Search

Zambia, a tobacco-growing country, provides manufacturing incentives to attract foreign and domestic investment. In an earlier study, we cautioned that these incentives could lead to local tobacco manufacturing, undermining its domestic tobacco control efforts. In 2018, as part of our continuing research program, we conducted key informant interviews (n = 15) and document analyses. Our early caution proved correct. In 2018, taking advantage of tax incentives, British American Tobacco Zambia and Roland Imperial Tobacco opened new cigarette-manufacturing facilities in the Lusaka Multi-Facility Economic Zone. They report capability of producing 25 million cigarettes daily, between 3 and 5 million of which is intended for the domestic market. Zambia's tax incentives for cigarette manufacturing are likely to increase domestic consumption. The 170 new jobs created in the two plants pale when considering long-term health impacts and lost economic productivity of an increase in supply of locally produced cigarette brands.

How health advocates and industry actors attempt to assert their authority as a strategy of influence in policymaking remains underexplored in the health governance literature. Greater exploration of the kinds of authority sources used by health actors vis-à-vis market actors and the role ideational factors may play in shaping access to these sources provides insight into advocates' efforts to exert influence in policy forums. Using the trade domain in Australia as a case study of the way in which the commercial determinants of health operate, we examined the different ways in which health, public interest and market actors assert their authority. Drawing on a political science typology of authority, we analysed 87 submissions to the Australian government during the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. We identify four types of authority claims; institutional authority, derived from holding a position of influence within another established institution; legal authority through appeals to legal agreements and precedents; networked authority through cross-referencing between actors, and expert authority through use of evidence. Combining these claims with a framing analysis, we found that these bases of authority were invoked differently by actors who shared the dominant neoliberal ideology in contrast to those actors that shared a public interest discourse. In particular, market actors were much less likely to rely on external sources of authority, while health and public interest actors were more likely to appeal to networked and expert authority. We argue that actors who share strong ideational alignment with the dominant policy discourse appear less reliant on other sources of authority. Implications of this analysis include the need for greater attention to the different strategies and ideas used by industry and public health organisations in trade policy agenda-setting for health, which ultimately enable or constrain the advancement of health on government agendas., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach requires formal and sustained governance structures and mechanisms to ensure that the policies of various non-health sectors maximize positive and minimize negative impacts on population health. In this paper, we demonstrate the usefulness of a network perspective in understanding and contributing to the effectiveness of HiAP. We undertook an exploratory, qualitative case study of a HiAP structure in Iran, the Kerman province Council of Health and Food Security (CHFS) with diverse members from health and non-health sectors. We analyzed relevant policy texts and interviewed 32 policy actors involved in the CHFS. Data were analyzed using within-case analysis and constant comparative methodology. Our findings suggest that CHFS governance from a network perspective drew in practice on elements of two competing network governance modes: the network administrative organization (NAO) and the lead organization mode. Our results also show that a shift from a hierarchical and market-based mode of interaction to a network logic within CHFS has not yet taken place. In addition, CHFS suffers from large membership and an inability to address complex 'wicked problems', as well as low trust, legitimacy and goal consensus among its members. Drawing on other HiAP studies and commentaries, insights from organization network theory, and in-depth findings from our case study, we conclude that a NAO may be the most effective mode of governance for tackling complex social problems in HiAP structures. Since similar studies are limited, and our single case study may not be transferable across all contexts, we suggest that further research be undertaken to explore HiAP structures from a network perspective in different institutional and cultural settings. With increasing emphasis given to HiAP approaches in national and international health policy discourse, it is important that comparative knowledge about the effectiveness of HiAP governance arrangements be developed., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

This latest contribution by the evaluation research team at Flinders University/Southgate Institute on their multiyear study of South Australia's Health in All Policies (HiAP) initiative is simultaneously frustrating, exemplary, and partial. It is frustrating because it does not yet reveal the extent to which the initiative achieved its stated outcomes; that awaits further papers. It is exemplary in describing an evaluation research design in which the research team has excelled over the years, and in adding to it an element of theory testing and re-testing. It is partial, in that the political and economic context considered important in examining both process and outcome of the HiAP initiative stops at the Australian state's borders as if the macro-level national and global political economy (and its power relations) have little or no bearing on the sustainability of the policy learning that the initiative may have engendered. To ask that of an otherwise elegant study design that effectively engages policy actors in its implementation may be demanding too much; but it may now be time that more critical political economy theories join with those that elaborate well the more routine praxis of public policy-making., (© 2018 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)

