Cargando…
Global health initiatives in Africa – governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment
BACKGROUND: The advent of global health initiatives (GHIs) has changed the landscape and architecture of health financing in low and middle income countries, particularly in Africa. Over the last decade, the African Region has realised improvements in health outcomes as a result of interventions imp...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4959383/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27454542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1448-9 |
_version_ | 1782444395703828480 |
---|---|
author | Mwisongo, Aziza Nabyonga-Orem, Juliet |
author_facet | Mwisongo, Aziza Nabyonga-Orem, Juliet |
author_sort | Mwisongo, Aziza |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The advent of global health initiatives (GHIs) has changed the landscape and architecture of health financing in low and middle income countries, particularly in Africa. Over the last decade, the African Region has realised improvements in health outcomes as a result of interventions implemented by both governments and development partners. However, alignment and harmonisation of partnerships and GHIs are still difficult in the African countries with inadequate capacity for their effective coordination. METHOD: Both published and grey literature was reviewed to understand the governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment of GHIs in the African Region; to synthesise the knowledge and highlight the persistent challenges; and to identify gaps for future research. RESULTS: GHI governance structures are often separate from those of the countries in which they operate. Their divergent funding channels and modalities may have contributed to the failure of governments to track their resources. There is also evidence that basically, earmarking and donor conditions drive funding allocations regardless of countries’ priorities. Although studies cite the lack of harmonisation of GHI priorities with national strategies, evidence shows improvements in that area over time. GHIs have used several strategies and mechanisms to involve the private sector. These have widened the pool of health service policy-makers and providers to include groups such as civil society organisations (CSOs), with both positive and negative implications. GHI strategies such as co-financing by countries as a condition for support have been positive in achieving sustainability of interventions. CONCLUSIONS: GHI approaches have not changed substantially over the years but there has been evolution in terms of donor funding and conditions. GHIs still largely operate in a vertical manner, bypassing country systems; they compete for the limited human resources; they influence country policies; and they are not always harmonised with other donors. To maximise returns on GHI support, there is need to ensure that their approaches are more comprehensive as opposed to being selective; to improve GHI country level governance and alignment with countries’ changing epidemiologic profiles; and to strengthen their involvement of CSOs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4959383 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49593832016-08-01 Global health initiatives in Africa – governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment Mwisongo, Aziza Nabyonga-Orem, Juliet BMC Health Serv Res Research BACKGROUND: The advent of global health initiatives (GHIs) has changed the landscape and architecture of health financing in low and middle income countries, particularly in Africa. Over the last decade, the African Region has realised improvements in health outcomes as a result of interventions implemented by both governments and development partners. However, alignment and harmonisation of partnerships and GHIs are still difficult in the African countries with inadequate capacity for their effective coordination. METHOD: Both published and grey literature was reviewed to understand the governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment of GHIs in the African Region; to synthesise the knowledge and highlight the persistent challenges; and to identify gaps for future research. RESULTS: GHI governance structures are often separate from those of the countries in which they operate. Their divergent funding channels and modalities may have contributed to the failure of governments to track their resources. There is also evidence that basically, earmarking and donor conditions drive funding allocations regardless of countries’ priorities. Although studies cite the lack of harmonisation of GHI priorities with national strategies, evidence shows improvements in that area over time. GHIs have used several strategies and mechanisms to involve the private sector. These have widened the pool of health service policy-makers and providers to include groups such as civil society organisations (CSOs), with both positive and negative implications. GHI strategies such as co-financing by countries as a condition for support have been positive in achieving sustainability of interventions. CONCLUSIONS: GHI approaches have not changed substantially over the years but there has been evolution in terms of donor funding and conditions. GHIs still largely operate in a vertical manner, bypassing country systems; they compete for the limited human resources; they influence country policies; and they are not always harmonised with other donors. To maximise returns on GHI support, there is need to ensure that their approaches are more comprehensive as opposed to being selective; to improve GHI country level governance and alignment with countries’ changing epidemiologic profiles; and to strengthen their involvement of CSOs. BioMed Central 2016-07-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4959383/ /pubmed/27454542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1448-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Mwisongo, Aziza Nabyonga-Orem, Juliet Global health initiatives in Africa – governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment |
title | Global health initiatives in Africa – governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment |
title_full | Global health initiatives in Africa – governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment |
title_fullStr | Global health initiatives in Africa – governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment |
title_full_unstemmed | Global health initiatives in Africa – governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment |
title_short | Global health initiatives in Africa – governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment |
title_sort | global health initiatives in africa – governance, priorities, harmonisation and alignment |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4959383/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27454542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1448-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mwisongoaziza globalhealthinitiativesinafricagovernanceprioritiesharmonisationandalignment AT nabyongaoremjuliet globalhealthinitiativesinafricagovernanceprioritiesharmonisationandalignment |