Stories

Tag: global health

  • The future of work: remarks at the 9th 1M1B Impact Summit held at the United Nations in Geneva

    The future of work: remarks at the 9th 1M1B Impact Summit held at the United Nations in Geneva

    On November 7, 2025, Reda Sadki, Executive Director of The Geneva Learning Foundation, joined the panel “The Future of Work: AI and Green Skills” at the 9th 1M1B Impact Summit held at the United Nations in Geneva. Moderated by Elizabeth Saunders, the discussion explored the rapid redefinition of the workforce by artificial intelligence and the green transition. The following is an edited transcript of Mr. Sadki’s remarks.

    Living with artificial intelligence

    Moderator: You have just seen some of these really incredible changemaker ideas and so what skills and mindsets stood out to you and how do you think those can be scaled to build a workforce that is living with AI and not competing with it?

    That is a wonderful question.

    I would answer that the key skill is learning to work with artificial intelligence.

    It is likely that your generation will be the first one learning to work side-by-side with AI as a partner or a co-worker, in the same way my generation learned to navigate the Internet.

    This requires three things.

    First, being ambitious.

    Second, being bold.

    And third, being courageous.

    Things are going to change dramatically in the next three to six years.

    There is a convergence of belief among those building these systems—what some call the “San Francisco Consensus”—that within this short timeframe, AI will fundamentally transform every aspect of human activity.

    We are facing the arrival of a new, non-human intelligence that is likely to have better reasoning skills than humans.

    This is not just about new tools.

    We are already seeing AI automate the routine tasks that make up the first rungs of a professional career.

    Some may tell you AI is not coming for your job, but I struggle to see that as anything other than misleading at best.

    In our programmes at The Geneva Learning Foundation, we have already used AI to replace key functions previously performed by humans.

    So, the sooner we are thinking, learning, and getting ready to navigate those changes, the better.

    The challenge is not to compete with AI in knowledge transmission.

    The risk is what some call “metacognitive laziness”, outsourcing our critical thinking to the machine.

    What is left for humans, and what we must cultivate, is facilitation, interpretation, and uniquely human-centric skills.

    These include creativity, curiosity, critical thinking, collective care, and consciousness.

    We must cultivate judgment, contextual wisdom, and ethical reasoning.

    We are navigating the unknown, and learning to do so together – by strengthening the connections between us, by asking what it means to be connected as humans – will be critical to our survival.

    Peer learning and democratizing access

    Moderator: I have a question for you about your foundation, because you have pioneered peer learning networks that have reached thousands globally. So what can we learn from this model about how to democratize access to AI and green skills, and make lifelong learning more inclusive and action-driven?

    The Geneva Learning Foundation’s mission, since 2016, has been to research, develop, and implement new ways to learn and lead.

    Our initial premise was that our traditional education systems are broken.

    They often rely on a top-down, “transmission model” of learning, where knowledge flows from experts to practitioners.

    This model is too slow, too expensive, and often fails to reach the people and communities that are facing extinction-level threats, whether that is climate change or artificial intelligence.

    In today’s world, these broken systems create significant risks when it comes to the critical threats upon our societies, including climate change and artificial intelligence.

    In the last three years, we have made key breakthroughs in solving four problems:

    • The problem of scale: how do we simultaneously connect tens of thousands of people in a single initiative, rather than one classroom at a time?
    • The problem of speed: how do we share knowledge at the speed problems emerge?
    • The problem of cost: how do we make this affordable?
    • And the problem of sustainability: how do we create systems people will continue to use because they are relevant?

    We have developed a model that we have tested in over 137 countries, working with international partners as well as ministries of health and, most importantly, with people on the ground in local communities.

    The first lesson learned is that in today’s complex, hyper-connected world, where there is an abundance of knowledge, simply knowing things is necessary, but not sufficient.

    The second lesson is recognizing the significance of what people know because they are there every day.

    We operate within knowledge systems that tend to devalue this “experiential knowledge”, often dismissing it as “anecdotal”.

    This is a form of “epistemic injustice”.

    We believe we must value what the health worker knows, what the mother or grandmother knows, and what the youth know, in order to solve the challenges before us.

    The third lesson is the power of digital networks to enable connections.

    In the past, learning from experience was constrained by our local environment.

    With digital networks, you can make connections with people from all over the world.

    This led us to the central piece of our innovation: peer learning mediated through digital networks.

    This could be so much more than the informal chatter and negative feedback loops of social media.

    It is a structured process where participants develop concrete projects addressing real challenges, review each other’s work, and engage in facilitated dialogue to share insights.

    Knowledge flows horizontally, from peer to peer, rather than just vertically.

    This model solves our four problems.

    It gives us scale.

    There is no upper limit.

    It gives us speed.

    It turns out to be incredibly cheap.

    And it is sustainable, because people keep doing it because it is actually helping them solve their needs.

    To give a specific example, in July 2023 we launched our program on climate change and health.

    We started by listening to the voices of thousands of health workers from all over the world, who painted a very scary picture of the impacts of climate change on the health of those they serve.

    But we also found that health workers were being incredibly creative with very limited resources.

    They had already begun to solve the problems they were facing in their communities, but unfortunately, very often with no one helping or supporting them.

    That led us to calculate that if we are able to connect one million health workers to each other to be learning from and supporting each other by 2030, that group of health workers could use the power of those connections to save seven million lives.

    And for the “bean counters” in the room, this would be at a cost of less than two dollars per life saved, which is actually cheaper than vaccination, one of the most effective interventions we have in health today.

    This is such an incredible equation that some of our partners say it sounds too good to be true.

    There is an incredible opportunity to link up health workers with other segments of society, including youth.

    We see the potential from building these coalitions and networks.

    This brings us back to AI.

    We really see peer learning as key to our survival as human beings.

    We may end up working with machines that already exceed our cognitive capacities, and will almost certainly do so definitively in pretty much every area of work within the next three to six years.

    We are going to have to respond to that by strengthening the connections we have as human beings.

    AI systems are trained on global data, but humans possess deep “contextual intelligence”.

    Peer learning is the bridge.

    It is how we learn together how to adapt AI’s powerful analytics to our local realities, cultural contexts, trust networks, and resource constraints.

    We have to think about what it means to be human in the Age of AI, and learning from each other will be very critical, very key to that survival.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025. Suspended between earth and ether, Cathedral of Circuits and Roots evokes a world where technology and nature, thought and matter, coalesce in fragile harmony. Its oxidized cubes, hues of turquoise, gold, and quiet rust, resemble relics of a civilization both ancient and yet to come. The sculpture’s floating architecture suggests a digital forest, each metallic block a leaf of knowledge, each connection a pulse of shared intelligence. It speaks to the dual call of our age: to grow roots deep in human wisdom, even as we build circuits reaching toward artificial minds. In this shimmering equilibrium, the work asks: can progress be both luminous and humane — and can learning itself become an act of restoration?

    References

  • How do we stop AI-generated ‘poverty porn’ fake images?

    How do we stop AI-generated ‘poverty porn’ fake images?

    There is an important and necessary conversation happening right now about the use of generative artificial intelligence in global health and humanitarian communications.

    Researchers like Arsenii Alenichev are correctly identifying a new wave of “poverty porn 2.0,” where artificial intelligence is used to generate stereotypical, racialized images of suffering – the very tropes many of us have worked for decades to banish.

    The alarms are valid.

    The images are harmful.

    But I am deeply concerned that in our rush to condemn the new technology, we are misdiagnosing the cause.

    The problem is not the tool.

    The problem is the user.

    Generative artificial intelligence is not the cause of poverty porn.

    The root cause is the deep-seeded racism and colonial mindset that have defined the humanitarian aid and global health sectors since their inception.

    This is not a new phenomenon.

    It is a long-standing pattern.

    In my private conversations with colleagues and researchers like Alenichev, I find we often agree on this point.

    Yet, the public-facing writing and research seem to stop short, focusing on the technological symptom rather than the systemic illness.

    It is vital we correct this focus before we implement the wrong solutions.

    The old poison in a new bottle

    Long before Midjourney, large organizations and their communications teams were propagating the worst kinds of caricatures.

    I know this.

    Many of us know this.

    We remember the history of award-winning photographers being sent from the Global North to “find… miserable kids” and stage images to meet the needs of funders. Organizations have always been willing to manufacture narratives that “show… people on the receiving end of aid as victims”.

    These working cultures — which demand images of suffering, which view Black and Brown bodies as instruments for fundraising, and which prioritize the “western gaze” — existed decades before artificial intelligence.

    Artificial intelligence did not create this impulse.

    It just made it cheaper, faster, and easier to execute.

    It is an enabler, not an originator.

    If an organization’s communications philosophy is rooted in colonial stereotypes, it will produce colonial stereotypes, whether it is using a 1000-dollar-a-day photographer or a 30-dollar-a-month software subscription.

    The danger of a misdiagnosis

    If we incorrectly identify artificial intelligence as the cause of this problem, our “solution” will be to ban the technology.

    This would be a catastrophic mistake.

    First, it is a superficial fix.

    It allows the very organizations producing this content to performatively cleanse themselves by banning a tool, all while eluding the fundamental, painful work of challenging their own underlying racism and colonial impulses.

    The problem will not be solved; it will simply revert to being expressed through traditional (and often staged) photography.

    Second, it punishes the wrong people.

