scholarly journals What makes advocacy work? Stakeholders’ voices and insights from prioritisation of Maternal and Child Health programme in Nigeria

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Uzochukwu ◽  
Chioma Onyedinma ◽  
Chinyere Okeke ◽  
Obinna Onwujekwe ◽  
Ana Manzano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Child Health ◽  
Health Professional ◽  
Maternal And Child Health ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
The Political ◽  
Professional Groups ◽  
The Media ◽  
Effective Advocacy ◽  
And Child Health ◽  
Health Programme

Abstract Background: The Nigerian government introduced and implemented a health programme to improve maternal and child health (MCH) called Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment programme for MCH (SURE-P/MCH). It ran from 2012 and ended abruptly in 2015 and was followed by increased advocacy for sustaining the MCH (antenatal, delivery, postnatal and immunization) services as a policy priority. Advocacy is important in allowing social voice, facilitating prioritization, and bringing different forces/actors together. Therefore, the study set out to understand how advocacy works - through understanding what effective advocacy implementation processes comprise and what mechanisms are triggered by which contexts to produce the intended outcomes. Methods: The study used a Realist Evaluation design through a mixed quantitative and qualitative methods case study approach. The programme theory (PT) was developed from three substantive social theories (power politics, media influence communication theory, and the three-streams theory of agenda-setting), data and programme design documentation, and subsequently tested. We report information from 22 key informant interviews including national and State policy and law makers, policy implementers, CSOs, Development partners, NGOs, health professional groups, and media practitioners and review of relevant documents on advocacy events post-SURE-P. Results: Key advocacy organizations and individuals including health professional groups, the media, civil society organizations, powerful individuals, and policymakers were involved in advocacy activities. The nature of their engagement included organizing workshops, symposiums, town hall meetings, individual meetings, press conferences, demonstrations, and engagements with media. Effective advocacy mechanism involved alliance brokering to increase influence, the media supporting and engaging in advocacy, and the use of champions, influencers, and spouses (Leadership and Elite Gendered Power Dynamics). The key contextual influences which determined the effectiveness of advocacy measures for MCH included the political cycle, availability of evidence on the issue, networking with powerful and interested champions, and alliance building in advocacy. All these enhanced the entrenchment of MCH on the political and financial agenda at the State and Federal levels. Conclusions: Our result suggest that advocacy can be a useful tool to bring together different forces by allowing expression of voices and ensuring accountability of different actors including policymakers. In the context of poor health outcomes, interest from policymakers and politicians in MCH, combined with advocacy from key policy actors armed with evidence, can improve prioritization and sustained implementation of MCH services.

scholarly journals What makes advocacy work? Stakeholders’ voices and insights from prioritisation of maternal and child health programme in Nigeria

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Uzochukwu ◽  
Chioma Onyedinma ◽  
Chinyere Okeke ◽  
Obinna Onwujekwe ◽  
Ana Manzano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Child Health ◽  
Health Professional ◽  
Maternal And Child Health ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
The Political ◽  
Professional Groups ◽  
The Media ◽  
Effective Advocacy ◽  
And Child Health ◽  
Health Programme

Abstract Background The Nigerian government introduced and implemented a health programme to improve maternal and child health (MCH) called Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment programme for MCH (SURE-P/MCH). It ran from 2012 and ended abruptly in 2015 and was followed by increased advocacy for sustaining the MCH (antenatal, delivery, postnatal and immunization) services as a policy priority. Advocacy is important in allowing social voice, facilitating prioritization, and bringing different forces/actors together. Therefore, the study set out to understand how advocacy works - through understanding what effective advocacy implementation processes comprise and what mechanisms are triggered by which contexts to produce the intended outcomes. Methods The study used a Realist Evaluation design through a mixed quantitative and qualitative methods case study approach. The programme theory (PT) was developed from three substantive social theories (power politics, media influence communication theory, and the three-streams theory of agenda-setting), data and programme design documentation, and subsequently tested. We report information from 22 key informant interviews including national and State policy and law makers, policy implementers, CSOs, Development partners, NGOs, health professional groups, and media practitioners and review of relevant documents on advocacy events post-SURE-P. Results Key advocacy organizations and individuals including health professional groups, the media, civil society organizations, powerful individuals, and policymakers were involved in advocacy activities. The nature of their engagement included organizing workshops, symposiums, town hall meetings, individual meetings, press conferences, demonstrations, and engagements with media. Effective advocacy mechanism involved alliance brokering to increase influence, the media supporting and engaging in advocacy, and the use of champions, influencers, and spouses (Leadership and Elite Gendered Power Dynamics). The key contextual influences which determined the effectiveness of advocacy measures for MCH included the political cycle, availability of evidence on the issue, networking with powerful and interested champions, and alliance building in advocacy. All these enhanced the entrenchment of MCH on the political and financial agenda at the State and Federal levels. Conclusions Our result suggest that advocacy can be a useful tool to bring together different forces by allowing expression of voices and ensuring accountability of different actors including policymakers. In the context of poor health outcomes, interest from policymakers and politicians in MCH, combined with advocacy from key policy actors armed with evidence, can improve prioritization and sustained implementation of MCH services.

