Global health action · 2025
Who is at the table and who has the power? Case study analysis of decision-making processes for the Global Financing Facility in Tanzania.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shamba Donat, Baraka Jitihada, Kinney Mary V, George Asha S, Msemo Georgina, Lawn Joy E, Steege Rosie
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In 2015, Tanzania joined the Global Financing Facility (GFF), a global health initiative for Reproductive, Maternal, Newborn, Child, and Adolescent Health and Nutrition (RMNCAH-N). Despite its resource mobilization goals, little is known about power dynamics in GFF policy processes. This paper presents the first power analysis of Tanzania's GFF engagement.
OBJECTIVE: To examine policy processes in developing GFF documents during its first two phases in Tanzania.
METHODS: An exploratory qualitative case study using document reviews (*n* = 22) and key informant interviews (*n* = 21) conducted in 2022-2023. Data were thematically analyzed and interpreted using Gaventa's power cube (levels, spaces, and forms of power).
RESULTS: Stakeholders praised the GFF's country-led, evidence-based approach and local autonomy. However, closed-door decision-making in phase one excluded civil society and the private sector. Invisible power imbalances in funding allocations left stillbirths and adolescent health without dedicated budgets, while vulnerable groups (e.g. people with disabilities) were overlooked. Disbursement-linked indicators emphasized measurable outcomes, reflecting visible power. Phase two showed adaptive learning, with improved inclusivity.
CONCLUSION: While government-led, global actors (e.g. World Bank, donors) heavily influenced decisions. Greater civil society engagement is needed for accountability. Future efforts must address power imbalances through meaningful citizen participation to strengthen RMNCAH-N services.
OBJECTIVE: To examine policy processes in developing GFF documents during its first two phases in Tanzania.
METHODS: An exploratory qualitative case study using document reviews (*n* = 22) and key informant interviews (*n* = 21) conducted in 2022-2023. Data were thematically analyzed and interpreted using Gaventa's power cube (levels, spaces, and forms of power).
RESULTS: Stakeholders praised the GFF's country-led, evidence-based approach and local autonomy. However, closed-door decision-making in phase one excluded civil society and the private sector. Invisible power imbalances in funding allocations left stillbirths and adolescent health without dedicated budgets, while vulnerable groups (e.g. people with disabilities) were overlooked. Disbursement-linked indicators emphasized measurable outcomes, reflecting visible power. Phase two showed adaptive learning, with improved inclusivity.
CONCLUSION: While government-led, global actors (e.g. World Bank, donors) heavily influenced decisions. Greater civil society engagement is needed for accountability. Future efforts must address power imbalances through meaningful citizen participation to strengthen RMNCAH-N services.