    For local actors and other small organizations, generative artificial intelligence is not necessarily a tool for creating poverty porn.

    It is a tactical advantage in a fight for survival.

    Such organizations may lack the resources for a full communication team.

    They are then “punished by algorithms” that demand a constant stream of visuals, burying stories of organizations that cannot provide them.

    Furthermore, some organizations committed to dignity in representation are also using artificial intelligence to solve other deep ethical problems.

    They use it to create dignified portraits for stories without having to navigate the complex and often extractive issues of child protection and consent.

    They use it to avoid exploiting real people.

    A blanket ban on artificial intelligence in our sector would disarm small, local organizations.

    It would silence those of us trying to use the tool ethically, while allowing the large, wealthy organizations to continue their old, harmful practices unchanged.

    The real work ahead

    This is why I must insist we reframe the debate.

    The question is not if we should use artificial intelligence.

    The question is, and has always been, how we challenge the racist systems that demand these images in the first place.

    My Algerian ancestors fought colonialism.

    I cannot separate my work at The Geneva Learning Foundation from the struggle against racism and fighting for the right to tell our own stories.

    That philosophy guides how I use any tool, whether it is a word processor or an image generator.

    The tool is not the ethic.

    We need to demand accountability from organizations like the World Health Organization, Plan International, and even the United Nations.

    We must challenge the working cultures that green-light these campaigns.

    We should also, as Arsenii rightly points out, support local photographers and artists.

    But we must not let organizations off the hook by allowing them to blame a piece of software for their own lack of imagination and their deep, unaddressed colonial legacies.

    Artificial intelligence is not the problem.

    Our sector’s colonial mindset is.

    References

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

  • What the 2025 State of AI Report means for global health and humanitarian action

    What the 2025 State of AI Report means for global health and humanitarian action

    The 2025 State of AI Report has arrived, painting a picture of an industry being fundamentally reshaped by “The Squeeze.”

    This is a critical, intensifying constraint on three key resources: the massive-scale compute (processing power) required for training, the availability of high-quality data, and the specialized human talent to build frontier models.

    This squeeze, the report details, is accelerating a consolidation of power.

    It favors the “hyperscalers”—the handful of large technology corporations that can afford to build their own power plants to run their data centers.

    For leaders in global health and humanitarian action, the report is essential reading.

    However, it must be read with a critical eye.

    The report’s narrative is, in many ways, the narrative of the hyperscalers.

    It focuses on the benchmarks they dominate, the closed models they are building, and the resource problems they face.

    This “view from the top” is valuable, but it is not the only reality.

    What does this consolidation of power mean for our sector, and where should we be focusing our attention?

    The new AI divide: A focus on closed-model dominance

    The report documents a clear trend: closed, proprietary models are pulling ahead of open-source alternatives in raw performance benchmarks.

    This is a direct result of the compute squeeze.

    When training costs become astronomical, only the wealthiest organizations can compete at the frontier.

    This focus on state-of-the-art performance, while informative, can be a distraction.

    For humanitarian action, the “best” model is not necessarily the one that tops a leaderboard, but the one that is affordable, adaptable, and deployable in low-resource settings.

    The true implication for our sector is the emergence of a new “AI divide”.

    This divide is not just about access but about capability.

    We may face a future where Global North institutions may license “PhD-level” specialized AI agents at cost lower than their human counterparts, while practitioners in the Global South are left with rudimentary or geolocked tools.

    This dynamic threatens to reinforce, rather than disrupt, existing knowledge power imbalances and risks a new era of “digital colonialism”, where the sector becomes entirely dependent on a few private companies for its most critical technology.

    Opportunities in the State of AI: Breakthroughs in science and health

    The most unambiguous good news in the 2025 report is the dramatic acceleration of AI in science and medicine.

    AI is no longer just a research assistant; it is demonstrating expert-level accuracy in diagnostics and is actively designing novel therapeutics.

    This is a profound opportunity for global health.

    Where the report’s perspective is incomplete, however, is on the gap between this capability and its real-world application.

    An AI can provide a brilliant medical insight, but it lacks the “contextual intelligence” of a local practitioner.

    An AI model may not know that people in a specific district avoid the clinic on Tuesdays because it is market day – unless humans are working side-by-side with the model to share such qualitative and experiential data.

    Read more: Why peer learning is critical to survive the Age of Artificial Intelligence

    Therefore, the report’s findings on medical AI should not prompt us to simply buy new tools.

    It should prompt us to invest in the human infrastructure—like structured peer learning networks —where health workers can collectively learn how to blend AI’s power with their deep understanding of local realities.

    The State of AI report’s risks and our own

    The 2025 report rightly identifies a shift in risk, moving from passive issues like model bias to active, malicious threats like accelerated cyber capabilities and new “bio-risks.”

    These are critical concerns for the health and humanitarian sectors.

    But the report misses the most immediate barrier to AI adoption in our field: our own organizational culture.

    Many of our institutions operate within “highly punitive accountability systems”.

    These systems, which tie performance evaluation directly to funding, create an environment where experimentation carries significant personal and institutional risk.

    This leads to a “transparency paradox”.

    Health workers and field staff are already experimenting with AI, but they are forced to hide their use.

    If they disclose that a report was AI-assisted, they risk having their work subjected to “automatic devaluation,” regardless of its quality.

    This punitive culture prevents open discussion and makes collective learning difficult.

    State of AI: A strategic response to the squeeze

    The 2025 State of AI Report confirms that we cannot compete in the compute squeeze.

    Our strategy must therefore be one of smart adaptation and collective action.

    For global health and humanitarian leaders, key takeaways include:

    1. Do not be distracted by the “SOTA” race. Our goal is not to have the highest-performing model, but the most applicable and equitable one.
    2. Invest in human networks, not just technology. The greatest gains will come from building the collaborative capacity of our workforce to use AI tools effectively in context.
    3. Fix our internal culture. We must create environments where staff can experiment with AI openly and safely, without fear of reprisal. We cannot adapt to this technology if we are punishing our innovators.
    4. Unite for collective power. The report’s theme of consolidation is a warning. As individual non-governmental organizations, we have no power to negotiate with hyperscalers. We must explore forming a “cooperative” to gain a “seat at the table” and co-shape an AI ecosystem that serves the public interest, not just corporate agendas.

    These risks and opportunities are part and parcel of why The Geneva Learning Foundation is offering the AI4Health certificate programme. Learn more here: https://www.learning.foundation/ai.

    References

  • Pour retrouver les enfants congolais non vaccinés, il est question des fumoirs à poisson et du dialogue inter-religieux

    Pour retrouver les enfants congolais non vaccinés, il est question des fumoirs à poisson et du dialogue inter-religieux

    Au deuxième jour de leurs travaux en direct, les professionnels de la santé congolais sont passés de la découverte à l’exploration des causes profondes qui laissent des centaines de milliers d’enfants exposés aux maladies évitables par la vaccination. Ils découvrent que les racines du problème sont souvent là où personne ne les attend: dans l’économie de la pêche, le dialogue avec les églises ou la gestion des camps de déplacés.

    Lire également: En République démocratique du Congo, la traque des enfants « zéro dose » passe par l’intelligence collective des acteurs de la santé

    Les analyses, plus fines, révèlent des leviers d’action insoupçonnés, démontrant la puissance d’une méthode qui transforme les soignants en stratèges.

    « La séance d’hier, c’était une séance de découverte, mais aujourd’hui, c’était une séance d’exploration. Explorer, c’est aller en profondeur. Il faut sonder ».

    Ces mots de Fidèle Tshibanda Mulangu, un participant congolais, résument la bascule qui s’est opérée ce mercredi 8 octobre.

    Après une première journée consacrée au partage des défis, la dynamique a changé.

    L’objectif n’était plus seulement d’identifier les problèmes, mais de les disséquer avec une précision accrue.

    Dans le cadre de l’initiative menée par La Fondation Apprendre Genève et ses partenaires — le ministère de la Santé de la RDC, l’UNICEF et Gavi — les participants ont été invités à appliquer une deuxième fois la méthode d’analyse des causes profondes.

    L’effet a été immédiat.

    « La séance d’hier m’a permis de comprendre que ce que je pensais être une cause profonde n’était qu’une cause intermédiaire », a ainsi partagé Hermione Raissa Tientcheu Ngounou, illustrant la sophistication croissante des analyses.

    Le dialogue rompu entre la foi et la santé publique

    Au cœur du Kasaï, un groupe de travail a de nouveau abordé la question des églises de réveil hostiles à la vaccination.

    Mais cette fois, l’analyse a dépassé le constat d’un obstacle religieux. « Les fidèles, lorsqu’ils tombent malades, ne vont pas dans les structures sanitaires, mais ils préfèrent rester dans des centres de prière », a expliqué le rapporteur du groupe, décrivant une rupture de confiance avec le système de santé formel.

    En poussant la réflexion, les participants ont conclu que le vrai problème était « l’absence d’un cadre de concertation formel entre le système de santé et les confessions religieuses ».

    La cause profonde n’était donc pas la foi, mais une faillite institutionnelle.

    Une prise de conscience qui a immédiatement fait émerger des solutions.

    « Dans le contexte des églises de réveil, les leaders de ces églises doivent être nos alliés », a insisté un participant, Mwamialumba Fidel.

    Vacciner dans le chaos de la guerre

    Dans le Nord-Kivu, une autre discussion a porté sur la vaccination des populations déplacées.

