Stories

Tag: peer learning

  • 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

  • Development is adaptation: Bill Gates’s shift is actually about linking climate change and health

    Development is adaptation: Bill Gates’s shift is actually about linking climate change and health

    Bill Gates’ latest public memo marks a significant shift in how the world’s most influential philanthropist frames the challenge of climate change. He sees a future in which responding to climate threats and promoting well-being become two sides of the same mission, declaring, “development is adaptation.”

    Gates argues that the principal metric for climate action should not be global temperature or near-term emission reductions alone, but measured improvement in the lives of the world’s most vulnerable populations.

    He argues that the focus of climate action should be on the “greatest possible impact for the most vulnerable people.”

    The suffering of poor communities must take priority, since, in his view, “climate change, disease, and poverty are all major problems. We should deal with them in proportion to the suffering they cause.”

    Climate change is about the health of the most vulnerable

    This position resonates with a core message that has emerged across global health over the past several years: climate change is about health.

    New data from the 2025 Lancet Countdown draw a stark picture:

    • Heat-related mortality has risen 63 percent since the 1990s.
    • Deaths from wildfire smoke and air pollution caused by fossil fuels continue to climb.
    • Food insecurity, driven by erratic weather, is destabilizing health and economies at once.
    • Thirteen out of twenty key health indicators linked to climate impacts now signal urgent action is needed.

    Health professionals, policy coalitions, scientists, and patient advocates have succeeded in bringing this nexus between climate and health squarely to the global agenda, culminating in recent summits where health finally shared the main stage with energy and economics.

    Yet just as the science and advocacy align, political attention risks fragmenting.

    Despite sweeping reports, evidence, and high-level declarations, momentum can ebb.

    There is now a risk that the transformative potential embedded in the climate-health linkage may not be fully realized.

    Here, Gates’s pivot could actually be the inflection point that the field needs.

    The case for health workforce-centered adaptation

    For nearly a decade, The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) has been advocating and demonstrating that meeting complex humanitarian, health, and development challenges requires strengthening not just technical capacities or disease programs, but the underlying connective tissue of the health system: its workforce.

    TGLF’s digital peer-learning platform now connects over 70,000 health workers across more than 130 countries.

    These practitioners – mostly in government service, often in low-resource or crisis-affected settings – are the first to observe, and often the first to respond to, the local impacts of climate change on health.

    Their reports show that health impacts are immediate and multi-faceted: rising malnutrition from crop failures, increases in waterborne diseases following floods, new burdens from air pollution and heat, and psychological distress from repeated disasters.

    What sets this approach apart is its systemic focus.

    Climate change is not a threat that can be “verticalized”.

    It demands responses that are adaptive, distributed, and coordinated across all levels of the health system.

    TGLF’s innovation lies in harnessing a distributed network to surface and scale locally-grounded solutions:

    Data from these initiatives demonstrate that such networked learning delivers results at scale, often with return on investment superior to parallel vertical programs, and increases system resilience and flexibility.

    Development is adaptation: the need for human capital investment

    The urgency and logic of these approaches are reinforced by ongoing policy developments ahead of COP30:

    • WHO’s Global Action Plan on Climate Change and Health, adopted at the World Health Assembly in May 2025, recognizes that without context-sensitive system strengthening, existing approaches are insufficient, and positions knowledge and workforce mobilization as strategic imperatives.
    • The COP30 Belem Health Action Plan establishes adaptation of the health sector to climate change as an international priority, calling for holistic, cross-sectoral strategies, and “community engagement and participation as foundational to implementation.”

    Without empowered and connected health workers, no global action plan will reach those most at risk or maintain public trust.

    A strategic investment imperative: why the next breakthrough must be human-centered

    The philanthropic search for cost-effective, scalable, and measurable impact has built immense legacies in reducing child mortality and combating infectious disease.

    Gates’ own approach of pioneering “vertical” innovations, optimizing delivery through metrics, and prioritizing technical solutions has been transformative, especially at the intersection of science and delivery.

    However, emerging science show the limits of technical “magic bullets” absent robust, interconnected local systems.

    Trust, legitimacy, and action flow from the relationships health workers build in – and with – their communities.

    If development is adaptation, what does this mean for the next phase in climate-health philanthropy?

    If the measure of climate action’s value is the scale and speed at which lives are improved and disasters averted, investing in the human infrastructure of the health system is the most evidence-based, cost-effective, and legacy-ensuring play available.

