Africa and the donor community: from conditionality to partnership

Kayizzi-Mugerwa, Steve

doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-1328(199803/04)10:2<219::aid-jid525>3.0.co;2-w

Cited by 21 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there are extensive critiques of this change [37–39], in particular questioning the extent to which these newly-styled ‘partnerships’ place both the high and lower income countries on an equal footing. Whilst there is overt importance placed upon the idea of recipient ‘ownership’, with the World Bank [40] stating ‘the need to put committed developing country governments and their people at the centre of their development process’, even the more ardent defenders [41] of this shift towards ‘partnerships’ have highlighted the inherent challenge.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do International Health Partnerships contribute to reverse innovation? a mixed methods study of THET-supported partnerships in the UK

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundInternational health partnerships (IHPs) are changing, with an increased emphasis on mutual accountability and joint agenda setting for both the high- and the low- or middle-income country (LMIC) partners. There is now an important focus on the bi-directionality of learning however for the UK partners, this typically focuses on learning at the individual level, through personal and professional development. We sought to evaluate whether this learning also takes the shape of ‘Reverse Innovation’ –when an idea conceived in a low-income country is subsequently adopted in a higher-income country.MethodsThis mixed methods study used an initial scoping survey of all the UK-leads of the Tropical Health Education Trust (THET)-supported International Health Partnerships (n = 114) to ascertain the extent to which the IHPs are or have been vehicles for Reverse Innovation. The survey formed the sampling frame for further deep-dive interviews to focus on volunteers’ experiences and attitudes to learning from LMICs. Interviews of IHP leads (n = 12) were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Survey data was analysed descriptively. Interview transcripts were coded thematically, using an inductive approach.ResultsSurvey response rate was 27% (n = 34). The majority (70%) strongly agreed that supporting LMIC partners best described the mission of the partnership but only 13% of respondents strongly agreed that learning about new innovations and models was a primary mission of their partnership. Although more than half of respondents reported having observed innovative practice in the LMIC, only one IHP respondent indicated that this has led to Reverse Innovation. Interviews with a sample of survey respondents revealed themes primarily around how learning is conceptualised, but also a central power imbalance between the UK and LMIC partners. Paternalistic notions of knowledge could be traced to partnership power dynamics and latent attitudes to LMICs.ConclusionsGiven the global flow of innovation, if High-income countries (HICs) are to benefit from LMIC practices, it is paramount to keep an open mind about where such learning can come from. Making the potential for learning more explicit and facilitating innovation dissemination upon return will ultimately underpin the success of adoption.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%