    Confrontés à une cause première comme la guerre, hors de leur portée, les soignants ont fait preuve d’un pragmatisme remarquable.

    L’analyse ne s’est pas enlisée dans un sentiment d’impuissance.

    Le groupe a rapidement identifié une faille concrète dans le système.

    « Pour les déplacés, le grand problème est que les enfants arrivent sans carnet de vaccination, et on ne sait pas comment les intégrer dans le PEV de routine », a partagé Clémence Mitongo.

    La cause racine n’était donc plus le conflit, mais « le manque de stratégie spécifique pour la prise en charge de ces enfants » une fois en sécurité.

    Le groupe a ainsi transformé un problème insoluble en un défi organisationnel sur lequel il est possible d’agir.

    Au-delà des frontières, une leçon d’économie locale

    La richesse des échanges a été amplifiée par la participation de professionnels d’autres pays.

    Un des cas les plus édifiants est venu de Madagascar, où 93 enfants d’un village de pêcheurs n’étaient pas vaccinés.

    « Les femmes sont obligées d’accompagner les hommes pour la vente du poisson. Et quand elles reviennent, nos équipes sont déjà parties », a expliqué le rapporteur du groupe.

    La cause profonde, révélée par l’analyse, n’avait rien de sanitaire.

    C’était l’absence d’un fumoir pour conserver le poisson, qui forçait les femmes à s’absenter.

    L’impact de cet exemple a été puissant.

    « Ce cas du Madagascar est très édifiant et illustre parfaitement la pertinence de l’analyse approfondie », a commenté Alphonse Kitoga.

    Une pédagogie de l’action

    Ces cas pratiques illustrent la maturation rapide des participants.

    La méthode des « cinq pourquoi », introduite la veille, est devenue un outil maîtrisé, un réflexe analytique.

    « C’est une nouvelle approche pour nous », a affirmé Baudouin Mbase Bonganga. « Le fait de travailler en groupe, de partager les expériences, ça nous a vraiment enrichis ».

    L’exercice ne vise pas à transmettre un savoir, mais à cultiver une compétence: la capacité de chaque professionnel à devenir un fin diagnosticien des problèmes de sa communauté et un architecte de solutions adaptées.

    De l’analyse à l’action

    Cette journée d’exploration intensive n’est qu’une étape.

    Les participants ont jusqu’au vendredi 10 octobre pour soumettre la première version de leur projet de terrain, où ils appliqueront ces analyses à leurs propres communautés.

    L’initiative démontre qu’en s’appropriant les bons outils, les acteurs de terrain peuvent rapidement monter en puissance.

    Comme l’a brillamment résumé Papa Gorgui Samba Ndiaye: « Cette méthode permet de contextualiser réellement les problèmes, et ce qui est bien, c’est qu’on sort des solutions toutes faites… Ça nous amène à innover ».

    Le mouvement est en marche, et il est porté par ceux qui, chaque jour, sont en première ligne.

    Image: Peer learning exercise, as seen from The Geneva Learning Foundation’s livestreaming studio.

  • En République démocratique du Congo, la traque des enfants « zéro dose » passe par l’intelligence collective des acteurs de la santé

    En République démocratique du Congo, la traque des enfants « zéro dose » passe par l’intelligence collective des acteurs de la santé

    KINSHASA et LUMUMBASHI, le 7 octobre 2025 (La Fondation Apprendre Genève) – « Ces jeunes filles qui ont des grossesses indésirables, quand elles mettent au monde, elles ont tendance à laisser les enfants livrés à eux-mêmes », explique Marguerite Bosita, coordonnatrice d’une organisation non gouvernementale à Kinshasa.

    « Ce manque d’informations sur les questions liées à la vaccination se pose encore plus, car ces enfants grandissent exposés à des difficultés de santé ».

    Sa voix, émanant d’une mission de terrain dans la province du Kongo Central, s’est jointe à des centaines d’autres ce 7 octobre 2025.

    Il s’agissait de la deuxième journée d’un exercice d’apprentissage par les pairs de 16 jours visant à identifier et à atteindre les enfants dits « zéro dose » en République démocratique du Congo (RDC).

    Ce sont ces centaines de milliers de nourrissons qui n’ont reçu aucun vaccin pour les protéger de nombreuses maladies.

    Pour les 1 617 professionnels de la santé inscrits à cet exercice, il ne s’agissait pas d’un webinaire de formation classique, mais d’une étape importante d’un mouvement bien plus large.

    Organisé par La Fondation Apprendre Genève, cet exercice est une pierre angulaire du Mouvement congolais pour la vaccination à l’horizon 2030 (IA2030).

    Il bénéficie du soutien du ministère de la Santé de la RDC à travers son Programme élargi de vaccination (PEV), de l’UNICEF et de Gavi, l’Alliance du Vaccin.

    L’initiative renverse le modèle traditionnel de l’aide internationale.

    Au lieu de s’appuyer sur des experts extérieurs, elle part d’un postulat aussi simple qu’il est conséquent.

    La meilleure expertise pour résoudre les défis de première ligne se trouve chez les travailleurs de la santé eux-mêmes.

    La composition de cette cohorte témoigne de la profondeur de l’initiative.

    Plus de la moitié des participants proviennent des niveaux périphériques et infranationaux du système de santé, là où la vaccination a lieu.

    Un professionnel sur cinq travaille au niveau central, assurant un lien essentiel entre les politiques nationales et les réalités du terrain.

    Le profil des participants est tout aussi varié.

    Un tiers sont des médecins, 30 % des agents de santé publique, suivis par les agents de santé communautaire (13 %) et les infirmiers (9 %).

    Fait marquant, près de la moitié d’entre eux travaillent directement pour le ministère de la Santé à travers le Programme élargi de vaccination (le «PEV»).

    Cette forte proportion de personnel gouvernemental, complétée par une représentation significative de la société civile et du secteur privé, ancre fermement l’initiative dans une appropriation nationale.

    Le regard du terrain

    « Les défis sont tellement grandioses », a déclaré Franck Kabongo, consultant en santé publique à Lubumbashi, dans la province du Haut-Katanga.

    En effet, les défis décrits par les participants sont immenses.

    Il a souligné deux obstacles majeurs.

    D’une part, la difficulté d’atteindre les enfants dans les communautés reculées.

    Car les problèmes logistiques représentent un « casse-tête» pour de nombreux acteurs de santé impliqué dans la vaccination.

    Pour Mme Bosita à Kinshasa, le problème est profondément social.

    Son organisation soutient les enfants vulnérables, y compris les orphelins et ceux qui vivent dans la rue, dont beaucoup sont nés de jeunes mères sans suivi médical.

    « Il n’y a pas assez de sensibilisation sur le terrain par rapport à cette notion », a-t-elle déploré, expliquant sa volonté d’intégrer la vaccination dans le travail de son association.

    Ces témoignages, partagés dès les premières minutes, ont brossé un tableau saisissant d’un corps de métier dévoué.

    Ils luttent contre un enchevêtrement complexe de barrières logistiques, sociales et informationnelles qui laissent les enfants les plus vulnérables sans protection.

    À la recherche des causes profondes

    Le cœur de l’exercice n’est pas seulement de partager les problèmes, mais de les disséquer.

    Grâce à une analyse de groupe structurée, les participants s’exercent à la technique des « cinq pourquoi ».

    Cette méthode vise à dépasser les symptômes pour trouver la véritable cause fondamentale d’un problème.

    Lors d’une session plénière, Charles Bawande, animateur communautaire dans la zone de santé de Kalamu à Kinshasa, a présenté un dilemme courant.

    Une forte concentration d’enfants zéro dose parmi les communautés de rue, très mobiles et souvent peu scolarisées.

    Au départ, le problème semblait être un simple manque d’information.

    Mais au fur et à mesure que le groupe a creusé, une réalité plus complexe est apparue.

    Pourquoi les enfants sont-ils manqués?

    Parce que les travailleurs de santé communautaires, les relais communautaires, ne disposent pas des informations nécessaires.

    Pourquoi n’ont-ils pas ces informations?

    Parce qu’ils n’assistent souvent pas aux séances d’information essentielles.

    Pourquoi n’y assistent-ils pas?

    Parce qu’ils sont occupés par d’autres activités.

    « Ils doivent vivre, ils doivent manger… ils sont locataires, ils doivent payer le loyer », a expliqué M. Bawande.

    La dernière question a révélé le cœur du problème.

    Pourquoi sont-ils occupés par d’autres choses?

    Parce que leur travail de relais communautaire est entièrement bénévole.

    Alors qu’on attend d’eux qu’ils agissent comme des volontaires, beaucoup sont des parents et des chefs de famille qui doivent donner la priorité à leur gagne-pain.

    Un problème qui semblait être un simple déficit d’information s’est révélé être ancré dans la précarité économique du système de santé bénévole.

    Une mosaïque de défis partagés

    Lorsque les participants se sont répartis en près de 80 petits groupes, leurs discussions ont révélé un large éventail d’obstacles, chacun profondément lié au contexte local.

    Les rapports des groupes ont dressé une carte riche et détaillée des freins à la vaccination à travers le vaste pays.

    Près de Goma, dans le Nord-Kivu, le groupe de Clémence Mitongo a identifié l’insécurité due à la guerre comme une barrière principale qui a déplacé les populations et perturbé les services de santé.

