To adjust, reform, or transform? Criteria for distinguishing efforts to change knowledge practices in global health.

Over the last decade, there has been an increase in calls and efforts to change knowledge practices in global health, from within the field, in the fields that intersect with it, and from outside the field. While these calls and efforts are often aimed at rethinking or reimagining the field, they often fall short. Based on interviews with researchers who have participated in change efforts within and around global health, we developed criteria for distinguishing change efforts between first-order change, which seeks to adjust the current system for efficiency and effectiveness while keeping things the same; second-order change, which seeks to reform the current system to meet the needs of stakeholders; and third-order change, which seeks the total transformation of the system. In addition to the schema, our findings illustrate how the desired order of change is not simply a choice but rather dynamically determined in the interaction between change seekers and the institutions and systems they seek to change. This study offers a tool to clearly articulate the nature of a particular change effort, to distinguish and allow for comparison between change efforts, and to think through the kinds and extents of change required to achieve desired transformational change.