South Sudan Policy Innovation Lab

Call Directions

South Sudan Policy Innovation Lab Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from South Sudan Policy Innovation Lab, Juba.

A South Sudan where public policy is inclusive, evidence-driven, and youth-informed—laying the foundation for lasting peace, equitable development, and democratic governance.

18/08/2026

Public Policy!

What is public policy if it does not solve real problems?

Public policy is not just about government documents, meetings, workshops, or complicated words. At its heart, public policy is about how society decides what problems need attention, what should be done about them, and how government can improve people’s lives.

The idea of public policy comes from a simple reality: communities have problems that individuals cannot solve alone. People need schools, hospitals, roads, clean water, security, jobs, functioning institutions, and many other public services. Because these issues affect large numbers of people, governments develop policies to respond to them.

But good intentions are not enough.

A government may want to improve education, reduce unemployment, strengthen healthcare, or support farmers. The important question is: What does the evidence tell us about the problem, and what solution is most likely to work?

This is why evidence and research are at the centre of good public policy.

Before creating a policy, we need to understand the problem. We need to ask:

What is happening? Why is it happening? Who is affected? What has been tried before? What worked? What failed? And what can we do differently?

Governments value strong public policy because good policies help them make better decisions, use limited public resources wisely, and respond to the real needs of their citizens.

What about South Sudan?

South Sudan has no shortage of challenges.

We face limited access to quality education and healthcare. Many communities struggle with roads, clean water and electricity. Youth unemployment remains a serious concern. Conflict and displacement continue to affect communities. Public institutions face capacity challenges. Women and young people often face barriers to meaningful participation in decision-making. Our economy remains heavily dependent on oil, while agriculture and other productive sectors remain underdeveloped.

But the challenge is not simply that these problems exist.

One of our biggest challenges is the gap between policy, implementation and reality.

Sometimes policies are developed without enough reliable local data. Sometimes research does not reach the people making decisions. Sometimes policies are well written but poorly implemented. At other times, policies are introduced without sufficient consultation with the communities they are meant to serve.

And when a policy fails, we do not always ask an important question:

What does the evidence tell us about why it failed?

This is where South Sudan needs stronger policy thinking.

We need policies that are based on our own realities, our own data, our own communities and our own experiences. We need researchers, policymakers, civil society, communities and young people to have meaningful conversations about the problems facing the country.

Public policy should not remain something discussed only in offices in Juba.

It should be something that a farmer in a rural community, a teacher in a classroom, a health worker in a county hospital, a young person looking for work, and a policymaker in Juba can all understand and contribute to.

Because a policy is only as meaningful as the difference it makes in people’s lives.

At the South Sudan Policy Innovation Lab, we believe public policy should be understandable, evidence-based, innovative and connected to real problems.

Let us make policy conversations part of everyday conversations.

Because South Sudan does not only need more policies. We need better policies that solve real problems.


04/01/2026

The Venezuelan Paradox: When International Law and Popular Will Collide

In the past seventy-two hours, social media has been flooded with reactions to reports that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was forcibly removed from power by the United States. The event has sparked intense global debate, exposing once again the contradictions that lie at the heart of international politics.

Reactions have been divided. Some see the move as an effort by Washington to counter China’s growing influence in Venezuela, while others argue it is driven by oil interests. The U.S. government, however, claims its actions were intended to restore democracy by removing a regime accused of authoritarianism, electoral manipulation, corruption, and involvement in narcotics trafficking.

From the liberal and legal perspective, the response has been largely critical. Academics, activists, and legal scholars argue that the action violates international law, particularly the UN Charter’s principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence. They warn that allowing powerful states to remove leaders sets a dangerous precedent that could leave weaker nations exposed.

Yet inside Venezuela, the reaction is strikingly different. Many Venezuelans, both at home and abroad, are celebrating. After years of economic collapse, hyperinflation, food shortages, mass migration, and political repression, the removal of Maduro is seen not through legal theory but as relief, and possibly liberation.

This contrast reveals a deeper tension. International law was designed to prevent chaos and foreign domination, but it was written by states, not by people. When governments use sovereignty to shield themselves while citizens suffer, the law can feel distant and selective. For many Venezuelans, arguments about sovereignty mean little when that sovereignty has failed to protect basic human dignity.

At the same time, skepticism toward U.S. intentions is understandable. History shows that many “humanitarian” or “democracy-promoting” interventions have hidden geopolitical interests and left countries worse off, as seen in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan.

The Venezuelan case exposes a central paradox: international law claims neutrality, yet it is often enforced selectively. Powerful states face few consequences, while weaker ones are held firmly to account. This forces an uncomfortable question—are international norms absolute, or do they bend with power and outcomes? And ultimately, should the stability of states outweigh the will and suffering of the people who live within them?

Address

Juba

Telephone

+211983333612

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when South Sudan Policy Innovation Lab posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share