    1. Investing in the health workforce is itself a breakthrough technology: It increases the absorptive capacity of low-resource health systems, making innovations stick and catalyzing uptake well beyond single-disease silos or narrow infrastructure projects.
    2. Long-term, system-wide resilience is built by equipping health workers – not simply with technology or training from above, but with platforms for peer learning, rapid response, and locally-driven adaptation coordinated through agile networks.
    3. The network effect is real: A million motivated and networked health practitioners is likely to surface, refine, and implement interventions at a scale and pace that outstrips most top-down models. Digitally-enabled peer learning, tested by TGLF, could link to AI systems to provide distributed AI-human intelligence that supports effective action.

    Without these bridges, even the best technology or policies will fail to gain a durable footprint at community level, especially as climate impacts deepen.

    Health is where climate change action matters most

    The world is waking to the reality that technical solutions alone cannot future-proof health against climate risks.

    We need to focus on the highest-value levers.

    This starts with a distributed, networked workforce at the coalface of the crisis, empowered to adapt, share, and lead.

    In a world of accelerating climate shocks and retreating political will, the boldest, most rational bet for sustained global impact is to go “horizontal” – to invest in the people and the systems that connect them.

    By helping build adaptive, digitally connected networks of health professionals, philanthropy can reinforce the foundation upon which all high-impact innovation rests.

    This is not a departure from the pursuit of technology-driven change, but rather the necessary evolution to ensure every breakthrough finds its mark – and that trust in science and public health stays strong under pressure.

    If ever there was a time for rigorous, data-driven engagement that bridges technology, health, and community resilience, this is it.

    Every indicator – scientific, economic, social – suggests that communities will confront more climate disruptions in the coming years.

    Investing in the people who translate science into health, who stand with their communities in crisis, is the most robust, scalable, and sustainable bet that any philanthropist or society can make.

    By focusing on these vital human connections, the world can ensure that innovation works where it matters most – and that the next chapter of climate action measures true success by the health, security, and opportunity it delivers for all.

    History will honor those whose support creates not only tools and policies, but the living networks of trust and craft upon which community resilience depends.

    That is the climate breakthrough waiting to happen.

    References

    1. COP30 Belém Action Plan. (2025). The Belém Health Action Plan for the Adaptation of the Health Sector to Climate Change. https://www.who.int/teams/environment-climate-change-and-health/climate-change-and-health/advocacy-partnerships/talks/health-at-cop30
    2. Ebi, K.L., et al. (2025). The attribution of human health outcomes to climate change: transdisciplinary practical guidance. Climatic Change, 178, 143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-025-03976-7
    3. Ebi, K.L., Haines, A. (2019). The imperative for climate action to protect health. The New England Journal of Medicine, 380, 263–273. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1807873
    4. Jacobson, J., Brooks, A., Mbuh, C., Sadki, R. (2023). Learning from frontline health workers in the climate change era. The Geneva Learning Foundation. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7316466
    5. Jones, I., Mbuh, C., Sadki, R., Steed, I. (2024). Climate change and health: Health workers on climate, community, and the urgent need for action (Version 1.0). The Geneva Learning Foundation. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11194918
    6. Romanello, M., et al. (2025). The 2025 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change. The Lancet S0140673625019191. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(25)01919-1
    7. Sadki, R. (2024). Health at COP29: Workforce crisis meets climate crisis. The Geneva Learning Foundation. https://doi.org/10.59350/sdmgt-ptt98
    8. Sadki, R. (2024). Strengthening primary health care in a changing climate. The Geneva Learning Foundation. https://doi.org/10.59350/5s2zf-s6879
    9. Sadki, R. (2024). The cost of inaction: Quantifying the impact of climate change on health. The Geneva Learning Foundation. https://doi.org/10.59350/gn95w-jpt34
    10. Sanchez, J.J., et al. (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
    11. Storeng, K. T. (2014). The GAVI Alliance and the Gates approach to health system strengthening. Global Public Health, 9(8), 865–879. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2014.940362
    12. World Health Organization. (2025). Draft Global Action Plan on Climate Change and Health. Seventy-eighth World Health Assembly. https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA78/A78_4Add2-en.pdf
  • 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

  • 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

  • How practitioners in Ukraine and across Europe built a self-sustaining peer learning network to support children

    How practitioners in Ukraine and across Europe built a self-sustaining peer learning network to support children

    When military fathers started arriving at her centre in Bulgaria, sharing challenges they faced with their own children, Irina V. found herself drawing on lessons learned not from textbooks, but from conversations with fellow practitioners scattered across a war zone.