Background: This study sought to better understand the drivers of skilled health professional migration, its consequences, and the various strategies countries have employed to mitigate its negative impacts. The study was conducted in four countries-Jamaica, India, the Philippines, and South Africa-that have historically been "sources" of health workers migrating to other countries. The aim of this paper is to present the findings from the Indian portion of the study., Methods: Data were collected using surveys of Indian generalist and specialist physicians, nurses, midwives, dentists, pharmacists, dieticians, and other allied health therapists. We also conducted structured interviews with key stakeholders representing government ministries, professional associations, regional health authorities, health care facilities, and educational institutions. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and regression models. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically., Results: Shortages of health workers are evident in certain parts of India and in certain specialty areas, but the degree and nature of such shortages are difficult to determine due to the lack of evidence and health information. The relationship of such shortages to international migration is not clear. Policy responses to health worker migration are also similarly embedded in wider processes aimed at health workforce management, but overall, there is no clear policy agenda to manage health worker migration. Decision-makers in India present conflicting options about the need or desirability of curtailing migration., Conclusions: Consequences of health work migration on the Indian health care system are not easily discernable from other compounding factors. Research suggests that shortages of skilled health workers in India must be examined in relation to domestic policies on training, recruitment, and retention rather than viewed as a direct consequence of the international migration of health workers.

Background: Negotiations surrounding the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade and investment agreement have recently concluded. Although trade and investment agreements, part of a broader shift to global economic integration, have been argued to be vital to improved economic growth, health, and general welfare, these agreements have increasingly come under scrutiny for their direct and indirect health impacts., Methods: We conducted a prospective health impact analysis to identify and assess a selected array of potential health risks of the TPP. We adapted the standard protocol for Health impact assessments (HIAs) (screening, scoping, and appraisal) to our aim of assessing potential health risks of trade and investment policy, and selected a health impact review methodology. This methodology is used to create a summary estimation of the most significant impacts on health of a broad policy or cluster of policies, such as a comprehensive trade and investment agreement., Results: Our analysis shows that there are a number of potentially serious health risks associated with the TPP, and details a range of policy implications for the health sector. Of particular focus are the potential implications of changes to intellectual property rights (IPRs), sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS), technical barriers to trade (TBT), investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), and regulatory coherence provisions on a range of issues, including access to medicines and health services, tobacco and alcohol control, diet-related health, and domestic health policy-making., Conclusion: We provide a list of policy recommendations to mitigate potential health risks associated with the TPP, and suggest that broad public consultations, including on the health risks of trade and investment agreements, should be part of all trade negotiations., (© 2016 by Kerman University of Medical Sciences)

Background: This paper arises from a four-country study that sought to better understand the drivers of skilled health worker migration, its consequences, and the strategies countries have employed to mitigate negative impacts. The four countries-Jamaica, India, the Philippines, and South Africa-have historically been "sources" of skilled health workers (SHWs) migrating to other countries. This paper presents the findings from South Africa., Methods: The study began with a scoping review of the literature on health worker migration from South Africa, followed by empirical data collected from skilled health workers and stakeholders. Surveys were conducted with physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and dentists. Interviews were conducted with key informants representing educators, regulators, national and local governments, private and public sector health facilities, recruitment agencies, and professional associations and councils. Survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and regression models. Interview data were analyzed thematically., Results: There has been an overall decrease in out-migration of skilled health workers from South Africa since the early 2000s largely attributed to a reduced need for foreign-trained skilled health workers in destination countries, limitations on recruitment, and tighter migration rules. Low levels of worker satisfaction persist, although the Occupation Specific Dispensation (OSD) policy (2007), which increased wages for health workers, has been described as critical in retaining South African nurses. Return migration was reportedly a common occurrence. The consequences attributed to SHW migration are mixed, but shortages appear to have declined. Most promising initiatives are those designed to reinforce the South African health system and undertaken within South Africa itself., Conclusions: In the near past, South Africa's health worker shortages as a result of emigration were viewed as significant and harmful. Currently, domestic policies to improve health care and the health workforce including innovations such as new skilled health worker cadres and OSD policies appear to have served to decrease SHW shortages to some extent. Decreased global demand for health workers and indications that South African SHWs primarily use migratory routes for professional development suggest that health worker shortages as a result of permanent migration no longer pertains to South Africa.

The Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) is one of a new generation of 'deep' preferential trade and investment agreements that will extend many of the provisions seen in previous agreements. This paper presents a prospective policy analysis of the likely text of the TPPA, with reference to nutrition policy space. Specifically, we analyse how the TPPA may constrain governments' policy space to implement the 'policy options for promoting a healthy diet' in the World Health Organization's Global Action Plan for Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases (NCDs) 2013-2020. This policy analysis suggests that if certain binding commitments are made under the TPPA, they could constrain the ability of governments to protect nutrition policy from the influence of vested interests, reduce the range of interventions available to actively discourage consumption of less healthy food (and to promote healthy food) and limit governments' capacity to implement these interventions, and reduce resources available for nutrition education initiatives. There is scope to protect policy space by including specific exclusions and/or exceptions during negotiation of trade and investment agreements like the TPPA, and by strengthening global health frameworks for nutrition to enable them to be used as reference during disputes in trade fora., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Issue Addressed: This paper examines recent Australian health reform policies and considers how the primary health care (PHC) workforce experiences subsequent change and perceives its impact on health promotion practice., Methods: Health policy documents were analysed to determine their intended impact on health promotion. Interviews were conducted with 39 respondents from four State-funded PHC services to gain their perceptions of the impact of policy change on health promotion., Results: There have been a plethora of policy and strategy documents over the last decade relevant to PHC, and these suggest an intention to strengthen health promotion. However, respondents report that changes to the role and focus of PHC services have led to fewer opportunities for health promotion. Services are struggling to engage in health promotion activity, while funding and policy directions are prioritised to targeted, individual behaviour change., Conclusion: The experience of PHC workforce respondents in South Australia suggests that, despite policy intentions, health promotion practice is much reduced. Our research suggests that rigorous evaluation of health sector reforms should be undertaken to assess both intended and unintended outcomes in terms of service quality and delivery. SO WHAT? Health promoters are experiencing a contradictory policy and practice environment, and this research should assist health promoters in advocating for more government accountability in the implementation of policies in order to advance comprehensive PHC.

Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach is generally perceived as an intersectoral approach to national or sub-national public policy development, such that health outcomes are given full consideration by non-health sectors. Globalization, however, has created numerous 'inherently global health issues' with cross-border causes and consequences, requiring new forms of global governance for health. Although such governance often includes both state and non-state (private, civil society) actors in agenda setting and influence, different actors have differing degrees of power and authority and, ultimately, it is states that ratify intergovernmental covenants or normative declarations that directly or indirectly affect health. This requires public health and health promotion practitioners working within countries to give increased attention to the foreign policies of their national governments. These foreign policies include those governing national security, foreign aid, trade and investment as well as the traditional forms of diplomacy. A new term has been coined to describe how health is coming to be positioned in governments' foreign policies: global health diplomacy. To become adept at this nuanced diplomatic practice requires familiarity with the different policy frames by which health might be inserted into the foreign policy deliberations, and thence intergovernmental/global governance negotiations. This article discusses six such frames (security, trade, development, global public goods, human rights, ethical/moral reasoning) that have been analytically useful in assessing the potential for greater and more health-promoting foreign policy coherence: a 'Health in All (Foreign) Policies' approach., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Health opportunities and risks have become increasingly global in both cause and consequence. Governments have been slow to recognise the global dimensions of health, although this is beginning to change. A new concept - global health diplomacy (GHD) - has evolved to describe how health is now being positioned within national foreign policies and entering into regional or multilateral negotiations. Traditionally, health negotiations have been seen as 'low politics' in international affairs: however, attention is now being given to understanding better how health can increase its prominence in foreign policy priorities and multilateral forums. We sought to identify how these efforts were manifested in Canada, with a focus on current barriers to inserting health in foreign policy. We conducted individual interviews with Canadian informants who were well placed through their diplomatic experience and knowledge to address this issue. Barriers identified by the respondents included a lack of content expertise (scientific and technical understanding of health and its practice), insufficient diplomatic expertise (the practice and art of diplomacy, including legal and technical expertise), the limited ways in which health has become framed as a foreign policy issue, funding limitations and cuts for global health, and lack of cross-sectoral policy coordination and coherence, given the important role that non-health foreign policy interests (notably in trade and investment liberalisation) can play in shaping global health outcomes. We conclude with some reflections on how regime change and domestic government ideology can also function as a barrier to GHD, and what this implies for retaining or expanding the placement of health in foreign policy.