scholarly journals What makes advocacy work? Stakeholders’ voices and insights from prioritisation of Maternal and Child Health programme in Nigeria

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Uzochukwu ◽  
Chioma Onyedinma ◽  
Chinyere Okeke ◽  
Obinna Onwujekwe ◽  
Ana Manzano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Child Health ◽  
Maternal And Child Health ◽  
Communication Theory ◽  
Realist Evaluation ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
The Political ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
The Media ◽  
Effective Advocacy ◽  
And Child Health

Abstract Background: The Nigerian government introduced and implemented health programmes to improve maternal and child health (MCH) called Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment programme for MCH (SURE-P/MCH). It ran from 2012 and ended abruptly in 2015 and was followed by increased advocacy for sustaining the MCH as a policy priority. Advocacy is important in allowing social voice, facilitating prioritization and bringing different forces/actors together. Therefore, the study set out to unpack how advocacy works - through understanding what effective advocacy implementation processes comprise and what mechanisms are triggered by which contexts to produce the intended outcome Methods: The study used a Realist Evaluation through a mixed quantitative and qualitative methods case study approach. The advocacy programme theory (PT) was developed from the literature (three substantive social theories of power politics, media influence communication theory and the three-streams theory of agenda setting), data and programme design documentation. We report information from 22 key informant interviews at both National and sub-national levels and review of relevant documents on advocacy events post-SURE-P. Results: Key advocacy organizations and individuals including health professional groups, the media, civil society organizations, powerful individuals and policy makers were involved in advocacy activities. The nature of their engagement included organizing workshops, symposium, town hall meetings, individual meetings, press conferences, demonstrations, and engagements with media. Effective advocacy mechanism involves alliance brokering to increase influence, the media supporting and engaging in advocacy, and use of champions, influencers and spouses (Leadership and Elite Gendered Power Dynamics). The key contextual influences which determined the effectiveness of advocacy measures for MCH include the political cycle, availability of evidence on the issue, networking with powerful and interested champions and alliance building in advocacy. All these enhanced the entrenchment of MCH on the political and financial agenda Conclusions: Advocacy is a useful tool to bring together different forces through allowing expression of voices and ensuring accountability. In the context of poor health outcomes, interest from policymakers and politicians in MCH, combined with advocacy from key policy actors and stakeholders armed with evidence, can lead to prioritization and sustained implementation of MCH services within the context of UHC

scholarly journals What makes advocacy work? Stakeholders’ voices and insights from prioritisation of Maternal and Child Health programme in Nigeria

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Uzochukwu ◽  
Chioma Onyedinma ◽  
Chinyere Okeke ◽  
Obinna Onwujekwe ◽  
Ana Manzano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Child Health ◽  
Maternal And Child Health ◽  
Realist Evaluation ◽  
The Political ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Programme Theory ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
Effective Advocacy ◽  
And Child Health ◽  
Health Programme

Abstract Background : The Nigerian government introduced and implemented a health programme to improve maternal and child health (MCH) called Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment programme for MCH (SURE-P/MCH). It ran from 2012 and ended abruptly in 2015.This was followed by increased advocacy for sustaining the MCH (antenatal, delivery, postnatal and immunization) services as a policy priority. Advocacy is important in allowing social voice, facilitating prioritization, and bringing different forces/actors together. Therefore, the study set out to understand how advocacy works - through understanding what effective advocacy implementation processes comprise and what mechanisms are triggered by which contexts to produce the intended outcomes. Methods: The study used Realist Evaluation design through a mixed methods case study approach. The programme theory was developed from three substantive social theories (power politics, media influence communication, and the three-streams theory of agenda-setting), data and programme design documentation, and subsequently tested. We report information from 22 key informant interviews including national and State policy and law makers, policy implementers, CSOs, Development partners, NGOs, health professional groups, media practitioners and review of relevant documents on advocacy events post-SURE-P. Results: Key advocacy organizations and individuals were involved in advocacy activities. The nature of their engagement included organizing workshops, symposiums, town hall meetings, individual meetings, press conferences, demonstrations, and engagements with media. Effective advocacy mechanism involved alliance brokering to increase influence, the media supporting and engaging in advocacy, and the use of champions, influencers, and spouses (Leadership and Elite Gendered Power Dynamics). The key contextual influences which determined the effectiveness of advocacy measures for MCH included the political cycle, availability of evidence on the issue, networking with policy champions, and alliance building in advocacy. All these enhanced the entrenchment of MCH on the political and financial agenda at the State and Federal levels. Conclusions: Our result suggest that advocacy can be a useful tool to bring together different forces by allowing expression of voices and ensuring accountability of different actors. In the context of poor health outcomes, interest from policymakers and politicians in MCH, combined with advocacy from key policy actors, can improve prioritization and sustained implementation of MCH services.

scholarly journals Evidence-based budgeting policy in maternal and child health programme: do they work?