    “What I learned about providing psychological first aid (PFA) to children actually helped me in working with parents of children in crisis,” Irina explained during a recent video call with professionals across Europe supporting children affected by the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine.

    That call was the first annual meeting of an entirely volunteer-driven network of practitioners – some working within kilometres of active combat – who teach each other how to better support children. This network emerged from an innovative certificate peer learning programme supported by the European Union’s EU4Health programme, developed by The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) with the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC).

    An organization like “Everything will be fine Ukraine” maintains operations within 20 kilometres of active fighting while supporting 6,000 children across three eastern regions. During online peer learning activities, some participants manage air raid interruptions, power outages, and repeated displacement of both staff and families they serve.

    “The most powerful solutions often emerge when professionals can learn directly from each other’s experience,” TGLF’s Charlotte Mbuh noted. “But knowledge sharing and learning are necessary but insufficient. Through the ‘Accelerator’ mechanism, we showed that participation results in measurable improvements in children’s wellbeing.”

    Learning in crisis

    The programme that connected Irina to her peers has achieved something that aid organizations typically spend years trying to build. In less than a year, 331 organizations representing 10,000 staff and volunteers joined a peer learning network that now reaches over one million Ukrainian children. Ninety-one volunteers across 13 countries now serve as focal points, recruiting participants and adapting materials to local contexts. The cost per participant is 87 per cent lower than European training averages. And rather than winding down as initial funding expires, the network is expanding.

    Most remarkably, 76 per cent of participants are based in Ukraine itself—not in the European host countries the programme originally planned to serve.

    IFRC’s longstanding commitment to integrating mental health into humanitarian response created the institutional framework that made this achievement possible. Speaking at the  EU4Health final event in Brussels in June, IFRC Regional Director for Europe Birgitte Bischoff Ebbesen called IFRC’s effort “the most ambitious targeted mental health and psychosocial support response in the history of the Red Cross and Red Crescent.”

    TGLF’s specific focus was to explore how online peer learning could support Red Cross staff and volunteers, together with other organizations and networks that support children.

    IFRC’s Panu Saaristo explains: “Peer learning creates a horizontal approach where practitioners facing similar challenges can support each other directly. This is really consistent with our community-led and volunteer-driven action led by local volunteers. When tools and approaches are shared peer-to-peer, we see solutions that are both more sustainable and more locally owned.”

    The power of learning from and supporting each other

    What makes this network different is its rejection of the traditional aid model, where experts tell local workers what to do. Instead, practitioners learn from and support each other.

    The approach addresses a fundamental problem in crisis response: conventional training cannot keep pace with rapidly evolving challenges on the ground. When a teacher in Poland encounters a child showing signs of distress linked to their experiences, she can connect within hours to a social worker in Ukraine who has dealt with similar cases.

    Katerina W., who worked with Ukrainian refugee students in Slovakia, described creating “safe corners” and “art corners” where children could communicate when trauma left them unable to speak. She shared these techniques not with a supervisor, but with hundreds of peers facing similar challenges across Europe.

    “The practical knowledge and real-life examples inspired me to adapt my methods and approach challenges with greater empathy and creativity,” said Jelena P., an education professional from Croatia who participated in the network.

    Jennifer R., who founded Teachers for Peace to provide free online lessons to war-affected Ukrainian children, explains the urgent need: “Many of my students show signs of distress that affected their learning. My challenge is to equip volunteer teachers with the right tools so they can feel confident and support the students beyond language learning.”

    Building something that lasts

    The network provides resources for what aid workers call “psychological first aid” or “PFA” for children—the immediate support provided to children experiencing crisis-related distress. This includes listening without pressure, addressing immediate needs, and connecting children with appropriate services.

    But the real innovation lies in how knowledge spreads and gets turned into action. Practitioners connect to share challenges and problem-solve solutions. The agenda emerges from their actual needs, not predetermined curricula.

    “At traditional training, we acquire knowledge and practice skills to get diplomas or certificates,” explained Anna Nyzkodubova, a Ukrainian PFA leader who became a facilitator to support her colleagues. “But here, when we learn through peer-to-peer principles, we grow professionally and make our contribution to solving real cases and real challenges.”