    Dans la province du Kasaï, le groupe de Yondo Kabonga a mis en lumière l’impact des rumeurs, de la désinformation et des barrières géographiques comme les ravins et les rivières.

    Ailleurs, d’autres groupes ont fait état de la résistance issue de convictions religieuses, certaines églises enseignant à leurs fidèles que la foi seule suffit à protéger leurs enfants.

    Un autre groupe a discuté du cas des réfugiés revenus d’Angola, où l’ignorance des parents concernant le calendrier vaccinal constitue un obstacle majeur.

    Ce diagnostic collectif a démontré la puissance du modèle d’apprentissage par les pairs.

    Aucun expert ne pourrait à lui seul posséder une compréhension aussi fine et étendue des défis à l’échelle nationale.

    Une nouvelle façon d’apprendre

    Cet exercice est fondamentalement différent des programmes de formation traditionnels.

    Il s’agit d’un parcours pratique où les participants deviennent des créateurs de connaissances et leaders des actions qui en découlent.

    Au cours du programme, chaque participant développera son propre projet de terrain, qu’il partagera avec son équipe, son centre de santé ou son district.

    Il s’agit d’un plan concret pour s’attaquer à un défi « zéro dose » dans sa propre communauté.

    Après avoir soumis une version préliminaire d’ici le vendredi 10 octobre, ils entreront dans une phase d’évaluation par les pairs.

    Chaque participant recevra les retours de trois collègues et, en retour, en fournira à trois autres, contribuant ainsi à renforcer le travail de chacun par l’intelligence collective.

    Tracer une voie à suivre

    L’étape suivante pour ces milliers de professionnels de la santé est de consolider leurs discussions de groupe et de poursuivre le travail sur leurs projets individuels avant l’échéance de vendredi.

    Le parcours se poursuivra avec des phases consacrées à l’évaluation par les pairs, à la révision des projets et, enfin, à une assemblée générale de clôture pour partager les plans améliorés.

    Cet exercice intensif est plus qu’un simple événement.

    Il est un catalyseur pour le Mouvement congolais pour la vaccination à l’horizon 2030.

    L’objectif est de traduire la stratégie mondiale du Programme pour la vaccination à l’horizon 2030 en actions tangibles, menées localement, qui produisent un impact réel.

    La solution, comme le suggère ce mouvement, ne se trouve pas dans des lignes directrices venues de Genève, mais dans la sagesse, la créativité et l’engagement combinés de milliers de praticiens congolais, travaillant ensemble à travers tout le pays.

    Illustration: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

  • Colonization, climate change, and indigenous health: from Algiers to Acre

    Colonization, climate change, and indigenous health: from Algiers to Acre

    I sat in a conference hall in Rio Branco, Acre State, Brazil.

    My mind was in a sanatorium of Algiers, Algeria.

    This was where my mother was sent as a girl.

    They told her she got tuberculosis because she was an “indigène musulman”.

    In 1938, the year of my mother’s birth and after over a century of colonization, about 5 out of every 100 Algerian people got infected with tuberculosis each year.

    French colonial reports show that Algerians died from tuberculosis at much higher rates than French settlers.

    They claimed the disease was endemic due to the supposed inferiority of our people.

    And that she was going to die.

    Colonialism is a liar.

    She survived.

    And it took less than eight years for an independent Algeria, free of the scourge of colonialism, to eradicate the scourge of TB.

    Listening to the leaders at Brazil’s First National Seminar on Indigenous Health and Climate Change, I heard that same lie being dismantled.

    The body of the territory, the body of the people

    I listened.

    I heard a diagnosis specific to their lands and histories, and recognized a familiar pattern.

    The territory is a living body, they said.

    When it is sick, we are sick.

    Ceiça Pitaguary is an indigenous leader and activist from the Pitaguary people in Brazil.

    The crisis, she explained, is a daily reality of “prolonged droughts, devastating floods, intense storms, and the rise in temperatures” that represents “real losses experienced in the body and on the territory”.

    This is a wound with many layers.

    There are the physical symptoms an epidemiologist would recognize: respiratory illnesses from fire and waterborne diseases from floods.

    But the deeper sickness that speakers diagnosed, one after another, is a systemic decay.

    I listened as Wallace Apurinã stated that when the floods come, “traditional medicine, which is such an important and fundamental knowledge for our subsistence… this ends”.

    It is a crisis that creates what Elisa Pankararu named a “collective sadness”.

    “Our people are sad,” she said, because the world is in imbalance.

    This is a spiritual wound, like the one Juliana Tupinikim described.

    She said the Krenak people lost not just a river to a mining disaster, but “fundamental elements of their spirituality and cultural identity”.

    The crisis, Gemina Shanenawá insisted, is not abstract.

    “It has a face, a name, and a territory: the face of Indigenous women”.

    She gave voice to their struggle: “‘I lost everything, I lost my house, I lost my pigs, my chickens. And now? What am I going to do?’”.

    The architecture of failure

    There is a pathogen worse than fossil fuel.

    It is colonialism.

    I recognized its stench in the testimony of the leaders.

    It is a system designed to fail its most vulnerable.

    Weibe Tapeba, Brazil’s Secretary of Indigenous Health, described the paralysis.

    “Today, our Indigenous territories are not understood as federal units,” he said.

    This means that they are unable to issue crucial decrees themselves, which severely hinders their ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from increasingly frequent catastrophic events.

    “We do not have the autonomy to issue such a decree ourselves”.

    This intentional powerlessness leaves communities exposed.

    It creates the chain reaction that researcher Renata Gracie detailed in the Yanomami territory, where illegal mining leads directly to “an enormous increment in the occurrence of malaria, trachoma, measles, tuberculosis, malnutrition”.

    The state’s response—culturally inappropriate food baskets were one example I heard—is changing.

    It was impressive to see how government, with leadership from Tapeba and others, engages in meaningful, open dialogue by and for indigenous communities.

    What you call anecdote, we call ancestral science

    An invisible but profound violence of colonization is the dismissal of a people’s way of knowing.

    Your science is ’data’.

    Ours is ’folklore’.

    The entire seminar was a rebellion against this lie.

    In my own talk, I spoke about how health workers’ expertise – what they know because they are there every day – is often devalued as mere “anecdote”.

    Putira Sacuena provided the most powerful rebuttal.

    She spoke of a small frog in the Xingu territory.

    “We stopped hearing its sound in the territory”, she explained.

    The frog’s silence predicted the rise in respiratory illness and diarrhea.

    She said: this is ancestral science.

    It is a signal from a highly sophisticated, multi-generational system of environmental monitoring.

    Our existing systems do not just miss this data.

    They are structurally incapable of recognizing it as data in the first place.

    The challenge, then, is to begin the work of unlearning the colonial biases that prevent us from seeing the knowledge that is right in front of us.

    It requires us to abandon the “high, hard ground” of our self-referential expertise.

    The fight for health here is, more than we realized, a fight for cognitive justice, a demand that such knowledge be seen not as a cultural artifact, but as essential data.

    As Ceiça Pitaguary declared, “The fight against the climate crisis will not be won without Indigenous peoples”.

    That is not a political slogan.

    It is a vital, scientific truth of our time.

    It demands that we, in our institutions and our fields of practice, dismantle the systems that are causing this devastation.

