Deutschland und die UN-Nachhaltigkeitsagenda 2016: noch lange nicht nachhaltig

Wird im Jahr 2030 kein Mensch mehr arm sein? Wird niemand mehr hungern müssen? Können alle Kinder wenigstens eine Grundschule besuchen? Konnten wir den Klimawandel abmildern, Städte nachhaltig umgestalten und die Ozeane schützen? Leben wir in friedlichen Demokratien, die die Menschenrechte zu Hause und über die eigenen Grenzen hinaus einhalten? Die 2030-Agenda der Vereinten Nationen und ihre 17 Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung versprechen die Transformation unserer Welt. Sie gelten für jedes Land, für die Länder des globalen Südens und des globalen Nordens, und damit auch für Deutschland. Angesprochen ist die ganze Bandbreite der Politik: Wirtschaft, Soziales, Umwelt, Finanzen, Agrar- und Verbraucherpolitik, Verkehr, Städtebau, Bildung und Gesundheit

Exploring health systems research and its influence on policy processes in low income countries

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The interface between research and policymaking in low-income countries is highly complex. The ability of health systems research to influence policy processes in such settings face numerous challenges. Successful analysis of the research-policy interface in these settings requires understanding of contextual factors as well as key influences on the interface. <it>Future Health Systems (FHS): Innovations for Equity </it>is a consortium conducting research in six countries in Asia and Africa. One of the three cross-country research themes of the consortium is analysis of the relationship between research (evidence) and policy making, especially their impact on the poor; insights gained in the initial conceptual phase of FHS activities can inform the global knowledge pool on this subject.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This paper provides a review of the research-policy interface in low-income countries and proposes a conceptual framework, followed by directions for empirical approaches. First, four developmental perspectives are considered: social institutional factors; virtual versus grassroots realities; science-society relationships; and construction of social arrangements. Building on these developmental perspectives three research-policy interface entry points are identified: 1. Recognizing policy as complex processes; 2. Engaging key stakeholders: decision-makers, providers, scientists, and communities; and 3. Enhancing accountability. A conceptual framework with three entry points to the research-policy interface – policy processes; stakeholder interests, values, and power; and accountability – within a context provided by four developmental perspectives is proposed. Potential empirical approaches to the research-policy interface are then reviewed. Finally, the value of such innovative empirical analysis is considered.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The purpose of this paper is to provide the background, conceptual framework, and key research directions for empirical activities focused on the research-policy interface in low income settings. The interface can be strengthened through such analysis leading to potential improvements in population health in low-income settings. Health system development cognizant of the myriad factors at the research-policy interface can form the basis for innovative future health systems.</p

Building health research systems to achieve better health

Health research systems can link knowledge generation with practical concerns to improve health and health equity. Interest in health research, and in how health research systems should best be organised, is moving up the agenda of bodies such as the World Health Organisation. Pioneering health research systems, for example those in Canada and the UK, show that progress is possible. However, radical steps are required to achieve this. Such steps should be based on evidence not anecdotes. Health Research Policy and Systems (HARPS) provides a vehicle for the publication of research, and informed opinion, on a range of topics related to the organisation of health research systems and the enormous benefits that can be achieved. Following the Mexico ministerial summit on health research, WHO has been identifying ways in which it could itself improve the use of research evidence. The results from this activity are soon to be published as a series of articles in HARPS. This editorial provides an account of some of these recent key developments in health research systems but places them in the context of a distinguished tradition of debate about the role of science in society. It also identifies some of the main issues on which 'research on health research' has already been conducted and published, in some cases in HARPS. Finding and retaining adequate financial and human resources to conduct health research is a major problem, especially in low and middle income countries where the need is often greatest. Research ethics and agenda-setting that responds to the demands of the public are issues of growing concern. Innovative and collaborative ways are being found to organise the conduct and utilisation of research so as to inform policy, and improve health and health equity. This is crucial, not least to achieve the health-related Millennium Development Goals. But much more progress is needed. The editorial ends by listing a wide range of topics related to the above priorities on which we hope to feature further articles in HARPS and thus contribute to an informed debate on how best to achieve such progress

The utilisation of health research in policy-making: Concepts, examples and methods of assessment

The importance of health research utilisation in policy-making, and of understanding the mechanisms involved, is increasingly recognised. Recent reports calling for more resources to improve health in developing countries, and global pressures for accountability, draw greater attention to research-informed policy-making. Key utilisation issues have been described for at least twenty years, but the growing focus on health research systems creates additional dimensions. The utilisation of health research in policy-making should contribute to policies that may eventually lead to desired outcomes, including health gains. In this article, exploration of these issues is combined with a review of various forms of policy-making. When this is linked to analysis of different types of health research, it assists in building a comprehensive account of the diverse meanings of research utilisation. Previous studies report methods and conceptual frameworks that have been applied, if with varying degrees of success, to record utilisation in policy-making. These studies reveal various examples of research impact within a general picture of underutilisation. Factors potentially enhancing utilisation can be identified by exploration of: priority setting; activities of the health research system at the interface between research and policy-making; and the role of the recipients, or 'receptors', of health research. An interfaces and receptors model provides a framework for analysis. Recommendations about possible methods for assessing health research utilisation follow identification of the purposes of such assessments. Our conclusion is that research utilisation can be better understood, and enhanced, by developing assessment methods informed by conceptual analysis and review of previous studies