    This peer learning model has proven so effective that the Geneva Learning Foundation announced in August it would continue the programme for five additional years. 

    “We saw that amongst those we had reached, this included practitioners working close to the front lines of armed conflict, working in very difficult conditions,” said Reda Sadki, Executive Director of The Geneva Learning Foundation, which coordinates the network. “Rather than limiting effectiveness, these challenging conditions revealed significant demand for peer learning. This is why we decided to continue these activities.”

    Scale through connection

    The network’s growth defies conventional wisdom about aid work. Rather than adding overhead, the growing size of the network enhances learning by providing more diverse experiences and perspectives. A social worker in eastern Ukraine might develop an approach that helps a teacher in Croatia facing similar challenges.

    Participants access six different types of activities, from short self-guided modules in multiple languages to intensive month-long programs where they implement specific projects and document results. The variety accommodates practitioners with different schedules and experience levels while maintaining quality through peer review and a strong child protection and mutual support framework.

    A different kind of aid

    The programme represents a broader shift in how international assistance might work. Rather than extracting knowledge from affected communities to inform distant decision-makers, it amplifies local expertise and creates connections between practitioners facing similar challenges.

    For Irina, working with Ukrainian refugees far from her home country, the network provided something invaluable: the knowledge that she was not alone, and that solutions existed within her professional community.

    “I realized the importance of separating psychotherapeutic long-term assistance and psychological first aid, especially when working with children who may be at risk of harming themselves,” she said, describing an insight that emerged from group discussions about recognizing when cases require specialist referral.

    As the programme enters its next phase, its founders are proposing additional innovations, including apps where practitioners can log experiences and reflect on challenges while building evidence of what works across different contexts.

    The model suggests a fundamental reimagining of how knowledge can strengthen local action in crisis response—not from experts to recipients, but between peers who understand each other’s reality because they live it every day. If properly supported, this model could reinforce its importance in the blueprint for future humanitarian action.

    References

    1. Sadki, R., 2025. How practitioners in Ukraine and across Europe built a self-sustaining peer learning network to support children. https://doi.org/10.59350/25pa2-ddt80
    2. Sadki, R., 2025. PFA Accelerator: across Europe, practitioners learn from each other to strengthen support to children affected by the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine. https://doi.org/10.59350/redasadki.21155
    3. Sadki, R., 2025. Peer learning for Psychological First Aid: New ways to strengthen support for Ukrainian children. https://doi.org/10.59350/dgpff-n9d63
    4. Sadki, R., 2024. Support of children affected by the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine: Bridging practice and learning through the sharing of experience. https://doi.org/10.59350/zbb4v-hay69
    5. The Geneva Learning Foundation and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, 2025. Діти у кризових ситуаціях, спільноти підтримки – Застосування першої психологічної допомоги для підтримки дітей, які постраждали від гуманітарної кризи в україні. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.14901474
    6. The Geneva Learning Foundation, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, 2025. Children in Crisis, Communities of Care – Psychological first aid for children affected by the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.14732092
    7. The Geneva Learning Foundation and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, 2024. Перша психологічна допомога дітям, які постраждали внаслідок гуманітарної кризи в Україні – Досвід дітей, опікунів та помічників. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.13730132
    8. The Geneva Learning Foundation and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, 2024. Psychological first aid in support of children affected by the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine: Experiences of children, caregivers, and helpers. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.13618862

    The initial development and implementation of this programme (2023-2025) was funded by the European Union through a project partnership with the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). All ongoing activities, content, and their delivery from 1 September 2025 are the sole responsibility of The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF).

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

  • From diagnosis to duty: health workers confront their own role in inequity

    From diagnosis to duty: health workers confront their own role in inequity

    A thirteen-year-old girl in Nigeria, bitten by a snake, arrived at a hospital with her frantic family. The hospital demanded payment before administering the antivenom. The family could not afford it. The girl died.

    This was one of the stark stories shared by health professionals on September 10, 2025, during “Exploration Day,” the third day of The Geneva Learning Foundation’s inaugural peer learning exercise on health equity. The previous day had been about diagnosing the external systems that create such tragedies. But today, the focus shifted.

    “Yesterday, we looked at the problem,” said TGLF facilitator Dr María Fernanda Monzón. “Today, we look in the mirror. We move from analyzing the situation to analyzing ourselves, our own role, our own power, and our own assumptions”.

