Cargando…

‘It doesn’t happen how you think, it is very complex!’ Reconciling stakeholder priorities, evidence, and processes for zoonoses prioritisation in India

BACKGROUND: Why do some zoonotic diseases receive priority from health policy decision-makers and planners whereas others receive little attention? By leveraging Shiffman and Smith’s political prioritisation framework, our paper advances a political economy of disease prioritisation focusing on four...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Asaaga, Festus A., Sriram, Aditi, Chanda, Mudassar M., Hoti, Subhash L., Young, Juliette C., Purse, Bethan V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10477356/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37674686
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1228950
_version_ 1785101136095608832
author Asaaga, Festus A.
Sriram, Aditi
Chanda, Mudassar M.
Hoti, Subhash L.
Young, Juliette C.
Purse, Bethan V.
author_facet Asaaga, Festus A.
Sriram, Aditi
Chanda, Mudassar M.
Hoti, Subhash L.
Young, Juliette C.
Purse, Bethan V.
author_sort Asaaga, Festus A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Why do some zoonotic diseases receive priority from health policy decision-makers and planners whereas others receive little attention? By leveraging Shiffman and Smith’s political prioritisation framework, our paper advances a political economy of disease prioritisation focusing on four key components: the strength of the actors involved in the prioritisation, the power of the ideas they use to portray the issue, the political contexts in which they operate, and the characteristics of the issue itself (e.g., overall burdens, severity, cost-effective interventions). These components afford a nuanced characterisation of how zoonotic diseases are prioritised for intervention and highlight the associated knowledge gaps affecting prioritisation outcomes. We apply this framework to the case of zoonoses management in India, specifically to identify the factors that shape disease prioritisation decision-making and outcomes. METHODS: We conducted 26 semi-structured interviews with national, state and district level health policymakers, disease managers and technical experts involved in disease surveillance and control in India. RESULTS: Our results show pluralistic interpretation of risks, exemplified by a disconnect between state and district level actors on priority diseases. The main factors identified as shaping prioritisation outcomes were related to the nature of the zoonoses problem (the complexity of the zoonotic disease, insufficient awareness and lack of evidence on disease burdens and impacts) as well as political, social, cultural and institutional environments (isolated departmental priorities, limited institutional authority, opaque funding mechanisms), and challenges in organisation leadership for cross-sectoral engagement. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight a compartmentalised regulatory system for zoonoses where political, social, cultural, and media factors can influence disease management and prioritisation. A major policy window is the institutionalisation of One Health to increase the political priority for strengthening cross-sectoral engagement to address several challenges, including the creation of effective institutions to reconcile stakeholder priorities and prioritisation processes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10477356
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104773562023-09-06 ‘It doesn’t happen how you think, it is very complex!’ Reconciling stakeholder priorities, evidence, and processes for zoonoses prioritisation in India Asaaga, Festus A. Sriram, Aditi Chanda, Mudassar M. Hoti, Subhash L. Young, Juliette C. Purse, Bethan V. Front Public Health Public Health BACKGROUND: Why do some zoonotic diseases receive priority from health policy decision-makers and planners whereas others receive little attention? By leveraging Shiffman and Smith’s political prioritisation framework, our paper advances a political economy of disease prioritisation focusing on four key components: the strength of the actors involved in the prioritisation, the power of the ideas they use to portray the issue, the political contexts in which they operate, and the characteristics of the issue itself (e.g., overall burdens, severity, cost-effective interventions). These components afford a nuanced characterisation of how zoonotic diseases are prioritised for intervention and highlight the associated knowledge gaps affecting prioritisation outcomes. We apply this framework to the case of zoonoses management in India, specifically to identify the factors that shape disease prioritisation decision-making and outcomes. METHODS: We conducted 26 semi-structured interviews with national, state and district level health policymakers, disease managers and technical experts involved in disease surveillance and control in India. RESULTS: Our results show pluralistic interpretation of risks, exemplified by a disconnect between state and district level actors on priority diseases. The main factors identified as shaping prioritisation outcomes were related to the nature of the zoonoses problem (the complexity of the zoonotic disease, insufficient awareness and lack of evidence on disease burdens and impacts) as well as political, social, cultural and institutional environments (isolated departmental priorities, limited institutional authority, opaque funding mechanisms), and challenges in organisation leadership for cross-sectoral engagement. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight a compartmentalised regulatory system for zoonoses where political, social, cultural, and media factors can influence disease management and prioritisation. A major policy window is the institutionalisation of One Health to increase the political priority for strengthening cross-sectoral engagement to address several challenges, including the creation of effective institutions to reconcile stakeholder priorities and prioritisation processes. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-08-22 /pmc/articles/PMC10477356/ /pubmed/37674686 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1228950 Text en Copyright © 2023 Asaaga, Sriram, Chanda, Hoti, Young and Purse. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Public Health
Asaaga, Festus A.
Sriram, Aditi
Chanda, Mudassar M.
Hoti, Subhash L.
Young, Juliette C.
Purse, Bethan V.
‘It doesn’t happen how you think, it is very complex!’ Reconciling stakeholder priorities, evidence, and processes for zoonoses prioritisation in India
title ‘It doesn’t happen how you think, it is very complex!’ Reconciling stakeholder priorities, evidence, and processes for zoonoses prioritisation in India
title_full ‘It doesn’t happen how you think, it is very complex!’ Reconciling stakeholder priorities, evidence, and processes for zoonoses prioritisation in India
title_fullStr ‘It doesn’t happen how you think, it is very complex!’ Reconciling stakeholder priorities, evidence, and processes for zoonoses prioritisation in India
title_full_unstemmed ‘It doesn’t happen how you think, it is very complex!’ Reconciling stakeholder priorities, evidence, and processes for zoonoses prioritisation in India
title_short ‘It doesn’t happen how you think, it is very complex!’ Reconciling stakeholder priorities, evidence, and processes for zoonoses prioritisation in India
title_sort ‘it doesn’t happen how you think, it is very complex!’ reconciling stakeholder priorities, evidence, and processes for zoonoses prioritisation in india
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10477356/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37674686
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1228950
work_keys_str_mv AT asaagafestusa itdoesnthappenhowyouthinkitisverycomplexreconcilingstakeholderprioritiesevidenceandprocessesforzoonosesprioritisationinindia
AT sriramaditi itdoesnthappenhowyouthinkitisverycomplexreconcilingstakeholderprioritiesevidenceandprocessesforzoonosesprioritisationinindia
AT chandamudassarm itdoesnthappenhowyouthinkitisverycomplexreconcilingstakeholderprioritiesevidenceandprocessesforzoonosesprioritisationinindia
AT hotisubhashl itdoesnthappenhowyouthinkitisverycomplexreconcilingstakeholderprioritiesevidenceandprocessesforzoonosesprioritisationinindia
AT youngjuliettec itdoesnthappenhowyouthinkitisverycomplexreconcilingstakeholderprioritiesevidenceandprocessesforzoonosesprioritisationinindia
AT pursebethanv itdoesnthappenhowyouthinkitisverycomplexreconcilingstakeholderprioritiesevidenceandprocessesforzoonosesprioritisationinindia