Causes and differentials of childhood mortality in Iraq

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Limited information is available in Iraq regarding the causes of under-five mortality. The vital registration system is deficient in its coverage, particularly from rural areas where access to health services is limited and most deaths occur at home, i.e. outside the health system, and hence the cause of death goes unreported. Knowledge of patterns and trends in causes of under-five mortality is essential for decision-makers in assessing programmatic needs, prioritizing interventions, and monitoring progress. The aim of this study was to identify causes of under-five children deaths using a simplified verbal autopsy questionnaire.</p> <p>The objective was to define the leading symptoms and cause of death among Iraqi children from all regions of Iraq during 1994–1999.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>To determine the cause structure of child deaths, a simplified verbal autopsy questionnaire was used in interviews conducted in the Iraqi Child & Maternal Mortality Survey (ICMMS) 1999 national sample. All the mothers/caregivers of the deceased children were asked open-ended questions about the symptoms within the two weeks preceding death; they could mention more than one symptom.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The leading cause of death among under-five children was found to be childhood illnesses in 81.2%, followed by sudden death in 8.9% and accidents in 3.3%. Among under-five children dying of illnesses, cough and difficulty in breathing were the main symptoms preceding death in 34.0%, followed by diarrhea in 24.4%. Among neonates the leading cause was cough/and or difficulty in breathing in 42.3%, followed by sudden death in 11.9%, congenital abnormalities in 10.3% and prematurity in 10.2%. Diarrhea was the leading cause of death among infants in 49.8%, followed by cough and/or difficulty in breathing in 26.6%. Among children 12–59 months diarrhea was the leading cause of death in 43.4%, followed by accidents, injuries, and poisoning in 19.3%, then cough/difficulty in breathing in 14.8%.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In Iraq Under-five child mortality is one of the highest in the Middle East region; deaths during the neonatal period accounted for more than half of under-five children deaths highlighting an urgent need to introduce health interventions to improve essential neonatal care. Priority needs to be given to the prevention, early and effective treatment of neonatal conditions, diarrheal diseases, acute respiratory infections, and accidents. This study points to the need for further standardized assessments of under-5 mortality in Iraq.</p

Repurposing NGO data for better research outcomes: A scoping review of the use and secondary analysis of NGO data in health policy and systems research

Background Non-government organisations (NGOs) collect and generate vast amounts of potentially rich data, most of which are not used for research purposes. Secondary analysis of NGO data (their use and analysis in a study for which they were not originally collected) presents an important but largely unrealised opportunity to provide new research insights in critical areas including the evaluation of health policy and programmes. Methods A scoping review of the published literature was performed to identify the extent to which secondary analysis of NGO data has been used in health policy and systems research (HPSR). A tiered analytic approach provided a comprehensive overview and descriptive analyses of the studies which: 1) used data produced or collected by or about NGOs; 2) performed secondary analysis of the NGO data (beyond use of an NGO report as a supporting reference); 3) used NGO-collected clinical data. Results Of the 156 studies which performed secondary analysis of NGO-produced or collected data, 64% (n=100) used NGO-produced reports (e.g. to critique NGO activities and as a contextual reference) and 8% (n=13) analysed NGO-collected clinical data.. Of the studies, 55% investigated service delivery research topics, with 48% undertaken in developing countries and 17% in both developing and developed. NGO-collected clinical data enabled HPSR within marginalised groups (e.g. migrants, people in conflict-affected areas), with some limitations such as inconsistencies and missing data. Conclusion We found evidence that NGO-collected and produced data are most commonly perceived as a source of supporting evidence for HPSR and not as primary source data. However, these data can facilitate research in under-researched marginalised groups and in contexts that are hard to reach by academics, such as conflict-affected areas. NGO–academic collaboration could help address issues of NGO data quality to facilitate their more widespread use in research. Their use could enable relevant and timely research in the areas of health policy, programme evaluation and advocacy to improve health and reduce health inequalities, especially in marginalised groups and developing countries

Evaluation of Extension Reforms in Brazil

To evaluate the impacts of the rural extension policy (PNATER), five territories were selected in three different Brazilian states, including Alto Jequitinhonha (Minas Gerais State), Cantuquiriguaçu (Paraná State), Pontal do Paranapanema (São Paulo State), São Paulo’s Southwestern (São Paulo State), and Vale do Ribeira (Paraná State). An indicator system was elaborated to collect and analyze data from farmers and extension agents in each territory. 12 indicators were proposed to accomplish the desired evaluation. These indicators express the meaningful aspects of the extension reform policy document’s values, principles, and objectives. Data collection instruments were composed of questionnaires focusing on objective questions, allowing only closed answers to identify the interviewee’s perception of his or her reality. The possibilities for responses were elaborated on a five-point Likert scale—from the least to the greatest—asking respondents to indicate how much they agree or disagree, approve or disapprove, or believe to be true or false. The questionnaire for family farmers was composed of 56 questions, encompassing different indicators, among which three were specific for black rural and indigenous communities. The researchers also added questions from the Brazilian Food Insecurity Scale. In total researchers conducted 1,000 interviews with farmers and 87 interviews with extensionists (in some territories the goal of 20 interviews with the extensionists in each territory was not achieved due to the difficulty in contacting them or their unavailability in the study period) in the five territories between August 2014 to January 2015.</p

How should banks govern the environment? Challenging the construction of action versus veto

Over the last two decades, banks have been developing environmental credit risk assessment policies and procedures. Today, even NGOs who had been at the forefront of campaigns naming and shaming bad practices acknowledge banks are taking environmental risk management seriously. Nonetheless, they now challenge banks to go further, advocating a no harm approach based on a so-called veto of investments. The author draws a post-structuralist position on risk perception to argue a characterization of environmental governance in terms of action and veto may mislead debate. Instead, the author proposes the starting point for debate on the part banks can play in governing the environment lies in mutual agreement on precautionary action