    The practitioner’s role

    The day’s intensive, small-group workshops challenged participants to move beyond naming a problem to questioning their own connection to it. Groups brought their findings back to the plenary, where the work of exploration continued.

    Oyelaja Olayide, a medical laboratory scientist from Nigeria, presented her group’s analysis of a child’s death following a lab misdiagnosis. The group’s root cause analysis pointed to a systemic issue: the lack of a quality management system in the laboratory. But then the facilitator turned the question back to her. “What was your role in this?”.

    The question hung in the air, shifting the focus from an abstract system to individual responsibility. This pivot is central to the learning process, and the cohort’s diversity is a core element of its design. The majority of participants are frontline health workers—nurses, midwives, doctors, and community health promoters. They work side-by-side as peers with national-level staff and international partners, with government employees making up over 40% of the group. This mix intentionally breaks down traditional hierarchies, creating a space where a policy-maker can learn directly from the lived experience of a clinician in a remote village.

    Learn more about the Certificate peer learning programme for equity in research and practice https://www.learning.foundation/bias

    After a moment of reflection, Olayide acknowledged her role as a professional with the expertise to see the gap. “My role is to be an advocate,” she concluded, recognizing her duty to push for the implementation of quality control systems that could prevent future tragedies.

    From reflection to a plan for action

    This deep self-reflection is the foundation for the next stage of the process: creating a viable action plan. For the remainder of the day, participants worked on the third part of their course project, which is due by the end of the week.

    The programme’s methodology insists that a good plan is not made for a community, but with a community. Participants were guided to develop action steps that involve listening to the people most affected and ensuring they help lead the change. This requires practitioners to think honestly about their position and power and how they can share it to empower others.

    The day’s exploration pushed participants beyond easy answers. It asked them to confront their own biases, acknowledge their power, and accept their professional duty not just to treat patients, but to help fix the broken systems that make them sick. By turning the analytical lens inward, they began to forge the tools they need to build a more equitable future.

    About the Certificate peer learning programme for equity in research and practice

    The Geneva Learning Foundation is an organization that helps health workers from around the world learn together as equals. It offers the Certificate peer learning programme for equity in research and practice, where health professionals work with each other to make health care more fair for everyone, both in how care is given and in how health is studied. The first course in this program is called EQUITY-001 Equity matters, which introduces a method called HEART. This method helps you turn your experience into a real plan for change. HEART stands for Human Equity, Action, Reflection, and Transformation. This means you will learn to see unfairness in health (Human Equity), create a practical plan to do something about it (Action), think carefully about the problem to find its root cause (Reflection), and make a lasting, positive change for your community (Transformation).

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

  • The practitioner as catalyst: How a global learning community is turning frontline experience into action on health inequity

    The practitioner as catalyst: How a global learning community is turning frontline experience into action on health inequity

    “In this phase of my life, I want to work directly with the communities to see what I can do,” said Dr. Sambo Godwin Ishaku, a public health leader from Nigeria with over two decades of experience. His words opened the second day of The Geneva Learning Foundation’s first-ever peer learning exercise on health equity. They also spoke to the very origin of the event itself.

    The Geneva Learning Foundation’s Certificate peer learning programme for equity in research and practice was created because thousands of health workers like Dr. Ishaku joined a global dialogue about equity and demanded a new kind of learning—one that moved beyond theory to provide practical tools for action.

    This inaugural session on 9 September 2025, called “Discovery Day,” was a direct answer to that call. It was not a lecture, but a three-hour, high-intensity workshop where the participants’ own experiences of inequity became the curriculum.

    The goal for the day was one step in a carefully designed 16-day process: to help practitioners see a familiar problem in a new way, setting the stage for them to build a viable action plan they can use in their communities.

    The anatomy of unfairness

    The session began with practitioners sharing true stories of systemic failure. These accounts gave a human pulse to the clinical definition of health inequity: the avoidable and unjust conditions that make it harder for some people to be healthy.

    To demonstrate how to move from story to analysis, the entire cohort engaged in a collective diagnosis. They focused on a first case presented by Dr. Elizabeth Oduwole, a retired physician, about a 65-year-old man unable to afford his diabetes medication on a meager pension. Together, in a live plenary, they used a simple analytical tool to excavate the root causes of this single injustice.

