How countries cope with competing demands and expectations: perspectives of different stakeholders on priority setting and resource allocation for health in the era of HIV and AIDS

Abstract

BackgroundHealth systems have experienced unprecedented stress in recent years, and as yet no consensus has emerged as to how to deal with the multiple burden of disease in the context of HIV and AIDS and other competing health priorities. Priority setting is essential, yet this is a complex, multifaceted process. Drawing on a study conducted in five African countries, this paper explores different stakeholders′ perceptions of health priorities, how priorities are defined in practice, the process of resource allocation for HIV and Health and how different stakeholders perceive this.MethodsA sub-analysis was conducted of selected data from a wider qualitative study that explored the interactions between health systems and HIV and AIDS responses in five sub-Saharan countries (Burkina Faso, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Madagascar and Malawi). Key background documents were analysed and semi-structured interviews (n = 258) and focus group discussions (n = 45) were held with representatives of communities, health personnel, decision makers, civil society representatives and development partners at both national and district level.ResultsHealth priorities were expressed either in terms of specific health problems and diseases or gaps in service delivery requiring a strengthening of the overall health system. In all five countries study respondents (with the exception of community members in Ghana) identified malaria and HIV as the two top health priorities. Community representatives were more likely to report concerns about accessibility of services and quality of care. National level respondents often referred to wider systemic challenges in relation to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Indeed, actual priority setting was heavily influenced by international agendas (e.g. MDGs) and by the ways in which development partners were supporting national strategic planning processes. At the same time, multi-stakeholder processes were increasingly used to identify priorities and inform sector-wide planning, whereby health service statistics were used to rank the burden of disease. However, many respondents remarked that health system challenges are not captured by such statistics.In all countries funding for health was reported to fall short of requirements and a need for further priority setting to match actual resource availability was identified. Pooled health sector funds have been established to some extent, but development partners′ lack of flexibility in the allocation of funds according to country-generated priorities was identified as a major constraint.ConclusionsAlthough we found consensus on health priorities across all levels in the study countries, current funding falls short of addressing these identified areas. The nature of external funding, as well as programme-specific investment, was found to distort priority setting. There are signs that existing interventions have had limited effects beyond meeting the needs of disease-specific programmes. A need for more comprehensive health s...

What Health Service Provider Factors Are Associated with Low Delivery of HIV Testing to Children with Acute Malnutrition in Dowa District of Malawi?

“…This scenario is entrenched by the finding that some of the test kits are supplied to health facilities by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) specifically for PMTCT. The priority accorded to HIV-focused services over other programs where resources are limited has been found in other studies conducted in Malawi as well [ 14 ]. It is clear that throughout the health system in the district there is need for a greater appreciation amongst staff of the importance of providing HIV testing to malnourished children and that HIV testing is an important entry point to other services such as ART which are critical to survival of such children.…”

Power and Agenda-Setting in Tanzanian Health Policy: An Analysis of Stakeholder Perspectives

“…13,59 This idea is supported by a broad base of literature stating that significant aid flows from donor organizations largely influence the national strategies of recipient countries. 2,3,10,11,32,35,49,50 This does not necessarily mean that donors always have the largest say, or that they are the ones who make the final decisions, but there is clearly an imbalanced interplay between donor and recipient. Ownership of development priorities is, therefore, muddled and negotiations can often be laden with unhelpful backchannel arguments, leading to an increase in fungibility when donors get their way.…”

“…Despite this shift, the exact influence of foreign stakeholders on national policies remains inconclusive, and further research into this area is essential for determining how donors and collaborators can best approach low-income countries. 3,7 Numerous studies have described the economic and political factors involved in priority-setting [8][9][10] and donor influence and coordination [11][12][13][14] on policy-making in low-income countries. However, there remains a gap in understanding the provenance of power within the donor-recipient relationship, how it is employed by various actors, and whether there are factors that can increase transparency and accountability.…”

Health financing at district level in Malawi: an analysis of the distribution of funds at two points in time

“…( Mayhew 2003 ). Other studies have highlighted the risks of reliance on donor funding pushing funding decisions away from local communities, with resource allocation and funding decisions being driven by donors ( Jenniskens et al 2012 ), and the potential misalignment of priorities ( Stierman et al 2013 ). We found evidence that districts in Malawi had some influence over how donor funding was used, and that external funding was allocated more equitably than other financing sources at district level.…”