Evidence-based public policy
Real-time data, quasi-experimental rigor, and traceable recommendations for decision-makers.
The challenge
Public policy is increasingly being asked to act on evidence that arrives at three uncomfortable scales at once: hyperlocal (which neighborhood is at risk), near-real-time (in the next 48 hours, in the next forecast window), and multi-source (administrative records plus satellite plus mobility plus community voice). Most government data systems were built for annual administrative reporting at the department or municipal level. The gap between what evidence-based policy now requires and what most data systems can deliver is widening — and the people most affected by that gap are usually the people least represented in the existing data streams.
That gap is where Capybara works. We bring climate-EWS spatial methods, alternative-data analytics from public-health and credit work, the JANUS publication framework, and explicit participatory design — combined into engagements that help governments, agencies, and communities act on real-time evidence without losing rigor or community legitimacy.
How we approach it
1 — Real-time evidence streamsLive data streams (anonymized mobility, environmental sensors, climate forecasts, health records) feed dashboards and alerts that surface emerging risks or unintended consequences early enough to act on. The same plumbing that powers Capybara situation reports adapts cleanly to policy-monitoring dashboards. |
2 — Quasi-experimental rigorMatched-control designs, interrupted time series, difference-in-differences, regression discontinuity — when a randomized trial is impossible (which is most of the time in public policy), quasi-experimental methods give a defensible estimate of what an intervention actually did. We have used these approaches across COVID-19, urban mobility, and digital-violence settings. |
3 — Hyperlocal "urban acupuncture"By analyzing granular spatial and social-network data, we identify leverage points — specific neighborhoods, infrastructure nodes, or community clusters where a small targeted intervention produces outsized impact. This framing came out of the COVID-19 work in Bogotá and now informs how Capybara situation reports prioritize sub-municipal zones. |
4 — Traceable recommendations (JANUS)Every analytic output for policy work follows the JANUS framework: every claim links to a dataset or source, every recommendation gets an adversarial pass (what could be wrong about this), AI assistance is disclosed, and external stakeholders can audit the reasoning chain. Policy is high-stakes; the analysis behind it has to survive scrutiny. |
Participatory by design
Quantitative analysis alone is not enough. Capybara policy engagements pair the methods above with two participatory practices borrowed from the Gaia Amazonas indigenous-data-governance work:
| Co-design workshops | Stakeholder engagement sessions where local leaders, technical experts, and community members co-create the policy frame, validate evidence, and shape the recommendations. Policies that emerge from co-design have higher legitimacy and more durable buy-in than analyst-authored proposals. |
| Theory of change mapping | Joint development of an explicit theory of change connects scientific evidence to stakeholder goals, with measurable intermediate milestones. Makes adaptive learning possible — the policy can be revised based on what the monitoring data show, rather than locked-in at design time. |
Who this is for
| City & national government agencies | Real-time analytics for crisis response, spatial risk mapping for resource allocation, quasi-experimental evaluation of completed interventions, and JANUS-format briefings for senior decision-makers. |
| International organizations & donors | Independent monitoring of programme impact, multi-country comparative analyses, scenario modelling for risk-based programming, and stakeholder-engagement processes for adaptive grant-making. |
| NGOs, civil society & community organizations | Counter-evidence to challenge official narratives, participatory data collection for advocacy, and policy briefs that translate community priorities into the language decision-makers respond to. The Capybara model code is open — communities and NGOs can run their own analyses without commissioning anyone. |
Track record
|
COVID-19 response — Bogotá 2020 — 2022 · City government and national agencies |
Real-time mobility analytics, spatial risk mapping, scenario modelling, and quasi-experimental evaluation for the city's pandemic response. Established the "urban acupuncture" framing that now informs how Capybara situation reports prioritize sub-municipal zones. |
|
SIGETI — indigenous data governance 2022 · Gaia Amazonas Foundation |
Co-developed information systems and policy tools with indigenous authorities in the Colombian Amazon. Combined remote sensing, field surveys, and local knowledge for territorial governance and climate adaptation. Direct ancestor of Capybara's participatory-validation posture. |
|
Digital violence & safe online spaces Colombia · MinTIC-Quantil initiative + civil society |
Network-theory and semantic analysis of harassment, polarization, and online aggression. Provided regulatory recommendations for digital-violence policy and supported the design of Colombia's digital-violence thermometer. |
|
Climate-risk situation reports 2024 — ongoing · Capybara Center |
JANUS-format situation reports for floods, wildfires, and heatwaves — published openly and structured for direct use by civil-protection coordinators, infrastructure operators, and municipal authorities. Browse the archive → |
What we don't do
| Partisan political work | We support evidence-based policy across the political spectrum. We do not write for parties, candidates, or campaigns; we decline engagements framed around defeating an opponent rather than solving a problem. |
| Replace local expertise | No analytic dashboard replaces the judgment of officials who know the territory and the community input that validates the data. Capybara's role is decision support, never decision making. |
| Prescriptive "solutions" | We deliver evidence, scenarios, and traceable recommendations. We do not deliver finished policy texts that bypass democratic deliberation, technical review, or community consultation. |
| Engagements without transparency | Where confidentiality of data is required we honour it. Where confidentiality of methodology is asked for we generally decline — transparent methods are the only kind that survive policy debate. |
Partner with us
Capybara works with government agencies, international organizations, NGOs, and community organizations on evidence-based policy design, evaluation, and translation. Typical engagement scopes:
- A diagnostic of a defined policy question using real-time data streams and quasi-experimental design.
- A co-design workshop series with technical experts, agency staff, and community representatives.
- A JANUS-format policy brief or situation report tailored to a specific decision-maker audience.
- An adaptive monitoring & evaluation framework with a theory of change and live indicators.
Capybara Center · Public policy & evidence-based decision support · MIT-licensed open methods · JANUS framework: DOI 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7580516/v1
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.