McLaughlin-Rotman Centre for Global Health, at the University Health Network and University of Toronto, MaRS Centre, South Tower, Suite 406, 101 College Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1L7, Canada.
BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2010 Dec 13;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S3. doi: 10.1186/1472-698X-10-S1-S3.
This paper describes and analyses Rwanda's science-based health product 'innovation system', highlighting examples of indigenous innovation and good practice. We use an innovation systems framework, which takes into account the wide variety of stakeholders and knowledge flows contributing to the innovation process. The study takes into account the destruction of the country's scientific infrastructure and human capital that occurred during the 1994 genocide, and describes government policy, research institutes and universities, the private sector, and NGOs that are involved in health product innovation in Rwanda.
Case study research methodology was used. Data were collected through reviews of academic literature and policy documents and through open-ended, face-to-face interviews with 38 people from across the science-based health innovation system. Data was collected over two visits to Rwanda between November - December 2007 and in May 2008. A workshop was held in Kigali on May 23rd and May 24th 2009 to validate the findings. A business plan was then developed to operationalize the findings.
The results of the study show that Rwanda has strong government will to support health innovation both through its political leadership and through government policy documents. However, it has a very weak scientific base as most of its scientific infrastructure as well as human capital were destroyed during the 1994 genocide. The regulatory agency is weak and its nascent private sector is ill-equipped to drive health innovation. In addition, there are no linkages between the various actors in the country's health innovation system i.e between research institutions, universities, the private sector, and government bureaucrats.
Despite the fact that the 1994 genocide destroyed most of the scientific infrastructure and human capital, the country has made remarkable progress towards developing its health innovation system, mainly due to political goodwill. The areas of greatest potential for Rwanda are in traditional plant technologies. However, there is need for investments in domestic skill development as well as infrastructure that will enhance innovation. Of foremost importance is the establishment of a platform to link the various actors in the health innovation system.
本文描述和分析了卢旺达基于科学的卫生产品“创新体系”,重点介绍了本土创新和良好实践的例子。我们使用了一个创新系统框架,该框架考虑了广泛的利益相关者和有助于创新过程的知识流。该研究考虑了该国在 1994 年种族灭绝期间科学基础设施和人力资本遭到的破坏,并描述了参与卢旺达卫生产品创新的政府政策、研究机构和大学、私营部门以及非政府组织。
采用案例研究方法。通过对学术文献和政策文件的审查以及对来自整个基于科学的卫生创新系统的 38 人的开放式、面对面访谈收集数据。数据于 2007 年 11 月至 12 月和 2008 年 5 月两次在卢旺达进行收集。2009 年 5 月 23 日和 24 日在基加利举行了一次研讨会,以验证研究结果。随后制定了一份商业计划,以实施研究结果。
研究结果表明,卢旺达政府有强烈的意愿支持卫生创新,既通过其政治领导,也通过政府政策文件。然而,它的科学基础非常薄弱,因为其大部分科学基础设施和人力资本都在 1994 年种族灭绝期间遭到破坏。监管机构薄弱,其新兴的私营部门也没有能力推动卫生创新。此外,该国卫生创新系统中的各个参与者之间没有联系,即研究机构、大学、私营部门和政府官僚之间没有联系。
尽管 1994 年的种族灭绝摧毁了大部分科学基础设施和人力资本,但该国在发展其卫生创新体系方面取得了显著进展,这主要归功于政治意愿。卢旺达最有潜力的领域是传统植物技术。然而,需要对国内技能发展和基础设施进行投资,以增强创新能力。最重要的是建立一个平台,将卫生创新系统中的各个参与者联系起来。