This article explores the neoliberal cooptation of social justice-oriented global health policies over the last three decades, from primary health care and 'health for all' to various contemporary so-called 'health equity' initiatives, such as Universal Health Coverage and 'health convergence'. The authors illustrate and contextualize the different periods and approaches with examples from a range of Latin American countries, drawing on diverse political experiences and social struggles in the health arena. The analysis concludes with reflections about the region's experiences of resisting and challenging the neoliberal health agenda, in spite of domestic and global environments that have constrained these efforts, past and present. In this sense, the struggle for bona fide equity in health and health policy remains an important and ongoing priority.Our thanks go to Mariajosé Aguilera, Esperanza Krementsova, Ramya Kumar, Devaki Nambiar, the anonymous reviewers and the editors of Development and Change. Development and Change 47(4): 734-759.
Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for a systems thinking approach to health systems strengthening to increase adoption of evidence-based interventions (EBI). The Integrative Systems Praxis for Implementation Research (INSPIRE) methodology operationalizes the WHO systems thinking framework to meet cervical cancer elimination-early detection and treatment (CC-EDT) goals.Methods: Using a systems thinking approach and grounded in the consolidated framework for implementation research, INSPIRE integrates multiple research methodologies and evaluation frameworks into a multilevel implementation strategy.Results: In phase I (creating a shared understanding), soft systems methodology and pathway analysis are used to create a shared visual understanding of the CC-EDT system, incorporating diverse stakeholder perspectives of the "what, how, and why" of system behavior. Phase II (finding leverage) facilitates active stake-holder engagement in knowledge transfer and decision-making using deliberative dialogues and multiple scenario analyses. Phase III (acting strategically) represents stakeholder-engaged implementation planning, using well-defined implementation strategies of education, training, and infrastructure development. In phase IV (learning and adapting), evaluation of key performance indicators via a reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance framework is reviewed by stakeholder teams, who continuously adapt implementation plans to improve system effectiveness.Conclusions: The INSPIRE methodology is a generalizable approach to context-adapted implementation of EBIs.Impact: Replacing static dissemination of implementation "roadmaps" with learning health systems through the integration of systems thinking and participatory action research, INSPIRE facilitates the development of scalable and sustainable implementation strategies adapted to local contexts.
The presumed global consensus on achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC) masks crucial issues regarding the principles and politics of what constitutes “universality” and what matters, past and present, in the struggle for health (care) justice. This article focuses on three dimensions of the problematic: 1) we unpack the rhetoric of UHC in terms of each of its three components: universal, health, and coverage; 2) paying special attention to Latin America, we revisit the neoliberal coup d’état against past and contemporary struggles for health justice, and we consider how the current neoliberal phase of capitalism has sought to arrest these struggles, co-opt their language, and narrow their vision; and 3) we re-imagine the contemporary challenges/dilemmas concerning health justice, transcending the false technocratic consensus around UHC and re-infusing the profoundly political nature of this struggle. In sum, as with the universe writ large, a range of matters matter: socio-political contexts at national and international levels, agenda-setting power, the battle over language, real policy effects, conceptual narratives, and people’s struggles for justice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.