Witter Sophie, Bertone Maria Paola, Chirwa Yotamu, Namakula Justine, So Sovannarith, Wurie Haja R
ReBUILD and Institute for Global Health and Development, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU UK.
Department of Global Health and Development & ReBUILD Consortium, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Confl Health. 2017 Jan 18;10:31. doi: 10.1186/s13031-016-0099-0. eCollection 2016.
Few studies look at policy making in the health sector in the aftermath of a conflict or crisis and even fewer specifically focus on Human Resources for Health, which is a critical domain for health sector performance. The main objective of the article is to shed light on the patterns and drivers of post-conflict policy-making. In particular, we explore whether the post -conflict period offers increased chances for the opening of 'windows for opportunity' for change and reform and the potential to reset health systems.
This article uses a comparative policy analysis framework. It is based on qualitative data, collected using three main tools - stakeholder mapping, key informant interviews and document reviews - in Uganda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia and Zimbabwe.
We found that HRH challenges were widely shared across the four cases in the post-conflict period but that the policy trajectories were different - driven by the nature of the conflicts but also the wider context. Our findings suggest that there is no formula for whether or when a 'window of opportunity' will arise which allows health systems to be reset. Problems are well understood in all four cases but core issues - such as adequate pay, effective distribution and HRH management - are to a greater or lesser degree unresolved. These problems are not confined to post-conflict settings, but underlying challenges to addressing them - including fiscal space, political consensus, willingness to pursue public objectives over private, and personal and institutional capacity to manage technical solutions - are liable to be even more acute in these settings. The role of the MoH emerged as weaker than expected, while the shift from donor dependence was clearly not linear and can take a considerable time.
Windows of opportunity for change and reform can occur but are by no means guaranteed by a crisis - rather they depend on a constellation of leadership, financing, and capacity. Recognition of urgency is certainly a facilitator but not sufficient alone. Post-conflict environments face particularly severe challenges to evidence-based policy making and policy implementation, which also constrain their ability to effectively use the windows which are presented.
很少有研究关注冲突或危机之后卫生部门的政策制定,而专门聚焦于卫生人力资源(这是卫生部门绩效的关键领域)的研究则更少。本文的主要目的是阐明冲突后政策制定的模式和驱动因素。特别是,我们探讨冲突后时期是否为变革与改革提供了更多“机会之窗”,以及重置卫生系统的可能性。
本文采用比较政策分析框架。它基于定性数据,这些数据是通过在乌干达、塞拉利昂、柬埔寨和津巴布韦使用三种主要工具收集的,即利益相关者映射、关键信息人访谈和文件审查。
我们发现,冲突后时期,这四个案例都普遍面临卫生人力资源挑战,但政策轨迹各不相同,这既受冲突性质影响,也受更广泛背景的影响。我们的研究结果表明,对于卫生系统重置而言,并不存在关于“机会之窗”是否会出现以及何时出现的固定模式。在所有四个案例中,问题都广为人知,但诸如合理薪酬、有效分配和卫生人力资源管理等核心问题在不同程度上仍未得到解决。这些问题并非冲突后环境所特有,但在这些环境中,解决这些问题所面临的潜在挑战,包括财政空间、政治共识、超越私利追求公共目标的意愿以及管理技术解决方案的个人和机构能力,可能会更加严峻。卫生部的作用比预期的要弱,而从依赖捐助转向并非直线式的,可能需要相当长的时间。
变革与改革的机会之窗可能会出现,但绝不是危机必然带来的,相反,它们取决于一系列的领导能力、资金和能力因素。认识到紧迫性固然是一个促进因素,但仅凭这一点并不够。冲突后环境在基于证据的政策制定和政策实施方面面临特别严峻的挑战,这也限制了它们有效利用出现的机会之窗的能力。