- Aha! Moment
What does it mean to mainstream behavioral sciences within public health institutions?
Busara: Kriti Chouhan, Shalin Desai, Patrick Forscher, Rowan Harrity, Joel Mumo, Ruth Wambua
WHO: Elena Altieri, Tim Chadborn
- September 16, 2026
- 9:46 am
SECTOR
PROJECT TYPE
Location
BEHAVIORAL THEME
OVERVIEW
This Aha! Moment summarizes findings from a joint Busara and World Health Organization (WHO) project on what it means to mainstream behavioural sciences within institutions responsible for public health. The project developed a conceptual framework and indicators to help WHO Member States assess the integration of behavioural sciences into policy, research, capacity building, and practice, and to identify gaps and track progress over time.
Research Questions
- What does it mean to mainstream behavioural sciences within public health institutions?
- What institutional conditions are required to systematically integrate behavioural sciences into public health?
- How can countries assess progress, identify gaps, and strengthen the institutionalization of behavioural sciences?
- What indicators can be used to monitor the integration of behavioural sciences across public health institutions?
Methods
The framework and indicators were developed through a structured, multi-stage process led by Busara and WHO. This included internal consultations, a situational analysis, interviews with experts from ministries of health, WHO offices, academia, international organizations, and behavioural science institutions, followed by development of a conceptual framework and draft indicators, stakeholder feedback through informal outreach and public consultation, and an external technical review. The project ran from June to December 2025 and involved 23 participants.
THEMATIC AREAS
Key Findings
- Successful mainstreaming of behavioural sciences requires progress across three interconnected pathways: policy engagement, research projects, and capacity building.
- Institutional change is viewed as a prerequisite for broader health-system transformation, making ministries, agencies, and public health institutions the primary focus of monitoring efforts.
- The Institutional Impact Model (IIM) shows that behavioural science becomes embedded in health systems through stronger leadership support, policy processes, workforce capabilities, and research systems.
- The RECAPPS monitoring framework, covering Research, Engagement, Capacity, Application, and Strategy, provides 12 indicators to assess and track the institutionalization of behavioural sciences.
- Countries at different stages of maturity can use the framework to establish baselines, set targets, monitor progress, and report achievements at national, regional, and global levels.
- Case studies from Malaysia, Canada, and Mali demonstrate different pathways for integrating behavioural sciences into public health governance and practice.
Implications for Policy or Development
- A common framework can help WHO Member States and ministries assess their preparedness to use behavioural sciences evidence and identify where staff and systems need strengthening.
- Governments can use the framework to track progress over time and compare learning across settings.
- Mainstreaming behavioural sciences can move governments beyond isolated experiments by incorporating behavioural evidence into policy design, implementation, and evaluation.
- Future work should focus on rolling out the framework in practice and assessing how it is implemented across different contexts.
- Comparing countries and regions could help identify contextual, institutional, and resource-related factors that explain differences in adoption.
How to Cite: Busara. 2026. What does it mean to mainstream behavioral sciences within public health institutions? (The aha! moment No. 36). Nairobi: Busara. DOI: doi.org/10.62372/JXBW9313.