A review of the methodology. Qualitative Research, 5(1), 1-18.
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8, 45.
Paterson, B., et al. (2001). Meta-synthesis of qualitative research: A practical guide to conducting a meta-synthesis of qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(3), 28-40.
Finfgeld-Connett, D. (2018). Meta-synthesis of qualitative research: A rigorous approach. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 74(10), 2439-2448.
Suri, H. (2011). Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis. Qualitative Research Journal, 11(2), 63-75.
Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2016). Systematic approaches to a successful literature review. Sage.
Barnett-Page, E., & Thomas, J. (2009). Methodological approaches to the synthesis of qualitative research: A critical review. Qualitative Research, 9(2), 139-158.
Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews. Sage Publications.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publications.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage Publications.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine de Gruyter.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007). The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.
Holton, J. A. (2010). The coding process and its challenges. In S. S. McCall & R. R. Atkinson (Eds.), Qualitative research methods (pp. 293-319). Sage Publications.
Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Grounded theory: A practical guide. Sage Publications.
Urquhart, C. (2013). Grounded theory for qualitative research: A practical guide. Sage Publications.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publications.
Scott, W. R., & Howell, J. L. (2008). Social theory and policy: Understanding the foundations of social governance. Wiley-Blackwell.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Kuckartz, U., & Rädiker, S. (2019). Analyzing qualitative data with MAXQDA: An introduction to techniques and applications. Springer.
Boeije, H. R. (2002). A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Quality & Quantity, 36(4), 391-409.
Urquhart, C., Lehmann, H., & Myers, M. D. (2010). Qualitative research methods in information systems. Sage Publications.
Amisi, M. (2015). Evaluating the effectiveness of government interventions in housing policy in South Africa. Pretoria: Government Printing Office.
Griessel, H., et al. (2019). Intersectoral collaboration and its impact on the success of housing projects. Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg Press.
Amisi, M. (2015). Evaluating the effectiveness of government interventions in housing policy in South Africa. Pretoria: Government Printing Office.
Griessel, H., et al. (2019). Intersectoral collaboration and its impact on the success of housing projects. Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg Press.
Abrahams, M.A. (2015). ‘A review of the growth of monitoring and evaluation in South Africa: Monitoring and evaluation as a profession, an industry and a governance tool’, African Evaluation Journal, 3(1), Art. #142, 8 pages.
Bauer, M.S., Damschroder, L., Hagedorn, H., Smith, J., & Kilbourne, A.M. (2015). An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist. BMC psychology, 3(1), p.32.
Bohnet, I. (2016). What works: Gender equality by design. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Boulle, J., Davids, M., Mabogoane, T., Goldman, I. (2015). Early Childhood Development Evidence-Based Policy Making and Implementation Case Study. DPME: Pretoria, South Africa.
Brinkman, S.A., Johnson, S.E., Codde, J.P., Hart, M.B., Straton, J.A., Mittinty, M.N., & Silburn, S.R. (2016). Efficacy of infant simulator programmes to prevent teenage pregnancy: A school-based cluster randomised controlled trial in Western Australia. The Lancet, 388(10057), 2264–2271.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Cairney, P. (2016). The politics of evidence-based policy making. Berlin: Springer.
Chalmers, I. (2005). If evidence-informed policy works in practice, does it matter if it doesn’t work in theory?. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 1(2), 227–242.
Davids, M., Samuels, M.-L., September, R., Moeng, T.L., Richter, L., Mabogoane, T.W. et al. (2015). ‘The pilot evaluation for the National Evaluation System in South Africa – A diagnostic review of early childhood development’. African Evaluation Journal, 3(1), Art. #141, 7 pages.
Dayal D., Langer L. (2016) Policy-relevant Evidence Maps: A departmental guidance note. DPME: Pretoria, South Africa.
Dayal, D. (2018). Introducing Evidence Mapping in the SA Public Sector. Keynote presentation at the Using Evidence in the Public Sector: What Can Rapid Response Services and Evidence Maps Offer Learning Exchange, 1 August, Protea Hotel, Pretoria, South Africa.
Dayal, H. (2016). Using Evidence to Reflect on South Africa’s 20 Years of Democracy. Insights From Within the Policy Space. Knowledge Sector Initiative Working Paper No 7. Jakarta: Knowledge Sector Initiative.
Department of Basic Education (DBE). (2017). The Early Grade Reading Study (EGRS): Summary Report: Results of Year 2 Impact Evaluation. DBE: Pretoria, South Africa.
Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA). (2016). National Biodiversity Research & Evidence Strategy (2015-2025). DEA: Pretoria, South Africa.
Department of Human Settlements. (2016). Evaluation of whether the provision of state subsidised housing has addressed asset poverty for households and created assets for Municipalities. Available at: [link] (Accessed: 24 January 2024).
Department of Human Settlements. (2017) Evaluation of the Impact of Human Settlements Development Programmes on the Environment during the implementation of the 2nd Edition of the Environmental Implementation. Available at: [link]. Accessed: 24 January 2024).
Department of Human Settlements. (2010). Monitoring evaluation and impact assessment 2013/2014–2018/2019: Policy and implementation framework for the human settlements. Pretoria: Department of Human Settlements. Available at: [link].(Accessed: 21 May 2024).
Department of Human Settlements. (2014). MTSF Outcome Number 8: Sustainable Human Settlements and Improved Quality of Household Life. Available at: [link]. (Accessed: 24 January 2024).
Department of Human Settlements. (2014). Rapid appraisal of Outcome 8: Output 1. Pretoria: Department of Human Settlements. Available at: [link]. (Accessed: 21 May 2024).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Lesedi Senamele Matlala
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
