In connecting evidence across the Humanitarian–Development–Peace (HDP) Nexus, aligning evidence agendas across humanitarian, development, and peace pillars requires intentional systems that move beyond sectoral silos toward holistic, context-responsive learning. In my experience at the intersection of PCVE, gender, and governance in county settings, valuable data exists across all three pillars—yet fragmentation prevents it from shaping a unified understanding of risk, resilience, and long-term community wellbeing.
One way to strengthen coherence is through shared learning frameworks built around harmonized indicators, aligned theories of change, and interoperable data systems. Humanitarian actors collecting early warning signals, development teams gathering socio-economic data, and peacebuilding practitioners tracking governance and cohesion trends can feed insights into a common evidence ecosystem. Joint sense-making platforms across UN agencies, county governments, and civil society further ensure interpretation and adaptation occur collectively.
Supporting local CSOs to build capacity in Core Humanitarian Standards (CHS) of Quality Assurance is critical. When local actors understand and apply CHS, their data becomes more reliable and compatible with UN and donor systems. Co-creating evaluation tools, monitoring frameworks, and learning agendas with these CSOs strengthens ownership and ensures evidence reflects local realities.
In African contexts, incorporating “Made in Africa Evaluation” (MAE) approaches, published and championed by our very own, Africa Evaluation Association (AfEA), can further decolonize practice by integrating local values, culture (such as Ubuntu), and conditions. By combining MAE principles with CHS, UN and donor systems can leverage contextually relevant methodologies, strengthen local capacity, and promote governance and accountability in a culturally grounded manner.
Finally, stronger Donor–CSO networking structures—learning hubs, joint review forums, and communities of practice—deepen understanding of scope, stabilize transitions of project ownership, and support long-term collaboration. Connecting evidence, capacities, and local approaches ensures HDP programs are coherent, context-sensitive, and impactful for the communities they serve.
RE: Global Impact Evaluation Forum 2025: Forging evidence partnerships for effective action
Kenya
Dennis Ngumi Wangombe
MEL Specialist
CHRIPS
Posté le 08/12/2025
In connecting evidence across the Humanitarian–Development–Peace (HDP) Nexus, aligning evidence agendas across humanitarian, development, and peace pillars requires intentional systems that move beyond sectoral silos toward holistic, context-responsive learning. In my experience at the intersection of PCVE, gender, and governance in county settings, valuable data exists across all three pillars—yet fragmentation prevents it from shaping a unified understanding of risk, resilience, and long-term community wellbeing.
One way to strengthen coherence is through shared learning frameworks built around harmonized indicators, aligned theories of change, and interoperable data systems. Humanitarian actors collecting early warning signals, development teams gathering socio-economic data, and peacebuilding practitioners tracking governance and cohesion trends can feed insights into a common evidence ecosystem. Joint sense-making platforms across UN agencies, county governments, and civil society further ensure interpretation and adaptation occur collectively.
Supporting local CSOs to build capacity in Core Humanitarian Standards (CHS) of Quality Assurance is critical. When local actors understand and apply CHS, their data becomes more reliable and compatible with UN and donor systems. Co-creating evaluation tools, monitoring frameworks, and learning agendas with these CSOs strengthens ownership and ensures evidence reflects local realities.
In African contexts, incorporating “Made in Africa Evaluation” (MAE) approaches, published and championed by our very own, Africa Evaluation Association (AfEA), can further decolonize practice by integrating local values, culture (such as Ubuntu), and conditions. By combining MAE principles with CHS, UN and donor systems can leverage contextually relevant methodologies, strengthen local capacity, and promote governance and accountability in a culturally grounded manner.
Finally, stronger Donor–CSO networking structures—learning hubs, joint review forums, and communities of practice—deepen understanding of scope, stabilize transitions of project ownership, and support long-term collaboration. Connecting evidence, capacities, and local approaches ensures HDP programs are coherent, context-sensitive, and impactful for the communities they serve.