    References

    1. Bentata, K., Alihalassa, S., Gharnaout, M., Bennani, M.A., Berrabah, Y., 2025. Algerian Tuberculosis Control Program: 60 Years of Successful Experience. Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.86357
    2. Brubacher, L.J., Peach, L., Chen, T.T.-W., Longboat, S., Dodd, W., Elliott, S.J., Patterson, K., Neufeld, H., 2024. Climate change, biodiversity loss, and Indigenous Peoples’ health and wellbeing: A systematic umbrella review. PLOS Glob Public Health 4, e0002995. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002995
    3. Ellwanger, J.H., others, 2020. Beyond diversity loss and climate change: Impacts of Amazon deforestation on infectious diseases and public health. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765202020191010
    4. Ford, J.D., 2012. Indigenous Health and Climate Change. Am J Public Health 102, 1260–1266. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300752
    5. Grande, A.J., Dias, I.M.A.V., Jardim, P.T.C., Aparecida Vieira Machado, A., Soratto, J., Da Rosa, M.I., Ceretta, L.B., Zourntos, X., Suares, R.O., Harding, S., 2024. Environmental degradation, climate change and health from the perspective of Brazilian Indigenous stakeholders: a qualitative study. BMJ Open 14, e083624. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-083624
    6. Jones, R., Macmillan, A., Reid, P., 2020. Climate Change Mitigation Policies and Co-Impacts on Indigenous Health: A Scoping Review. IJERPH 17, 9063. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17239063
    7. Kramer, C.K., Leitão, C.B., Viana, L.V., 2022. The impact of urbanisation on the cardiometabolic health of Indigenous Brazilian peoples: a systematic review and meta-analysis, and data from the Brazilian Health registry. The Lancet 400, 2074–2083. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00625-0
    8. Lavallee, L.F., Poole, J.M., 2010. Beyond Recovery: Colonization, Health and Healing for Indigenous People in Canada. Int J Ment Health Addiction 8, 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-009-9239-8
    9. Lin, C.Y., Loyola-Sanchez, A., Boyling, E., Barnabe, C., 2020. Community engagement approaches for Indigenous health research: recommendations based on an integrative review. BMJ Open 10, e039736. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039736
    10. Pontes, A.L., others, 2020. Health reform and Indigenous health policy in Brazil. Health Policy and Planning. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czaa116
    11. Rankoana, S.A., 2022. Climate change impacts on indigenous health promotion: the case study of Dikgale community in Limpopo Province, South Africa. Glob Health Promot 29, 58–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/17579759211015183
    12. Reading, C., Wien, F., 2009. Health inequalities and the social determinants of Aboriginal health. National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health.
    13. Redvers, N., Celidwen, Y., Schultz, C., Horn, O., Githaiga, C., Vera, M., Perdrisat, M., Mad Plume, L., Kobei, D., Kain, M.C., Poelina, A., Rojas, J.N., Blondin, B., 2022. The determinants of planetary health: an Indigenous consensus perspective. The Lancet Planetary Health 6, e156–e163. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00354-5
    14. Rieger, K.L., Horton, M., Copenace, S., Bennett, M., Buss, M., Chudyk, A.M., Cook, L., Hornan, B., Horrill, T., Linton, J., McPherson, K., Rattray, J.M., Murray, K., Phillips-Beck, W., Sinclair, R., Slavutskiy, O., Stewart, R., Schultz, A.S., 2023. Elevating the Uses of Storytelling Methods Within Indigenous Health Research: A Critical, Participatory Scoping Review. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 22, 16094069231174764. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231174764
    15. Roher, S.I.G., Yu, Z., Martin, D.H., Benoit, A.C., 2021. How is Etuaptmumk/Two-Eyed Seeing characterized in Indigenous health research? A scoping review. PLoS ONE 16, e0254612. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254612
    16. Sadki, R., 2025. Climate change and health: a new peer learning programme by and for health workers from the most climate-vulnerable countries. https://doi.org/10.59350/redasadki.21339
    17. Sadki, R., 2001. Colonialism and disease: tuberculosis in Algeria. https://doi.org/10.59350/jhbhx-zm765
    18. Sadki, R., 2024. Knowing-in-action: Bridging the theory-practice divide in global health. https://doi.org/10.59350/4evj5-vm802
    19. Sadki, R., 2024. Strengthening primary health care in a changing climate. https://doi.org/10.59350/5s2zf-s6879
    20. Sadki, R., 2025. WHO Global Conference on Climate and Health: New pathways to overcome structural barriers blocking effective climate and health action. https://doi.org/10.59350/redasadki.21322
    21. Sanchez, J.J., Gitau, E., Sadki, R., Mbuh, C., Silver, K., Berry, P., Bhutta, Z., Bogard, K., Collman, G., Dey, S., Dinku, T., Dwipayanti, N.M.U., Ebi, K., Felts La Roca Soares, M., Gudoshava, M., Hashizume, M., Lichtveld, M., Lowe, R., Mateen, B., Muchangi, M., Ndiaye, O., Omay, P., Pinheiro dos Santos, W., Ruiz-Carrascal, D., Shumake-Guillemot, J., Stewart-Ibarra, A., Tiwari, S., 2025. The climate crisis and human health: identifying grand challenges through participatory research. The Lancet Global Health 13, e199–e200. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2214-109x(25)00003-8
    22. Sahu, M., others, 2022. Measuring Impact of Climate Change on Indigenous Populations’ Health: A Global Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315592
    23. Sanson‐Fisher, R.W., Campbell, E.M., Perkins, J.J., Blunden, S.V., Davis, B.B., 2006. Indigenous health research: a critical review of outputs over time. Medical Journal of Australia 184, 502–505. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2006.tb00343.x
    24. Santos, H.C.D., Mill, J.G., 2024. Multimorbidity and associated factors in the adult Indigenous population living in villages in the municipality of Aracruz, Espírito Santo, State, Brazil. Cad. Saúde Pública 40, e00135323. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311xen135323
    25. Silva-Junior, C.H.L., others, 2023. Brazilian Amazon indigenous territories under climate and deforestation pressure: an analysis of 2013-2021 period. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-31570-y
    26. Smallwood, R., Woods, C., Power, T., Usher, K., 2021. Understanding the Impact of Historical Trauma Due to Colonization on the Health and Well-Being of Indigenous Young Peoples: A Systematic Scoping Review. J Transcult Nurs 32, 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043659620935955
    27. Soares, G.H., Jamieson, L., Biazevic, M.G.H., Michel-Crosato, E., 2022. Disparities in Excess Mortality Between Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Brazilians in 2020: Measuring the Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic. J. Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities 9, 2227–2236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-021-01162-w
    28. Thebaud, A., Lert, F., 1985. Maladie subie, maladie dominee, industrialisation et technologie medicale: Le cas de la tuberculose. Social Science & Medicine 21, 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(85)90081-4
    29. Thomas, A., 2024. Colonization as a Determinant of Health. Western University Global Health Equity.
    30. US Environmental Protection Agency, 2025. Climate Change and the Health of Indigenous Populations. EPA.
    31. World Health Organization, 2025. Global Plan of Action for Health of Indigenous Peoples. WHO.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

  • Gender in emergencies: a new peer learning programme from The Geneva Learning Foundation

    Gender in emergencies: a new peer learning programme from The Geneva Learning Foundation

    This is a critical moment for work on gender in emergencies.

    Across the humanitarian sector, we are witnessing a coordinated backlash.

    Decades of progress are threatened by targeted funding cuts, the erasure of essential research and tools, and a political climate that seeks to silence our work.

    Many dedicated practitioners feel isolated and that their work is being devalued.

    This is not a time for silence.

    It is a time for solidarity and for finding resilient ways to sustain our practice.

    In this spirit, The Geneva Learning Foundation is pleased to announce the new Certificate peer learning programme for gender in emergencies.

    We offer this programme to build upon the decades of vital work by countless practitioners and activists, seeing our role as one of contribution to the collective effort of all who continue to champion gender equality in emergencies.

    Learn more and request your invitation to the programme and its first course here.

    Our approach: A programme built from the ground up

    This programme was built from scratch with a distinct philosophy.

    We did not start with a pre-packaged curriculum.

    Instead, we turned to two foundational sources of knowledge.

    • First, we listened to the most valuable resource we have: the firsthand experiences of thousands of practitioners in our global network. Their stories of what truly happens on the front lines—what works, what fails, and why—form the living heart of this programme.
    • Second, we grounded our approach in the deep insights of intersectional, decolonial, and feminist scholarship. These perspectives challenge us to move beyond technical fixes and to analyze the systems of power that create gender inequality in the first place.

    This unique origin means our programme is a dynamic space co-created with and for practitioners who are serious about transformative change.

    Gender in emergencies: Gender through an intersectional lens

    Our focus is squarely on gender in emergencies.

    We start with gender analysis because it is a fundamental tool for effective humanitarian action.

    However, we use an intersectional lens.

    We recognize that a person’s experience is shaped not by gender alone, but by how their gender compounds with their age, disability, ethnicity, and other aspects of their identity.

    This lens does not replace gender analysis.

    It makes it stronger.

    It allows us to see how power works differently for different women, men, girls, and boys, and helps us to design solutions that do not inadvertently leave behind the people marginalized by something other than their gender.

    Gender in emergencies requires learning at the speed of crisis

    Humanitarian response must be rapid, and so must our learning.

    A slow, top-down training model cannot keep pace with the reality of a crisis.

    The Geneva Learning Foundation’s Impact Accelerator is a peer learning-to-action model built for the speed and complexity of humanitarian settings.

    It is a ‘learn-by-doing’ experience where your frontline experience is the textbook.

    The model is designed to quickly turn your individual insights into collective knowledge and practical action.

    You analyze a real challenge from your work, share it with a small group of global peers, and use their feedback to build a concrete plan.

    This process accelerates the development of context-specific solutions that are grounded in reality, not just theory.

    Your first step: The foundational primer for gender in emergencies

    We are starting this new programme with a free, open-access foundational course.

    Enrollment is now open.

    The course is a quick primer that introduces core concepts of gender, intersectionality, and bias through the real-world stories of practitioners.

    It provides the shared language and practical tools to begin your journey of reflection, peer collaboration, and action.

    Building a resilient community

    This is more than a training programme.

    It is an invitation to join a global community of practice.

    In a time of backlash and division, creating spaces where we can learn from each other, share our struggles, and find solidarity is a critical act of resistance.

    If you are ready to deepen your practice and connect with colleagues who share your commitment, we invite you to join us.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation © 2025

  • From Murang’a to the world: remembering Joseph Ngugi, champion of peer learning for community health

    From Murang’a to the world: remembering Joseph Ngugi, champion of peer learning for community health

    “What keeps me going now is the excitement of the clients who receive the service and the sad faces of those clients who need the services and cannot get them.” Joseph Mbari Ngugi shared these words on May 30, 2023, capturing the profound empathy and dedication that defined his life’s work. This commitment to serving those most in need—and his deep awareness of those still unreached—characterized not only his career as a senior community health officer and public health specialist in Kenya’s Murang’a County, but also his extraordinary five-year journey through the Geneva Learning Foundation’s most rigorous learning programmes.

    It was the morning of the first day of August, 2025. The message from his daughter was simple and devastating: “Hello this is Wanjiru Mbari Ngugi’s Daughter. I am the one currently with his phone. This is to inform you that Dad passed away this morning.”

