The emergence and effectiveness of global health networks: findings and future research.

Global health issues vary in the amount of attention and resources they receive. One reason is that the networks of individuals and organizations that address these issues differ in their effectiveness. This article presents key findings from a research project on the emergence and effectiveness of global health networks addressing tobacco use, alcohol harm, maternal mortality, neonatal mortality, tuberculosis and pneumonia. Although networks are only one of many factors influencing priority, they do matter, particularly for shaping the way the problem and solutions are understood, and convincing governments, international organizations and other global actors to address the issue. Their national-level effects vary by issue and are more difficult to ascertain. Networks are most likely to produce effects when (1) their members construct a compelling framing of the issue, one that includes a shared understanding of the problem, a consensus on solutions and convincing reasons to act and (2) they build a political coalition that includes individuals and organizations beyond their traditional base in the health sector, a task that demands engagement in the politics of the issue, not just its technical aspects. Maintaining a focused frame and sustaining a broad coalition are often in tension: effective networks find ways to balance the two challenges. The emergence and effectiveness of a network are shaped both by its members' decisions and by contextual factors, including historical influences (e.g. prior failed attempts to address the problem), features of the policy environment (e.g. global development goals) and characteristics of the issue the network addresses (e.g. its mortality burden). Their proliferation raises the issue of their legitimacy. Reasons to consider them legitimate include their members' expertise and the attention they bring to neglected issues. Reasons to question their legitimacy include their largely elite composition and the fragmentation they bring to global health governance.

A framework on the emergence and effectiveness of global health networks.

Since 1990 mortality and morbidity decline has been more extensive for some conditions prevalent in low- and middle-income countries than for others. One reason may be differences in the effectiveness of global health networks, which have proliferated in recent years. Some may be more capable than others in attracting attention to a condition, in generating funding, in developing interventions and in convincing national governments to adopt policies. This article introduces a supplement on the emergence and effectiveness of global health networks. The supplement examines networks concerned with six global health problems: tuberculosis (TB), pneumonia, tobacco use, alcohol harm, maternal mortality and newborn deaths. This article presents a conceptual framework delineating factors that may shape why networks crystallize more easily surrounding some issues than others, and once formed, why some are better able than others to shape policy and public health outcomes. All supplement papers draw on this framework. The framework consists of 10 factors in three categories: (1) features of the networks and actors that comprise them, including leadership, governance arrangements, network composition and framing strategies; (2) conditions in the global policy environment, including potential allies and opponents, funding availability and global expectations concerning which issues should be prioritized; (3) and characteristics of the issue, including severity, tractability and affected groups. The article also explains the design of the project, which is grounded in comparison of networks surrounding three matched issues: TB and pneumonia, tobacco use and alcohol harm, and maternal and newborn survival. Despite similar burden and issue characteristics, there has been considerably greater policy traction for the first in each pair. The supplement articles aim to explain the role of networks in shaping these differences, and collectively represent the first comparative effort to understand the emergence and effectiveness of global health networks.

Pneumonia's second wind? A case study of the global health network for childhood pneumonia.

Advocacy, policy, research and intervention efforts against childhood pneumonia have lagged behind other health issues, including malaria, measles and tuberculosis. Accelerating progress on the issue began in 2008, following decades of efforts by individuals and organizations to address the leading cause of childhood mortality and establish a global health network. This article traces the history of this network's formation and evolution to identify lessons for other global health issues. Through document review and interviews with current, former and potential network members, this case study identifies five distinct eras of activity against childhood pneumonia: a period of isolation (post WWII to 1984), the duration of WHO's Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) Programme (1984-1995), Integrated Management of Childhood illness's (IMCI) early years (1995-2003), a brief period of network re-emergence (2003-2008) and recent accelerating progress (2008 on). Analysis of these eras reveals the critical importance of building a shared identity in order to form an effective network and take advantage of emerging opportunities. During the ARI era, an initial network formed around a relatively narrow shared identity focused on community-level care. The shift to IMCI led to the partial dissolution of this network, stalled progress on addressing pneumonia in communities and missed opportunities. Frustrated with lack of progress on the issue, actors began forming a network and shared identity that included a broad spectrum of those whose interests overlap with pneumonia. As the network coalesced and expanded, its members coordinated and collaborated on conducting and sharing research on severity and tractability, crafting comprehensive strategies and conducting advocacy. These network activities exerted indirect influence leading to increased attention, funding, policies and some implementation.

