{"title":"'We thought supporting was strengthening': re-examining the role of external assistance for health systems strengthening in Zimbabwe post-COVID-19.","authors":"Alison T Mhazo, Charles C Maponga","doi":"10.1093/heapol/czae052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Zimbabwe has received substantial external assistance for health since the early 2000s, including funding earmarked for, or framed as, health systems strengthening (HSS). This study sought to examine whether external assistance has strengthened the health system (i.e. enabled comprehensive changes to health system performance drivers) or has just supported the health system (by increasing inputs and improving service coverage in the short term). Between August and October 2022, we conducted in-depth key informant interviews with 18 individuals and reviewed documents to understand: (1) whether external funding has supported or strengthened Zimbabwe's health system since the 2000s; (2) whether the experience of COVID-19 fosters a re-examination of what had been considered as HSS during the pre-pandemic era; and (3) areas to be reconsidered for HSS post COVID-19. Our findings suggest that external funders have supported Zimbabwe to control major epidemics and avert health system collapse. However, the COVID-19 pandemic showed that supporting the health system is not the same as strengthening it, as it became apparent at that time that the health sector is plagued with several system-wide bottlenecks. External funding is fragile and highly unsustainable, which reinforces the oft-ignored reality that HSS is a sovereign mandate of country-level authorities, and one that falls outside the core interests of external funders. The key positive lesson from the pandemic is that Zimbabwe is capable of raising domestic resources to fund HSS. However, there is no guarantee that such funding will be maintained. There is a need, then, to reconsider government's stewardship for HSS. External funders need to re-examine whether their funding really strengthens the national health system or just supports the country to provide basic services in their areas of interest.</p>","PeriodicalId":12926,"journal":{"name":"Health policy and planning","volume":" ","pages":"652-660"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11308609/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health policy and planning","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czae052","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Zimbabwe has received substantial external assistance for health since the early 2000s, including funding earmarked for, or framed as, health systems strengthening (HSS). This study sought to examine whether external assistance has strengthened the health system (i.e. enabled comprehensive changes to health system performance drivers) or has just supported the health system (by increasing inputs and improving service coverage in the short term). Between August and October 2022, we conducted in-depth key informant interviews with 18 individuals and reviewed documents to understand: (1) whether external funding has supported or strengthened Zimbabwe's health system since the 2000s; (2) whether the experience of COVID-19 fosters a re-examination of what had been considered as HSS during the pre-pandemic era; and (3) areas to be reconsidered for HSS post COVID-19. Our findings suggest that external funders have supported Zimbabwe to control major epidemics and avert health system collapse. However, the COVID-19 pandemic showed that supporting the health system is not the same as strengthening it, as it became apparent at that time that the health sector is plagued with several system-wide bottlenecks. External funding is fragile and highly unsustainable, which reinforces the oft-ignored reality that HSS is a sovereign mandate of country-level authorities, and one that falls outside the core interests of external funders. The key positive lesson from the pandemic is that Zimbabwe is capable of raising domestic resources to fund HSS. However, there is no guarantee that such funding will be maintained. There is a need, then, to reconsider government's stewardship for HSS. External funders need to re-examine whether their funding really strengthens the national health system or just supports the country to provide basic services in their areas of interest.
期刊介绍:
Health Policy and Planning publishes health policy and systems research focusing on low- and middle-income countries.
Our journal provides an international forum for publishing original and high-quality research that addresses questions pertinent to policy-makers, public health researchers and practitioners. Health Policy and Planning is published 10 times a year.