Buse Kent
Overseas Development Institute, 111 Westminster Bridge Road, London, UK.
Health Policy Plan. 2008 Sep;23(5):351-60. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czn026. Epub 2008 Jul 29.
As a function of the inherently political nature of health policy, there have long been calls for, as well as guidance on, analysis of its political dimensions to inform practice. Yet there are few accounts in the literature of systematic attention to real-time documentation and analysis of political-economy factors and feedback to engender reform. The dearth of such prospective policy analysis is perhaps understandable given the many intrinsic difficulties in such an enterprise. This paper provides an outline approach of how researchers might work together with advocacy coalitions (or other political actors) to document and analyse the efforts of such coalitions to use policy analysis to influence the policy processes-agenda setting, policy formulation and policy implementation-in which they engage. In so doing, it identifies challenges based on reviews of the theoretical, methodological and empirical literature as well as the experience of the author. The aim of the paper is to generate debate to assist in resolving the myriad challenges inherent in prospective policy analysis. The paper responds to appeals for political research which addresses the problems confronting political actors so as to guide future action-research for evidence-informed, pro-poor health policy.
鉴于卫生政策具有内在的政治性质,长期以来一直有人呼吁对其政治层面进行分析并提供相关指导,以便为实践提供信息。然而,文献中很少有关于系统关注政治经济因素的实时记录与分析以及反馈以推动改革的内容。考虑到这项工作存在诸多内在困难,这种前瞻性政策分析的匮乏或许是可以理解的。本文概述了研究人员如何与倡导联盟(或其他政治行为体)合作,记录和分析这些联盟利用政策分析来影响其参与的政策过程(议程设定、政策制定和政策实施)的努力。在此过程中,本文基于对理论、方法和实证文献的回顾以及作者的经验,确定了挑战。本文的目的是引发讨论,以帮助解决前瞻性政策分析中固有的众多挑战。本文回应了开展政治研究的呼吁,该研究旨在解决政治行为体面临的问题,从而指导未来的行动研究,以制定基于证据的、有利于穷人的卫生政策。