    The tool, known as the “Five Whys,” is less about power and more about simplicity. Its strength lies in its accessibility, providing a common language for a cohort of remarkable diversity. In this programme, community health workers, doctors, nurses, midwives, and others who work for health on the front lines of service delivery make up the majority of participants. They work side-by-side as peers with national-level staff and international partners. Government staff comprise over 40% of the group.

    The group’s collective intelligence peeled back the layers of Dr. Oduwole’s story. The man’s inability to afford medicine was not just about poverty (Why #1) , but about a lack of government policy for the elderly (Why #2). This, in turn, was linked to a lack of advocacy (Why #3) , which stemmed from biased social norms that devalue the lives of older adults (Why #4). The root cause they uncovered was a deep-seated cultural belief, passed down through generations, that this was simply the natural order of things (Why #5). In minutes, the problem had transformed from a financial issue into a profound cultural challenge.

    A crucible for discovery

    With this shared experience, the practitioners were plunged into a rapid series of timed, small-group workshops. In these intense breakout sessions, they applied the same methodology to situations each group identified.

    The stories that emerged were stark. One group analyzed the experience of a participant from Nigeria whose father died after being denied oxygen at a hospital because the only available tank was being reserved for a doctor’s mother. Their analysis traced this act back to a root cause of systemic decay and a breakdown in the ethics of the health profession. Another group tackled the insidious spread of health misinformation preventing rural girls in a conflict-afflicted area from receiving the HPV vaccine, identifying the root cause as an inadequate national health communication strategy.

    A learning community was born in these workshops. They became a crucible where practitioners, often isolated in their daily work, connect with peers who understand their struggles. By unpacking a real-world problem together, they practice the skills needed for their final course project: a practical action plan due at the end of the week, which they will then have peer-reviewed and revised.

    The process is designed to generate unexpected insights. Day 2, “Discovery,” is followed by Day 3, “Exploration,” both dedicated to this intensive peer analysis. By the end of the journey, each participant will have an action plan to tackle a local challenge, one that is often radically different from what they might have first envisioned, because it targets a newly discovered root cause.

    The session ended, as it began, with the voices of health workers. The chat filled with a sense of energy and purpose. “We are all eager to learn, to know more, and to make an equitable Africa,” wrote Vivian Abara, a pre-hospital emergency services responder . “We’re really, really ready to go the whole nine yards and do everything, help ourselves, hold each other’s hand and move.”

    About The Geneva Learning Foundation

    The Geneva Learning Foundation is an organization that helps health workers from around the world learn together as equals. It offers the Certificate peer learning programme for equity in research and practice, where health professionals work with each other to make health care more fair for everyone, both in how care is given and in how health is studied. The first course in this programme is called EQUITY-001 Equity matters, which introduces a method called HEART. This method helps you turn your experience into a real plan for change. HEART stands for Human Equity, Action, Reflection, and Transformation. This means you will learn to see inequity in health (Human Equity), create a practical plan to do something about it (Action), think carefully about the problem to find its root cause (Reflection), and make a lasting, positive change for your community (Transformation).

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

  • Climate change and health: a new peer learning programme by and for health workers from the most climate-vulnerable countries

    Climate change and health: a new peer learning programme by and for health workers from the most climate-vulnerable countries

    GENEVA, Switzerland, 23 July 2025 (The Geneva Learning Foundation) –Today, The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) announces the launch of “Learning to lead change on the frontline of climate change and health,” the inaugural course in a new certificate programme designed by and for professionals facing climate change impacts on health.

    Enrollment is now open. The course will launch on 11 August 2025.

    Two years ago today, nearly 5,000 health professionals from across the developing world gathered online for an unprecedented conversation. They shared something most climate scientists had never heard: detailed, firsthand accounts of how rising temperatures, extreme weather, and environmental changes were already devastating the health of their communities.

    The stories were urgent and specific. A nurse in Ghana described managing surges of malaria after unprecedented flooding. A community health worker in Bangladesh explained how cholera outbreaks followed every major storm. A pharmacist in Nigeria watched children suffer malnutrition as crops failed during extended droughts.

    “I can hear the worry in your voices,” one global health partner told participants during those historic July 2023 events, “and I really respect the time that you are giving to tell us about what is happening to you directly.”

    Connecting the dots from individual impact to systemic crisis

    While climate change dominates headlines for its environmental and economic impacts, a parallel health crisis has been quietly unfolding in clinics and hospitals across Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Health workers have become first-hand witnesses to climate change’s human toll.

