↓ Skip to main content

Health financing policies in Sub-Saharan Africa: government ownership or donors’ influence? A scoping review of policymaking processes

Overview of attention for article published in Global Health Research and Policy, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#17 of 262)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
46 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
236 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Health financing policies in Sub-Saharan Africa: government ownership or donors’ influence? A scoping review of policymaking processes
Published in
Global Health Research and Policy, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s41256-017-0043-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lara Gautier, Valéry Ridde

Abstract

The rise on the international scene of advocacy for universal health coverage (UHC) was accompanied by the promotion of a variety of health financing policies. Major donors presented health insurance, user fee exemption, and results-based financing policies as relevant instruments for achieving UHC in Sub-Saharan Africa. The "donor-driven" push for policies aiming at UHC raises concerns about governments' effective buy-in of such policies. Because the latter has implications on the success of such policies, we searched for evidence of government ownership of the policymaking process. We conducted a scoping review of the English and French literature from January 2001 to December 2015 on government ownership of decision-making on policies aiming at UHC in Sub-Saharan Africa. Thirty-five (35) results were retrieved. We extracted, synthesized and analyzed data in order to provide insights on ownership at five stages of the policymaking process: emergence, formulation, funding, implementation, and evaluation. The majority of articles (24/35) showed mixed results (i.e. ownership was identified at one or more levels of policymaking process but not all) in terms of government ownership. Authors of only five papers provided evidence of ownership at all reviewed policymaking stages. When results demonstrated some lack of government ownership at any of the five stages, we noticed that donors did not necessarily play a role: other actors' involvement was contributing to undermining government-owned decision-making, such as the private sector. We also found evidence that both government ownership and donors' influence can successfully coexist. Future research should look beyond indicators of government ownership, by analyzing historical factors behind the imbalance of power between the different actors during policy negotiations. There is a need to investigate how some national actors become policy champions and thereby influence policy formulation. In order to effectively achieve government ownership of financing policies aiming at UHC, we recommend strengthening the State's coordination and domestic funding mobilization roles, together with securing a higher involvement of governmental (both political and technical) actors by donors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 236 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 236 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 44 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 8%
Researcher 17 7%
Student > Postgraduate 15 6%
Other 34 14%
Unknown 71 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 41 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 35 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 17 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Other 28 12%
Unknown 78 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2022.
All research outputs
#863,110
of 25,292,378 outputs
Outputs from Global Health Research and Policy
#17
of 262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,772
of 323,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Health Research and Policy
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,378 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them