DRG Learning Agenda

A dynamic collection of research questions that serve to guide the DRG Center’s and USAID Missions’ analytical efforts related to DRG

Participants in USAID/Georgia's Disability Advocacy Project, implemented by the Coalition for Independent Living. Photo Credit: Lasha Kuprashvili, Coalition For Independent Living

The DRG Learning Agenda at USAID is a dynamic collection of research questions that guide the DRG Bureau analytical efforts related to Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance (DRG). The agenda serves as a framework for identifying evidence gaps, commissioning research, and generating recommendations to improve DRG programming. Beginning in 2016, the DRG Learning Agenda is entering its third iteration with the 2024-26 DRG Learning Agenda that continues to expand and update the technical evidence base on topics of strategic interest.

The 2016 and 2017 Learning Agendas included 20 Learning Questions across five themes: Participation and Inclusion, Transparency and Accountability, Human Rights, DRG Integration, and Theories of Democratic Change. The DRG Center formulated the DRG Learning Agendas through a consultative process with internal Theme Teams and USAID field staff. The Center created action plans for each question and a Learning Agenda Advisory Group to oversee annual updates to the agendas. The Center then funded evidence reviews along with research and evaluation activities to evidence gaps.

USAID reviewed past research supported by the DRG Center and assessed the degree to which the questions from the latest agendas were addressed (see Learning Overview). This process included a compilation and summary of research including ÿndings, conclusions, and recommendations (see Learning Agenda Rack-Up). 

The Learning Agenda questions were informed by existing DRG research and evaluation efforts and were developed collaboratively by DRG Center Theme Teams and staff from USAID Washington and USAID Missions overseas as well as through consultations with academics and external experts. The current agenda is divided into three tracks—cross-cutting, process, and team—that each focus on a certain type of learning question. The cross-cutting track addresses questions related to topics, or themes, that apply to multiple DRG program areas (such as civil society and governance). The process track addresses questions on how we learn and apply evidence within the DRG sector. 

 

Opening Up Democratic Spaces

What are the most effective interventions focused on public institutions to reverse democratic backsliding and/or support greater democratization? For more information on the Opening Up Democratic Spaces, check out the infographic along with the Literature Review, Executive Summary of Case Study Report, and the Full Case Study report.

Information Ecosystem

What factors and dynamics foster -- and build resilience to -- the proliferation of disinformation, misinformation and/or malinformation? For more information on the Information Ecosystem research, check out the infographic along with the Literature Review and the Research Database.

Anti-Corruption

How should USAID foster anti-corruption reform in contexts where “political will” is weak? For more information on the Anti-Corruption Research, check out the infographic and full report.

Integrating inclusion

What donor-assisted interventions can we use to change entrenched norms holding individuals and groups such as youth, women and girls back from engaging politically and why? For more information, check out the Women's Political Party Leadership (WPPL) work, check out more here. 

Evidence in programming

How do Missions integrate DRG evidence into programming and how can evidence use be supported? For more information, read the DRG Mission Use of Evidence (MUSE) study. 

 

 

 

The 2024-26 DRG Learning Agenda priorities and questions were informed by extensive stakeholder consultation and analysis. The priorities focus on areas of work where we can maximize the impact of our learning investments by ensuring they have broad applicability across a range of DRG programs. 

Priority

Question/s

What works: What works and what doesn’t work in  commonly implemented DRG interventions?

 

 

What works and what doesn’t work in commonly implemented interventions? For whom do they work? How do they work and what contextual and programmatic factors contribute to effectiveness?

 

To what extent do different training modalities (e.g., in-person workshops, online modules, blended learning) impact the knowledge acquisition, skill development, and self-reported preparedness of potential DRG recipients, considering factors such as prior experience, learning styles, and access to technology?

Democratic Resilience: What activities across development sectors work to contribute to democratic resilience?

How do activities across non-DRG development sectors positively or negatively influence  democratic outcomes, institutions, and processes?  What are key contextual and programmatic factors that mediate this relationship? 

How do emergent democratic practices and innovations vary in their design, implementation, and effectiveness in promoting citizen participation, political inclusion, and government responsiveness in different social and political contexts?

What types of influence do external authoritarian powers exert on democratic processes and institutions? How can this be identified, mitigated and addressed through our programming?

Democratic Openings: What opportunities and challenges do democratic openings present and how can USAID best respond to them?

How can USAID collaborate with local actors and institutions including governments, civil society organizations, and other stakeholders to maximize the impact of their efforts in response to democratic openings? How does this differ by social, economic and cultural context?

To what extent do external actors, such as international organizations or foreign governments, influence democratic transitions during periods of opening?

How have past USAID interventions addressed democratic openings in various countries, and what lessons can be learned from these experiences?

Improve Evidence Use: What are the most effective approaches and modalities to deliver DRG assistance?

How can non-traditional modalities to DRG programming including co-creation, G2G, and multi-donor funded approaches be leveraged to develop localized and culturally appropriate modalities for delivering DRG assistance that effectively address the specific needs and capacities of different communities?

For three most significant learnings identified by DRG MEL Experts, what results have been achieved, how many learnings have been implemented at scale, why or why not, what needs to be done to replicate these best practices?