    Dr. Seydou Mohamed Ouedraogo from Burkina Faso described devastating floods that “really marked the memory of the inhabitants” and led to cascading health impacts.

    Felix Kole from Gambia reported that “wells have turned to salty water” due to rising sea levels, while extreme heat meant “people are no longer sleeping inside their houses,” creating new security and health complications.

    Rebecca Akello, a public health nurse from Uganda, documented malnutrition impacts directly: “During dry spells where there is no food, children come and their growth monitoring shows they really score low weight for age.”

    Health professionals like Dr. Iktiyar Kandaker from Bangladesh already get that this is a systemic challenge: “Our health system is not prepared to actually address these situations. So this is a combined challenge… but it requires a lot of time to fix it.”

    These health workers serve as what TGLF calls “trusted advisors”—over half describe themselves as being like “members of the family” to the populations they serve. Yet until now, they have had no structured way to learn from each other’s experiences or develop coordinated responses to climate health challenges.

    Learning from those who know because they are there every day

    “It is something that all of us have to join hands to be able to do the most we can to educate our communities on what they can do,” said Monica Agu, a community pharmacist from Nigeria who participated in the founding 2023 events. Her words captured the collaborative spirit that has driven the programme’s development.

    The new certificate programme employs TGLF’s proven peer learning methodology, recognizing that health workers are already implementing life-saving climate adaptations with limited resources. During the 2023 events, participants shared examples of modified immunization schedules during heat waves, cholera outbreak management after flooding, and maintaining health services during extreme weather events.

    “We believe that investing in health workers is one of the best ways to accelerate and strengthen the response to climate change impacts on health,” explains TGLF Executive Director Reda Sadki.

    The programme has been developed from comprehensive analysis of health worker experiences documented since 2023. Most observations come from small and medium-sized communities in the most climate-vulnerable countries.

    For health, a different kind of climate action

    Unlike traditional climate programmes focused on policy or infrastructure, this initiative recognizes that effective climate health responses must be developed by those experiencing the impacts firsthand. The course enables health workers to share their own experiences, learn from colleagues facing similar challenges, and develop both individual and collective responses.

    Dr. Eme Ngeda from the Democratic Republic of Congo captured this approach during the 2023 events: “We are all responsible for these climate disruptions. We must sensitize our populations in waste management and sensitize how to reform our healthcare providers to face resilience, face disasters.”

    The programme connects leaders from more than 4,000 locally-led health organizations through TGLF’s REACH network, enabling them to become programme partners supporting their health workers in developing climate-health leadership skills.

    Building global solutions by connecting local, indigenous knowledge and expertise

    The inaugural course offers health professionals worldwide the opportunity to learn from documented experiences of colleagues who are facing unprecedented consequences of climate change on health. Rather than lectures or theoretical frameworks, the programme employs structured reflection and peer feedback cycles, enabling participants to develop actionable implementation plans informed by peer knowledge and global guidance.

    The course covers four key areas based on health worker experiences:

    • Climate and environmental changes: Recognizing connections between climate and health in local communities.
    • Health impacts on communities: Understanding direct health impacts, food security, and mental health effects.
    • Changing disease patterns: Managing infectious diseases, respiratory conditions, and healthcare access challenges.
    • Community responses and adaptations: Implementing local solutions and innovations from peer experiences.

    Participants earn verified certificates aligned to professional development competency frameworks. Upon completion, they join TGLF’s global community of health practitioners for ongoing peer support and collaboration.

    The urgency of now

    The programme launches at a critical moment. Climate change impacts on health are accelerating, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where health systems are least equipped to respond. Yet these same regions are producing innovative, resource-efficient solutions that could benefit communities worldwide.

    As one health worker reflected during the 2023 events: “Although climate change is a global phenomenon, it is affecting very, very locally people in very different ways.” The new programme acknowledges this reality while creating pathways for local solutions to inform global responses.

    The course is available in English and French, designed to work on mobile devices and basic internet connections. It is free for health workers in participating countries.

    For health workers who have been managing climate impacts in isolation, the programme offers something unprecedented: the chance to learn from colleagues who truly understand their challenges and to contribute their own expertise to a growing global knowledge base.

    As the climate health crisis deepens, the solutions may well come from those who have been living with its impacts longest—if we finally give them the platforms and recognition they deserve.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

  • 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