The bit in the middle: a synthesis of global health literature on policy formulation and adoption.

Policy formulation and adoption are poorly understood phases of the health policy process. We conducted a narrative synthesis of 28 articles on health policy in low- and middle-income countries to provide insight on what kinds of activities take place in these phases, the actors crafting policies and the institutions in which policy making occurs. The narrative synthesis involved an inductive process to identify relevant articles, extract relevant data from text and reach new understandings. We find that actors exercising decision-making power include not just various governmental entities, but also civil society, commissioners, nongovernmental organizations and even clergy. We also find that most articles identified two or more distinct institutions in which policy formulation and adoption occurred. Finally, we identify seven distinct activities inherent in policy formulation and adoption: generation of policy alternatives, deliberation and/or consultation, advocacy of specific policy alternatives, lobbying for specific alternatives, negotiation of policy decisions, drafting or enacting policy and guidance/influence on implementation development. Health policy researchers can draw on these categories to deepen their understanding of how policy formulation and adoption unfolds.

Holding health providers in developing countries accountable to consumers: a synthesis of relevant scholarship.

Health care providers in low-income countries often treat consumers poorly. Many providers do not consider it their responsibility to listen carefully to consumer preferences, to facilitate access to care, to offer detailed information, or to treat patients with respect. A lack of provider accountability to health consumers may have adverse effects on the quality of health care they provide, and ultimately on health outcomes. This paper synthesizes relevant research on health provision in low-, middle- and high-income countries with the aim of identifying factors that shape health provider accountability to consumers, and discerning promising interventions to enhance responsiveness. Drawing on this scholarship, we develop a framework that classifies factors into two categories: those concerning the health system and those that pertain to social influences. Among the health systems factors that may shape provider accountability are oversight mechanisms, revenue sources, and the nature of competition in the health sector-all influences that may lead providers to be accountable to entities other than consumers, such as governments and donors. Among the social factors we explore are consumer power, especially information levels, and provider beliefs surrounding accountability. Evidence on factors and interventions shaping health provider accountability is thin. For this reason, it is not possible to draw firm conclusions on what works to enhance accountability. This being said, research does suggest four mechanisms that may improve provider responsiveness: 1. Creating official community participation mechanisms in the context of health service decentralization; 2. Enhancing the quality of health information that consumers receive; 3. Establishing community groups that empower consumers to take action; 4. Including non-governmental organizations in efforts to expand access to care. This synthesis reviews evidence on these and other interventions, and points to future research needs to build knowledge on how to enhance health provider accountability to consumers.

Has aid for AIDS raised all health funding boats?

Global health analysts have debated whether donor prioritization of HIV/AIDS control has lifted all boats, raising attention and funding levels for health issues aside from HIV/AIDS. We investigate this question, considering donor funding for 4 historically prominent health agendas-HIV/AIDS, health systems strengthening, population and reproductive health, and infectious disease control-over the decade 1998-2007. We employ funding data from the Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which tracks donor aid. The data indicate that HIV/AIDS may have helped to increase funding for the control of other infectious diseases; however, there is no firm evidence that other health issues beyond the control of infectious diseases have benefited. Between 1998 and 2007, funding for HIV/AIDS control rose from just 5.5% to nearly half of all aid for health. Over the same period, funding for health systems strengthening declined from 62.3% to 23.9% of total health aid and that for population and reproductive health declined from 26.4% to 12.3%. Also, even as total aid for health tripled during this decade, aid for health systems strengthening largely stagnated. Overall, the data indicate little support for the contention that donor funding for HIV/AIDS has lifted all boats.