    Joseph’s passing represents more than the loss of a dedicated health worker in Kenya’s Murang’a County. It marks the end of an extraordinary journey that saw him evolve from participant to peer mentor within the Geneva Learning Foundation’s learning networks—a community where over 60,000 practitioners now connect across country borders and between continents to learn from and support each other to solve problems and drive change from the ground up.

    Joseph Ngugi: The making of a global health scholar

    Over the years, Joseph shared his personal story. His path to leadership in this global community began with family tragedy. “When I was young, my sister contracted malaria number of times, leading to numerous hospital visits and long periods of missed school,” he told us. “These experiences were not only distressing but also financially draining for my family, as medical costs piled up and my parents had to take time off work to care for her.” That childhood experience of watching illness devastate a family became the foundation for his professional mission. 

    In November 2020, when the world was grappling with the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, Joseph joined the Foundation’s COVID-19 Peer Hub—a groundbreaking initiative launched in April 2020 that connected over 6,000 health professionals from 86 countries to face the early consequences of the pandemic. Unlike traditional training programmes that positioned experts as sole knowledge sources, the Peer Hub recognized that frontline workers like Joseph possessed crucial insights about overcoming vaccine hesitancy that needed to be shared across borders.

    The timing was significant. When news of the first vaccines came, participants decided to examine how they had previously helped communities move “from hesitancy to acceptance of a vaccine.” Joseph’s case study, developed through peer collaboration between November and December 2020, drew on his extensive experience with routine immunization programs in Murang’a County. His documented approach to building trust with communities became a teaching resource for colleagues across Africa and beyond—knowledge that would prove invaluable when COVID-19 vaccines began arriving in Africa months later, starting with Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire in March 2021.

    Joseph Ngugi: The Scholar’s progression

    Joseph’s engagement with what would become the Movement for Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) reflected his deepening sophistication as both learner and teacher. The Movement initiative, launched globally in support of the ambitious aims of the world’s immunization strategy to leave no one behind, required more than technical knowledge—it demanded practitioners who could analyze complex local challenges and adapt global strategies to diverse contexts.

    Starting with the WHO Scholar Level 1 certification in 2021, Joseph mastered the Foundation’s approach to structured problem-solving. But it was his progression to the 2022 Full Learning Cycle, where he earned certification with distinction, that revealed his true analytical capabilities. His systematic deconstruction of vaccine storage challenges in Murang’a County exemplified this growth.

    Rather than accepting equipment failures as inevitable, Joseph deployed rigorous root cause analysis: “Why are vaccines not stored properly? Because the refrigeration units are often outdated or malfunctioning.” But he didn’t stop there. Through five levels of inquiry, he traced the problem to its fundamental source: “The most important root cause: inadequate training and information dissemination among healthcare workers and administrators.”

    This insight—that knowledge gaps, not resource constraints, lay at the heart of vaccine storage failures—helped colleagues in other countries to address similar challenges in very different contexts.

    Joseph Ngugi: From local practice to global knowledge

    Joseph’s work exemplified how the Foundation’s network transforms individual insights into collective wisdom. His malaria prevention campaigns in Murang’a County carried particular personal significance—having witnessed his sister’s repeated malaria infections as a child, he understood intimately how the disease devastated families. Now, as a health professional, he could take systematic action to prevent other families from experiencing similar suffering.

    “Local leaders, health workers, and volunteers went door-to-door distributing nets and educating families about their importance,” he shared. “The project was successful due to the collaborative effort and the support of local influencers who championed the cause. This grassroots approach helped build trust and ensured widespread adoption of bed nets.” The boy who had watched helplessly as his sister endured “numerous hospital visits and long periods of missed school” had become the health worker who could mobilize entire communities for prevention.

    Meanwhile, his immunization work achieved impressive results by using lessons learned and shared across the network. His measurable success spoke to the power of peer-tested approaches: “My county was listed in 2nd position with 95% with the highest percentage of children (aged 12-23 months) who are fully vaccinated for basic antigens as per basic schedule compared with the leading at 96% and the lowest with 23%.”

    Through peer learning that he helped facilitate – giving and receiving feedback– both his malaria prevention methods and immunization strategies became available to thousands of colleagues facing similar challenges. When global immunization leaders engaged with TGLF’s network, asking for feedback on a new framework to support integration of immunization into primary health care, Joseph’s feedback illustrated this knowledge multiplication effect. “I have referred to [the] framework more than once and shared with my colleagues and supervisors and it has been very useful,” he reported. “My colleagues were excited to know such a tool existed and were ready to use it. The framework made a difference in solving the vaccine advocacy as it has the solutions to most of my challenges.”

    Joseph Ngugi: Crisis leadership in a changing climate

    When Kenya’s devastating 2019 floods tested every assumption about health service delivery, Joseph emerged as an innovative crisis leader whose documented responses became learning resources for the Foundation’s growing focus on climate change and health. His detailed accounts revealed both the scale of climate disruption and the ingenuity required to maintain health services under extreme conditions.

    Working with local government and humanitarian agencies, Joseph helped coordinate emergency airlifts using helicopters to deliver essential medical supplies to isolated communities, with the Kenya Red Cross playing a critical coordination role. When helicopter transport was unavailable, his team improvised: “We resorted to unconventional means, such as using motorbikes and porters to deliver medicines to stranded populations.”

    His documentation captured both community solidarity and the chaos of disaster response: “People were incredibly supportive, offering shelter and food to those displaced. Local youth groups helped clear debris from roads, making some areas passable. On the other hand, there were instances of looting of medical supplies during the chaos, which slowed down our efforts.”

    Joseph’s prescient observations about the health impact of climate patterns became increasingly relevant: “Over the years, I’ve noticed that such weather-related disruptions have become more frequent and severe, a clear sign of climate change. The rainy seasons are no longer predictable, and their intensity often overwhelms existing infrastructure.” His first-hand accounts became part of a growing body of evidence showing how health workers worldwide are witnessing climate change impacts firsthand—knowledge that often precedes formal scientific documentation by years.

    Joseph Ngugi, the equity advocate

    Perhaps nowhere was Joseph’s moral clarity more evident than in his systematic approach to health equity challenges. When he witnessed an elderly rural woman being ignored at a hospital registration desk while younger, well-dressed patients received immediate attention, he documented both his direct intervention and his proposed systemic solutions.

    “I later engaged hospital staff in a discussion about unconscious bias and the need to treat all patients with dignity,” he explained. His characteristically systematic solution—implementing a token system for patient queuing that would ensure first-come, first-served service regardless of appearance or language—provided concrete guidance that colleagues could adapt to their own contexts.

    Joseph’s approach to neglected tropical diseases demonstrated similar principled persistence. Working on lymphatic filariasis in Murang’a County, he documented comprehensive community intervention approaches that included support groups for affected patients and collaboration with traditional healers to address cultural misconceptions. “Building partnerships and fostering ownership within the community were crucial in sustaining our efforts and driving positive change,” he noted—an insight that resonated across the Foundation’s network of practitioners facing similar challenges with stigmatized conditions.

    A family committed to learning

    Joseph’s commitment to collaborative learning extended to his household. His wife Caroline participated alongside him in Foundation activities, making their home a center of both local health advocacy and global knowledge sharing. Caroline documented her own community engagement successes: “Positive response from the community on the importance of taking their children for immunization. Able to reach pregnant mothers and sensitized them the importance of starting antenatal care clinic early.”

    Their partnership embodied the Foundation’s philosophy that effective global health work requires both deep local engagement and broad network connections. Joseph’s honest assessment of community health work captured both its frustrations and profound rewards: “The worst part of my job is when you reach out to the community for services and [they] are not willing. The best part is when you reach the community members and they listen to you and hear what you have brought in the ground.”

    The pioneer’s final exploration

    Even in his final months, Joseph continued pushing boundaries in ways that reflected his lifelong commitment to innovation. His recent exploration of artificial intelligence tools as potential aids to health work represented not disengagement from human learning but rather his latest attempt to incorporate emerging capabilities into community health practice—a continuation of the innovative thinking that had characterized his entire journey with the Foundation.

    For The Geneva Learning Foundation’s Executive Director Reda Sadki, Joseph was “a pioneer exploring the use of artificial intelligence” within global health contexts, demonstrating how practitioners could thoughtfully experiment with new technologies while maintaining focus on community needs.

    A voice that bridged worlds

    From November 2020 through August 2025, Joseph Ngugi completed an extraordinary progression through the Foundation’s most demanding programmes: the COVID-19 Peer Hub, WHO Scholar Level 1 certification, the Movement for Immunization Agenda 2030’s first Full Learning Cycle with distinction, Impact Accelerator certifications, and advanced collaborative work with the Nigeria Movement for Immunization Agenda 2030, which connected over 4,000 participants across Nigeria’s diverse health system.

    His Nigeria collaborative work, completed in July 2024, demonstrated his evolution into a mentor for colleagues in countries other than his own, facing similar challenges. Through structured peer review processes and collaborative root cause analyses, Joseph helped dozens of Nigerian health workers develop their own systematic approaches to immunization challenges—knowledge that will continue influencing practice long after his passing.

    “What I have learned from sharing photos and seeing photos from colleagues: we share common challenges, challenges are everywhere, love for human being is universal, health is wealth, immunization is the best investment in the world,” he wrote, capturing the spirit of global solidarity that sustained his work and connected him to practitioners worldwide.