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (S2) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Faozi Kurniawan ◽  
Deni Harbianto ◽  
Digna Purwaningrum ◽  
Tiara Marthias
Keyword(s):  
Child Health ◽  
Maternal And Child Health ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Child Health Programme ◽  
And Child Health ◽  
Health Programme

Interrupted breast-feeding: the experience of women-mothers

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 230
Author(s):  
Ana Paula Lima ◽  
Marly Javorski
Keyword(s):  
Child Health ◽  
Health Professional ◽  
Breast Feeding ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Maternal And Child Health ◽  
Ethics Committee ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
Investigación Cualitativa ◽  
Las Mujeres ◽  
And Child Health

ABSTRACTObjective: to analyze the perception of women who had precociously weaned the children on the experience of the breastfeeding. Methodology: this is about a research from qualitative approach, performed in a Baby Friendly Hospital, in Recife city, Pernambuco, and had as participants nine mothers who were with their six-months-old babies. Data had been collected through half-structuralized interview and after, we analyzed them according to the techniques of thematic analysis. This study has been approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Agamenon Magalhães Hospital in Recife city (protocol number 149/05). Results: the analysis of subjects disclosed that women, although knowing and repeating the speech technician concerning to breastfeeding, do not suckle the children until the sixth month of life. All, at first, told causes that let them free of the decision to wean. The analysis also emphasized women re-interpret the meanings of breastfeeding through the influence of third, this influence may be positive or negative in the course of lactation. Breast-feeding showed for these women as an experience that awakes ambivalent feelings, pleasant and at times and stressfull at others. Conclusion: while being a health professional, we need to relearn to hear the mothers and to promote the breastfeeding on the basis of reality of each woman, understanding that the practical of suckling the baby is also determined by the representations of the society where she is inserted. Descriptors: breastfeeding; weaning; maternal and child health. RESUMOObjetivos: analisar a percepção de mulheres, que desmamaram os filhos precocemente sobre a vivência da amamentação. Metodologia: pesquisa com abordagem qualitativa, realizada em um Hospital Amigo da Criança, em Recife, Pernambuco, tendo como sujeitos nove mães de bebês na faixa etária de zero até seis meses. Os dados foram coletados pela técnica de entrevista com roteiro semi-estruturado. Após a transcrição das entrevistas, estas foram analisadas segundo a técnica de análise temática. O projeto de pesquisa foi aprovado pelo Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa do Hospital Agamenon Magalhães em Recife (número de protocolo149/05). Resultados: a análise dos temas revelou que as mulheres, apesar de conhecerem o discurso técnico do aleitamento materno, não amamentam os filhos até o sexto mês de vida. Todas, a princípio, relataram causas que as isentavam da decisão de desmamar. Elas também re-interpretam os significados da amamentação por meio da influência de terceiros, podendo esta influência ser positiva ou negativa no curso da lactação. A amamentação revelou-se para estas mulheres como uma experiência que desperta sentimentos ambivalentes, ora agradável ora desconfortante. Conclusão: enquanto profissionais da saúde, precisamos re-aprender a ouvir as mulheres-mães e promover a amamentação com base na realidade de cada uma, compreendendo que a prática de aleitar o filho também é determinada pelas representações da sociedade em que está inserida. Descritores: aleitamento materno; desmame; saúde materno-infantil. RESUMENObjetivo: analizar la opinión de las mujeres, que habían destetado los niños precociously, en la experiencia del amamantamiento. Metodología: investigación cualitativa, celebrada en um Hospital Amigo del Niño, en Recife, Pernambuco, y lo tenía como los ciudadanos nueve madres de bebés en el etária congriegan hasta seis meses. Los datos habían sido recogidos por la técnica de entrevista con guión mitad-structuralized. Después de que la transcripción de las entrevistas, éstas hubiera sido analizada según técnica del análisis temático. El estudio fue aprobado por el Comité de Ética del Hosptial Agamenon Magalhães en Recife (númerod de registro 149/05). Resultados: el análisis de los temas divulgó que las mujeres, aunque conocer al técnico del discurso del aleitamento maternal, no amamantan los niños hasta el sexto mes de la vida. Todos, el principio, habían dicho a causas ese isentavam ellos de la decisión destetar. También invierten interpretación de los significados del amamantamiento por medio de la influencia del tercera, pudiendo esta influencia positiva o negativa a estar en el curso de la lactancia. Amamantamiento demostrado para estas mujeres como experiencia que despierta sensaciones ambivalentes, sin embargo desconfortante al menos agradable. Conclusión: mientras que son profesionales salud, necesitamos aprender de nuevo a oír a las mujer-madres y promover el amamantar en base de la realidad cada uno, entendiendo que la práctica del amamantar al niño también es determinado por las representaciones de la sociedad donde se inserta. Descriptores: lactancia materna; destete; salud materno-infantil. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document