Civil society participation in global public private partnerships for health

Abstract

The growth of global public-private partnerships for health has opened up new spaces for civil society participation in global health governance. Such participation is often justified by the claim that civil society organizations, because of their independence and links to communities, can help address democratic deficits in global-level decision-making processes. This article examines the notion of ‘civil society engagement’ within major public–private partnerships for health, where civil society is often said to play a particularly important role in mediating between public and private spheres. How do major global health partnerships actually define ‘civil society’, who represents civil society within their global-level decision-making bodies, and what formal power do civil society representatives hold relative to other public and private-sector partners? Based on a structured analysis of publicly available documents of 18 of the largest global public–private partnerships for health, we show that many of them make laudatory claims about the value of their ‘civil society engagement’. Most use the term ‘civil society’ to refer to non-governmental organizations and communities affected by particular health issues, and state that they expect these actors to represent the needs and interests of specific populations in global-level decisions about strategies, funding models and policies. Yet, such civil society actors have a relatively low level of representation within the partnerships’ boards and steering committees, especially compared with private-sector actors (10.3 vs 23.7%). Moreover, there is little evidence of civil society representatives’ direct and substantial influence within the partnerships’ global-level governing bodies, where many decisions affecting country-level programmes are made. Rather, their main role within these partnerships seems to be to implement projects and advocate and raise funds, despite common discourses that emphasise civil society's watchdog function and transformative power. The findings suggest the need for in-depth research into the formal and informal power of civil society within global health governance processes.

Perception of TPET Lecturers’ on the Effect of Global Partnerships in Developing Students’ Career Human Capital

“…The SDGs mentioned the need to promote entrepreneurial career and lifelong learning opportunities for all, and the degree to which global partnerships influence the realization of these goals. Stakeholders cooperation worldwide has been described as global partnerships (Paula, Khan, & Stuart, 2015), multistakeholder partnerships (Okitasari, Dahiya, & Takemoto, 2018), or public, private, civil society partnerships (Storeng & de Bengy, 2018). In this current study, global partnerships are more utilized.…”

Collective forward-looking responsibility of patient advocacy organizations: conceptual and ethical analysis

“…CSOs can generally be defined as non-governmental actors, varying from activists, small community-based groups and informal movements to highly organized institutions and international organizations or networks [ 12 ]. One common goal of CSOs is to participate in or influence (health) policy [ 13 , 14 ] and research [ 15 ] on behalf of citizens or socially and economically disadvantaged groups, for example, women, persons with disabilities or migrants [ 16 ]. Due to their independence from direct governmental management, their non-economic aims and their voluntary and bottom-up way of working [ 11 ], PAOs and CSOs have much in common.…”

Cooperative Partnership with Milk Companies Based on Codex Alimentarius in Realizing Food Sovereignty in Indonesia

“…Masyarakat sipil (civil society) adalah sebuah fenomena perkembangan pemerintahan di luar negara dan bangsa sebagai salah satu perubahan politik paling khas di akhir setengah abad belakangan (Bexell et al 2010;Storeng and Puyvalle 2018). Kekuatan para aktor pada Gambar 1 diharapkan sama untuk mengimbangi peran pemerintah maupun swasta (market) yang seringkali membuat masyarakat menjadi korban, karena akan kehilangan hak-haknya sebagai manusia (O. .…”