    A legacy of networked learning

    Joseph Mbari Ngugi’s death leaves a profound void in a global learning network where his thoughtful analyses, generous mentorship, and systematic documentation created lasting value for thousands of colleagues. His comprehensive body of work—from detailed root cause analyses to innovative crisis responses, from equity advocacy to climate adaptation strategies—represents one of the most complete records of how a dedicated practitioner can evolve into a sophisticated analyst and effective advocate through structured peer learning.

    His progression from childhood dreams inspired by witnessing healthcare compassion to becoming a leader in global health networks demonstrates the transformative potential of connecting local practice with worldwide learning communities. In an era of unprecedented health challenges—from climate change to emerging diseases to persistent inequities—Joseph’s documented approach offers a roadmap for practitioners worldwide seeking to make systematic change while remaining deeply rooted in their communities.

    Joseph Ngugi’s voice may now be silent, but his contributions continue speaking through the colleagues he mentored, the frameworks he helped refine, and the thousands of health workers who will encounter his insights through the Foundation’s ongoing work. His legacy reminds us that the most effective global health leadership often emerges not from traditional hierarchies but from practitioners who combine deep local knowledge with the courage to share their experiences across borders, creating networks of learning that can respond to our world’s most pressing challenges with both precision and compassion.

    Photo credit: Matiba Eye and Dental Hospital, Murang’a County Kenya. Joseph Mbari Ngugi submitted this photo for World Immunization Week in 2023. Here is what he told us about the image: “This is me, and Grace M Kihara, nursing officer, on the 15th of March 2023 at the Kenneth Matiba Eye and Dental Hospital in Murang’a County, Kenya. My work includes explaining to clients the importance of measles immunization and other vaccines, and advocating for immunization.”

    Fediverse Reactions
  • WHO Global Conference on Climate and Health: New pathways to overcome structural barriers blocking effective climate and health action

    WHO Global Conference on Climate and Health: New pathways to overcome structural barriers blocking effective climate and health action

    After the World Health Assembly’s adoption of ambitious global plan of action for climate and health, global and country stakeholders are meeting in Brasilia for the Global Conference on Climate and Health, ahead of COP30. Three critical observations emerged that illuminate why conventional global health approaches may be structurally inadequate for the challenges resulting from climate change impacts on health.

    These observations carry particular significance for global health leaders who now possess a WHA-approved strategy and action plan, but lack proven mechanisms for rapid, community-led implementation in the face of an unprecedented set of challenges. They also matter for major funders whose substantial investments in policy and research have yet to be matched by commensurate support for the communities and health workers who will be the ones to translate better science and policy into action.

    Signal 1: When funding disappears and demand explodes

    Seventy percent of global health funding vanished, virtually overnight. This collapse comes precisely when the World Health Organization projects a shortage of 10 million health workers by 2030—six million in climate-vulnerable sub-Saharan Africa.

    The World Bank calculates that climate change will generate 4.1-5.2 billion disease cases and cost $8.6-20.8 trillion by 2050 in low- and middle-income countries alone. Health systems must simultaneously manage unprecedented demand with drastically reduced resources.

    Traditional technical assistance—flying experts to conduct workshops, cascade training through hierarchies—is more difficult to resource. By comparison, peer learning networks can reduce costs by 86 percent while achieving implementation rates seven times higher than conventional methods. Furthermore, 82 percent of participants in such networks continue independently after formal interventions end. Peer learning is especially well-suited to include health workers in conflict zones, refugee settings, and remote areas where climate vulnerability peaks—precisely the locations where traditional expert-led capacity building proves most difficult and expensive.

    The funding crisis makes it more of an imperative than ever before to examine which approaches can scale effectively when resources contract. Organizations that recognize this shift early could achieve breakthrough results as traditional approaches become unaffordable.

    Signal 2: Global expertise meets local reality

    The World Health Assembly continues producing comprehensive action plans backed by thousands of expert hours. The climate and health action plan represents the pinnacle of this approach—technically excellent, evidence-based, globally applicable.

    Yet the persistent implementation gap reflects deeper challenges about how knowledge flows between institutions and communities. Current theories of change assume that technical expertise, properly communicated, will lead to improved outcomes. Local knowledge gets framed as “barriers to implementation”, rather than recognized as essential intelligence for adaptation.

    This creates a paradox. The WHO recognizes that “community-led initiatives that harness local knowledge and practices” are “fundamental for creating interventions that are both culturally appropriate and effective.” Health workers possess sophisticated understanding of how global frameworks must adapt to local realities. But systematic mechanisms for capturing and integrating knowledge and action remain underdeveloped.

    Climate change manifests differently in each community—shifting disease patterns in Kenya differ from changing agricultural cycles in Bangladesh, which differ from altered water availability in Morocco. Health workers witness these changes daily, developing contextual responses that often remain invisible to global institutions. The question becomes whether global frameworks can evolve to recognize and systematically integrate this distributed intelligence rather than treating it as anecdotal evidence.

    Signal 3: The policy-people gap widens if field-building ignores communities and is disconnected from local action

    Substantial philanthropic funding is flowing toward climate and health policy and evidence generation. Some funders call this “field-building”. Research institutions develop sophisticated models. Policy frameworks become more comprehensive. Scientific understanding advances rapidly. These investments are producing genuinely better science and more effective policies—essential progress that must continue.

    Yet investment in communities and health workers—the people who must implement policies and apply evidence—remains disproportionately small. This disparity creates concerning dynamics where knowledge advances faster than the capacity to apply it meaningfully in communities.

    The risk extends beyond implementation gaps. When sophisticated policies and evidence develop without commensurate investment in community relationships, communities may reject even superior science and policies—not because they are irrational or too ignorant to recognize the benefits, but because the effort to accompany communities through change has been insufficient. Health workers, as trusted advisors within their communities, are uniquely positioned to bridge this gap by helping communities make sense of new evidence and adapt policies to local realities.

    Health workers serve as trusted advisors within communities facing climate impacts. When investment patterns overlook this relationship, sophisticated policies risk becoming irrelevant to the people they aim to help. The trust networks essential for translating evidence into community action – and ensuring that evidence is relevant and useful – receive less attention than the evidence itself.

    The pathway forward: Health workers as knowledge creators and leaders of change

    These three signals point toward a fundamental misalignment between how global institutions approach climate and health challenges and how communities experience them. The funding crisis makes traditional expert-led approaches unsustainable. Implementation gaps persist because local knowledge remains systematically undervalued. Investment patterns favor sophisticated frameworks over the human relationships needed to apply them effectively.

    When a community health worker in Nigeria notices malaria cases appearing earlier each season, or a nurse in Bangladesh observes heat-related illness patterns in specific neighborhoods, they are detecting signals that epidemiological studies might take years to document formally. This represents a form of “early warning system” that current approaches tend to overlook.

    Recent innovations demonstrate different possibilities. Networks connecting health practitioners across countries through digital platforms treat health workers as knowledge creators rather than knowledge recipients. Such approaches have achieved, in other fields, implementation rates seven times higher than conventional technical assistance while reducing costs by 86 percent. There is no reason why applying these approaches would not result in similar results. 

    For the World Health Organization, such approaches could offer pathways to operationalize the Global Plan of Action through the very health workers the organization recognizes as “uniquely positioned” to champion climate action while building essential community trust.

    For major funders, these models represent opportunities to complement policy and research investments with approaches that strengthen community capacity to apply sophisticated knowledge to local realities.

    The evidence suggests that failure to bridge these gaps could prove more costly than the investment required to close them. But the returns—measured in communities reached, knowledge applied, and trust maintained—justify treating health worker networks as essential infrastructure for climate and health response rather than optional additions.

    Three questions for leaders

    As leaders prepare for the Global Climate Change and Health conference in Brasilia and begin work to implement climate and health commitments, three questions emerge from the World Health Assembly observations:

    • For institutions with comprehensive plans: How will technical excellence translate into community-level implementation when traditional capacity building approaches have become economically unsustainable?
    • For funders investing in research and policy: How can sophisticated evidence and frameworks reach the health workers and communities who must apply them to local realities?
    • For all climate and health leaders: What happens when policies advance faster than the trust relationships and implementation capacity needed to apply them effectively?

    The signals from the World Health Assembly suggest that conventional approaches face structural constraints that incremental improvements cannot address. The funding crisis, implementation gaps, and investment disparities require responses that recognize health workers as partners in creating climate and health solutions rather than merely implementing plans created elsewhere.

    The choice is not whether to transform approaches—resource constraints and community realities make transformation inevitable. The choice is whether leaders will direct that transformation toward approaches that strengthen both global knowledge and local capacity, or risk watching sophisticated frameworks fail for lack of community connection and trust.

