Policy dialogue and participation: a new way of crafting a national health financing strategy in Morocco

Enhancing multi-sectoral collaboration in health: the open arena for public health as a model for bridging the knowledge-translation gap

Effective public health interventions at local level must involve communities and stakeholders beyond the health services spectrum. A dedicated venue for structured discussion will ensure ongoing multi-sectoral collaboration more effectively than convening ad hoc meetings. Such a venue can be created using existing resources, at minimal extra cost. The University Hospital in Nice (France) has established an Open Arena for Public Health which can serve as a model for promoting collaborative partnerships at local level. The Arena has been successful in implementing sustainable interventions thanks to a set of principles, including: non-hierarchical governance and operating, fair representation of stakeholders, consensus as to best available evidence internationally and locally, policy dialogues: open, free-flowing discussions without preconceived solutions, and an experimental approach to interventions.

An ethical analysis of policy dialogues

BACKGROUND

A policy dialogue is a tool which promotes evidence-informed policy-making. It involves deliberation about a high-priority issue, informed by a synthesis of the best-available evidence, where potential policy interventions are discussed by stakeholders. We offer an ethical analysis of policy dialogues - an argument about how policy dialogues ought to be conceived and executed - to guide those organizing and participating in policy dialogues. Our analysis focuses on the deliberative dialogues themselves, rather than ethical issues in the broader policy context within which they are situated.

METHODS

We conduct a philosophical conceptual analysis of policy dialogues, informed by a formal and an interpretative literature review.

RESULTS

We identify the objectives of policy dialogues, and consider the procedural and substantive values that should govern them. As knowledge translation tools, the chief objective of policy dialogues is to ensure that prospective evidence-informed health policies are appropriate for and likely to support evidence-informed decision-making in a particular context. We identify five core characteristics which serve this objective: policy dialogues are (i) focused on a high-priority issue, (ii) evidence-informed, (iii) deliberative, (iv) participatory and (v) action-oriented. In contrast to dominant ethical frameworks for policy-making, we argue that transparency and accountability are not central procedural values for policy dialogues, as they are liable to inhibit the open deliberation that is necessary for successful policy dialogues. Instead, policy dialogues are legitimate insofar as they pursue the objectives and embody the core characteristics identified above. Finally, we argue that good policy dialogues need to actively consider a range of substantive values other than health benefit and equity.

CONCLUSIONS

Policy dialogues should recognize the limits of effectiveness as a guiding value for policy-making, and operate with an expansive conception of successful outcomes. We offer a set of questions to support those organizing and participating in policy dialogues.

How effective is the health promotion policy in Sichuan, China: based on the PMC-Index model and field evaluation

BACKGROUND

Many countries around the world highlight the health in all policies (HiAP). However, most of the related research focused on the influential factors and implementation strategies, with less concern on the evaluation of HiAP. In response to HiAP's call, the Chinese government has proposed health promotion policies (HPPs) in counties or districts, the evaluation of HPPs in sample counties or districts of Sichuan province in China is an essential basis for optimizing policy content, improving policy implementation, and ensuring health promotion's continuous and efficient operation.

METHODS

This paper established an evaluation system for HPPs based on the PMC-Index model and then quantitatively analyzed 37 representative HPPs from the pilot areas in Sichuan province. In addition, a team of experts conducted a field assessment.

RESULTS

The results showed that the average PMC index of 37 HPPs was 7.091, and correlation analysis showed that there was a significant correlation between the PMC index and expert score.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that the overall consistency of HPPs was good and proves a connection between the formulation and implementation of HPPs.

Priorities for sexual and reproductive health in Morocco as part of universal health coverage: maternal health as a national priority

Maternal health (MH) is a national priority of Morocco. Factors influencing the agenda set by the reproductive and maternal health policy process at the national level were evaluated using the Shiffman and Smith framework. This framework included the influence of the actors, the power of the ideas used, the nature of the political context, and the characteristics of the issue itself. Factors were evaluated by a review of documents and interviews with policy-makers, partners and individuals in the private sector, civil society and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) involved in MH, and decision-makers responsible for implementing health-financing strategies in Morocco. Evaluations showed that maternal mortality in Morocco was considered human rights and social development as well as a public health problem. The actors responsible for MH, including members of the government, researchers, national technical experts, members of the private sector, United Nations partners and NGOs, agreed on progress made in MH and universal health care (UHC). Stakeholders also agreed on the prioritisation process for MH and its inclusion in the health benefits package. Prioritisation of MH was found to depend on national health priorities set by the government and its close partners, as well as on the availability of human and financial resources. Interventions at the operational level were based on evidence, best practices, allocation of adequate financial and human resources, and rigorous monitoring and accountability. However, MH and health financing are experiencing difficulties in many areas, related to social and economic and health disparities, and gender inequality, and quality of care.

A scoping review of researchers' involvement in health policy dialogue in Africa

BACKGROUND

Improving evidence-informed policy dialogue to support the development and implementation of national health policies is vital, but there is limited evidence on researchers' roles in policy dialogue processes in Africa. The objective of this study is to examine researchers' involvement in health policy dialogue in Africa.

METHODS

The database search of this scoping review was conducted from inception to January 24, 2021, by an expert searcher/librarian to determine the extent of evidence, barriers, and facilitators of researchers' involvement in health policy dialogues in Africa. PROSPERO, Wiley Cochrane Library, OVID Medline, OVID EMBASE, OVID PsycINFO, OVID Global Health, EBSCO CINAHL, BASE (Bielefeld Academic Search Engine), and Google/Google Scholar were searched using key words representing the concepts "policy dialogue", "health", and "Africa". No limits were applied. A narrative summary of results was presented.

RESULTS

There were 26 eligible studies representing 21 African countries. Significant discrepancies in researchers' involvement existed across countries. In 62% of the countries, there was suboptimal involvement of researchers in policy dialogues due to no or partial participation in policy dialogues. Major barriers included limited funding, lack of evidence in the public health field of interest, and skepticism of policymakers. The presence of an interface for exchange, demand for scientific evidence, and donors' funding were the most reported facilitators.

CONCLUSIONS

To improve the uptake of evidence in health policy-making processes, an environment of trust and communication between policymakers and researchers must be established. Policymakers need to demonstrate that they value research, by providing adequate funding, promoting knowledge translation activities, and supporting personal and professional development opportunities for researchers.