Background: Over the past decade, global health issues have become more prominent in foreign policies at the national level. The process to develop state level global health strategies is arguably a form of global health diplomacy (GHD). Despite an increase in the volume of secondary research and analysis in this area, little primary research, particularly that which draws directly on the perspectives of those involved in these processes, has been conducted. This study seeks to fill this knowledge gap through an empirical case study of Health is Global: A UK Government Strategy 2008-2013. It aims to build understanding about how and why health is integrated into foreign policy and derive lessons of potential relevance to other nations interested in developing whole-of-government global health strategies., Methods: The major element of the study consisted of an in-depth investigation and analysis of the UK global health strategy. Document analysis and twenty interviews were conducted. Data was organized and described using an adapted version of Walt and Gilson's policy analysis triangle. A general inductive approach was used to identify themes in the data, which were then analysed and interpreted using Fidler's health and foreign policy conceptualizations and Kingdon's multiples streams model of the policymaking process., Results: The primary reason that the UK decided to focus more on global health is self-interest - to protect national and international security and economic interests. Investing in global health was also seen as a way to enhance the UK's international reputation. A focus on global health to primarily benefit other nations and improve global health per se was a prevalent through weaker theme. A well organized, credible policy community played a critical role in the process and a policy entrepreneur with expertise in both international relations and health helped catalyze attention and action on global health when the time was right. Support from the Prime Minister and from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office was essential. The process to arrive at a government-wide strategy was complex and time-consuming, but also broke down silos. Significant negotiation and compromise were required from actors with widely varying perspectives on global health and conflicting priorities., Conclusions: As primarily an exploratory study, this research sheds significant light on the global health policymaking process at the level of the state. It provides a useful and important starting point for further hypothesis driven empirical research that focuses on the integration of health in foreign policy, how and why this happens and whether or not it makes an impact on improving global health.

This commentary argues that there are three major crises confronting global health: ongoing financial crises; deepening ecological crises; and rapidly escalating income and wealth inequalities within and between nations. Global rhetorical responses to these crises frequently invoke policy sentiments similar to those advised by the 2008 WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH). However, actual policy decisions run counter to the evidence reviewed by the Commission, and its final report recommendations. Failure to re-regulate financial capitalism, introduce regulatory standards for transnational companies, or subordinate trade and investment liberalization treaties to development goals and human rights treaties will exacerbate global health inequities into the future. More positively, there is increasing support for systems of global taxation. The challenge for global health, however, will remain the willingness of states to make domestic and foreign policy choices that strengthen income redistribution, economic regulation, and citizen rights.

In recent decades, public health policy and practice have been increasingly challenged by globalization, even as global financing for health has increased dramatically. This article discusses globalization and its health challenges from a vantage of political science, emphasizing increased global flows (of pathogens, information, trade, finance, and people) as driving, and driven by, global market integration. This integration requires a shift in public health thinking from a singular focus on international health (the higher disease burden in poor countries) to a more nuanced analysis of global health (in which health risks in both poor and rich countries are seen as having inherently global causes and consequences). Several globalization-related pathways to health exist, two key ones of which are described: globalized diseases and economic vulnerabilities. The article concludes with a call for national governments, especially those of wealthier nations, to take greater account of global health and its social determinants in all their foreign policies.

In this Health Policy article, we selected and reviewed evidence synthesised by nine knowledge networks established by WHO to support the Commission on the Social Determinants of Health. We have indicated the part that national governments and civil society can play in reducing health inequity. Government action can take three forms: (1) as provider or guarantor of human rights and essential services; (2) as facilitator of policy frameworks that provide the basis for equitable health improvement; and (3) as gatherer and monitor of data about their populations in ways that generate health information about mortality and morbidity and data about health equity. We use examples from the knowledge networks to illustrate some of the options governments have in fulfilling this role. Civil society takes many forms: here, we have used examples of community groups and social movements. Governments and civil society can have important positive roles in addressing health inequity if political will exists.

The reduction of health inequities is an ethical imperative, according to the WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH). Drawing on detailed multidisciplinary evidence assembled by the Globalization Knowledge Network that supported the CSDH, we define globalisation in mainly economic terms. We consider and reject the presumption that globalisation will yield health benefits as a result of its contribution to rapid economic growth and associated reductions in poverty. Expanding on this point, we describe four disequalising dynamics by which contemporary globalisation causes divergence: the global reorganisation of production and emergence of a global labour-market; the increasing importance of binding trade agreements and processes to resolve disputes; the rapidly increasing mobility of financial capital; and the persistence of debt crises in developing countries. Generic policies designed to reduce health inequities are described with reference to the three Rs of redistribution, regulation, and rights. We conclude with an examination of the interconnected intellectual and institutional challenges to reduction of health inequities that are created by contemporary globalisation.