    References

    Miller, J., Howard, C., Alqodmani, L., 2024. Advocating for a Healthy Response to Climate Change — COP28 and the Health Community. N Engl J Med 390, 1354–1356. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2314835

    Sanchez, J.J., Gitau, E., Sadki, R., Mbuh, C., Silver, K., Berry, P., Bhutta, Z., Bogard, K., Collman, G., Dey, S., Dinku, T., Dwipayanti, N.M.U., Ebi, K., Felts La Roca Soares, M., Gudoshava, M., Hashizume, M., Lichtveld, M., Lowe, R., Mateen, B., Muchangi, M., Ndiaye, O., Omay, P., Pinheiro Dos Santos, W., Ruiz-Carrascal, D., Shumake-Guillemot, J., Stewart-Ibarra, A., Tiwari, S., 2025. The climate crisis and human health: identifying grand challenges through participatory research. The Lancet Global Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(25)00003-8

    Sadki, R., 2024. Health at COP29: Workforce crisis meets climate crisis. https://doi.org/10.59350/sdmgt-ptt98

    Sadki, R., 2024. Strengthening primary health care in a changing climate. https://doi.org/10.59350/5s2zf-s6879

    Sadki, R., 2024. The cost of inaction: Quantifying the impact of climate change on health. https://doi.org/10.59350/gn95w-jpt34

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

  • Nigeria Immunization Agenda 2030 Collaborative: Piloting a national peer learning programme

    Nigeria Immunization Agenda 2030 Collaborative: Piloting a national peer learning programme

    Insights report about Nigeria’s Immunization Agenda 2030 Collaborative surfaces surprising solutions for both demand- and supply-side immunization challenges

    When 4,434 practitioners from all 36 states asked why children in their communities remained unvaccinated, the problems they thought they understood often had entirely different root causes.

    “I ended up being surprised at the answer I got,” said one health worker.

    Half of the health workers who participated in Nigeria’s largest-ever peer learning exercise in July 2024 discovered that their initial assumptions about local immunization challenges were wrong. The six-week programme generated 409 detailed analyses of local immunization challenges, with each reviewed by peers across the country.

    One year after The Geneva Learning Foundation launched the first Immunization Agenda 2030 Collaborative, in partnership with UNICEF and Gavi, under the auspices of the Nigeria Primary Health Care Development Agency (NPHCDA), a comprehensive insights report documents findings that illuminate persistent gaps between health system planning and community realities.

    How to access the Nigeria Immunization Collaborative’s first insights report:

    Chat with the report

    Health workers report being asked for insights for first time

    A recurring theme emerged from participant feedback that surprised programme organizers. “Many said no one has ever asked us what we think should happen or why do you think that is,” said TGLF’s Charlotte Mbuh, during the February 2025 presentation of the findings to NPHCDA and the country’s immunization partners.

    This potential for linking community experience with formal planning processes became evident when systematic analysis revealed that participants consistently identified practical solutions—many of which they could implement with existing resources.

    “Through my participation in the immunization Collaborative, I learned the critical value of root cause analysis,” reported one participant from Apo Resettlement Primary Health Centre in Abuja. “I applied this approach to uncover that insufficient manpower was the primary issue limiting vaccine coverage”—not the community resistance initially assumed.

    Dr. Akinpelu Adetola, a government public health specialist in Lagos State, exemplified this pattern. Her investigation of declining vaccination rates revealed poor scheduling that created both overcrowded and quiet clinic days. “A register and scheduling system were introduced to address this issue,” she shared with colleagues from across the country.

    Implementation gaps – not knowledge gaps – in the Nigeria Immunization Collaborative

    The Collaborative’s most significant finding challenges a common assumption in global health programming. Participants consistently proposed solutions that were “already well-known, suggesting that progress is limited by implementation issues rather than a lack of solutions,” according to the evaluation report.

    This pattern appeared across diverse contexts and challenge types. When health workers applied root cause analysis to local problems, they frequently identified straightforward interventions that had been overlooked by previous efforts focused on changing community attitudes or providing additional training.

    The evaluation found that 42% of participating health workers identified zero-dose challenges as their top local priority—aligning with national strategy priorities while providing granular intelligence about how these challenges manifest in specific communities.

    Nigeria Immunization Agenda 2030 Collaborative: Reconnecting data collection with local problem-solving

    A striking finding illuminated a fundamental disconnect in Nigeria’s health information systems: only 25% of participants knew their local coverage rates for key vaccines, despite many being responsible for collecting and reporting these figures at the local levels.

    “Many said, well, I collect these numbers, pass them on, but I didn’t know I could actually use them. They could actually help me in my work,” Mbuh explained, describing how participants began analyzing data they were already gathering within the first four weeks of the programme.

    While participants initially focused on demand-side issues—why communities do not seek vaccination services—systematic investigation often revealed supply-side problems underlying apparent “hesitancy.”

    Six primary supply-side challenges consistently undermine immunization delivery: poor data quality hampering service planning; vaccine stockouts due to inadequate inventory management; non-functional cold chain equipment; missed opportunities for catch-up vaccination; service quality issues that deter families; and systematic exclusion of hard-to-reach populations.

    Scale, speed, and sustainability across a complex federal system

    Launched by The Geneva Learning Foundation on 22 July 2024 in partnership with NPHCDA with support from UNICEF and Gavi, the Nigeria Immunization Agenda 2030 Collaborative connected health workers and other immunization stakeholders from more than 300 local government areas – with most based in northern States – within two weeks. Over 600 government facilities, private sector providers, and civil society organizations then signed on as organizational partners. Participants included 65% from local government and facility levels—both the community health workers who directly deliver immunization services and the LGA managers who support them.

    The initiative achieved this scale while operating at faster speed and significantly lower cost than conventional technical assistance and capacity-building approaches.

    The programme supported participants in using a simple, practical “five-whys” root cause analysis methodology, with each analysis reviewed by three peers across Nigeria’s diverse contexts. This peer review process provided depth to complement scale: it improved analytical quality regardless of participants’ initial skill levels.

    “The peer review was another mind-blowing innovation where intellect from other parts of Nigeria viewed your work and made constructive input,” noted one reviewer. “It made me realize I can be a team player.”

    Rapid implementation documented within weeks

    Within six weeks, health workers began reporting connections between new activities based on their root cause analyses and improved health outcomes.

    “During the Collaborative, we discussed successful case studies from other regions. Inspired by these stories, I have strengthened partnerships with local health authorities and other stakeholders to deepen immunization coverage, especially among under-fives. This collaboration has resulted in a significant increase in childhood vaccination rates in my community,” reported one participant from Ebonyi State.

    Unlike conventional training programs that end with certificates, evidence emerged that participants were applying insights within their ongoing work responsibilities and sustaining collaboration independently.

    Evidence of sustained networks and application one year later

    In fact, evidence one year on points to surprising sustainability, as the network continues to function without any external support.

    Four months after the programme concluded, TGLF organized a Teach to Reach session with 24,610 health workers participating, featuring Collaborative participants sharing early outcomes from the Nigeria initiative. This session revealed participants maintaining connections and applying methodologies in new contexts.

    “When we applied the root cause analysis, the five ‘whys’, this opened our eyes to see that it was not all about community members alone,” reported Uyebi Enosandra, a disability specialist working in Delta State. “We have challenges with the primary health workers, not knowing how to incorporate children with disability in the immunization programme.”

    Her account exemplified the pattern documented across participant testimonials: systematic analysis revealed different root causes than initially assumed, leading to more targeted solutions.

    Gregory, a retired professional who participated in outbreak response work in Borno State, described encountering Collaborative participants in the field: “I was pleased to hear that they participated in the Collaborative. And whatever step I wanted to take, they were almost ahead of me to say, sir, we have learned this and we are going to apply it.”

    “In my everyday activities at work I use this ‘5 whys’ to get to the root cause of any complaint and in my own little space make an impact on the patient,” one participant reported in follow-up feedback.

    The methodology’s application extended beyond immunization contexts. Participants reported using the analytical framework for disability inclusion, malaria programming, and broader health system challenges, suggesting the transferable value of structured problem-solving approaches.

    The December 2024 Teach to Reach session revealed ongoing demand for the methodology. Despite significant connectivity challenges affecting West Africa during the session, participants expressed eagerness to share the approach with colleagues. “Presently I’m even encouraging my colleagues to join,” one participant noted. “They’ve been asking me, how do I join, when will this come and all that.”

    The most significant sustainability indicator, according to Mbuh, appeared in widespread participant feedback: “I did not realize how much I could do with what we already have.” This response gained particular relevance as Nigeria and other countries navigate current funding constraints affecting global health programming.

    Potential to strengthen existing systems

    For NPHCDA and international partners, the Collaborative provided intelligence typically unavailable through conventional assessments. The analysis of root cause analyses offers detailed insights into how challenges manifest across Nigeria’s diverse geographic and cultural contexts.

    The approach demonstrated potential to complement existing training, supervision, and technical assistance systems by harnessing health workers’ practical experience and problem-solving capacity. The model addresses real-world challenges participants can immediately influence while building professional networks alongside technical competencies.

    “This pilot programme has demonstrated demand for peer learning, and the feasibility of running a national peer learning programme that brings together the strengths of a national immunization programme, a global partner and an educational organization,” the evaluation concludes.

    For Nigeria’s work toward Zero-Dose Immunization Recovery Plan goals through 2028, the Collaborative provides an innovative approach for translating national strategies into local action while building health worker capacity for continuous adaptation and problem-solving.

    The programme has evolved into what participants describe as a self-sustaining platform that continues operating independent of formal support, suggesting potential for integration with existing health system structures and processes in a true “sector-wide” approach.

    Reference

    Jones, I., Sadki, R., Sequeira, J., & Mbuh, C. (2025). Nigeria Immunization Agenda 2030 Collaborative: Piloting a national peer learning programme (1.0). The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14167168

    Image: Cover the report “Nigeria Immunization Agenda 2030 Collaborative: Piloting a national peer learning programme”.