Abstract

A decade ago, the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (PMNCH) was established to combat the growing fragmentation of global health action into uncoordinated, issue-specific efforts. Inspired by dominant global public-private partnerships for health, the PMNCH brought together previously competing advocacy coalitions for safe motherhood and child survival and attracted support from major donors, foundations and professional bodies. Today, its founders highlight its achievements in generating priority for ‘MNCH’, encouraging integrated health systems thinking and demonstrating the value of collaboration in global health endeavours. Against this dominant discourse on the success of the PMNCH, this article shows that rhetoric in support of partnership and integration often masks continued structural drivers and political dynamics that bias the global health field towards vertical goals. Drawing on ethnographic research, this article examines the Safe Motherhood Initiative’s evolution into the PMNCH as a response to the competitive forces shaping the current global health field. Despite many successes, the PMNCH has struggled to resolve historically entrenched programmatic and ideological divisions between the maternal and child health advocacy coalitions. For the Safe Motherhood Initiative, the cost of operating within an extremely competitive policy arena has involved a partial renouncement of ambitions to broader social transformations in favour of narrower, but feasible and ‘sellable’ interventions. A widespread perception that maternal health remains subordinated to child health even within the Partnership has elicited self-protective responses from the safe motherhood contingent. Ironically, however, such responses may accentuate the kind of fragmentation to global health governance, financing and policy solutions that the Partnership was intended to challenge. The article contributes to the emerging critical ethnographic literature on global health initiatives by highlighting how integration may only be possible with a more radical conceptualization of global health governance.

Highlights

  • In 1987, the Safe Motherhood Initiative (SMI) was launched to bring attention to the ‘neglected tragedy’ of maternal mortality, amidst frustration that the M in MCH—maternal and child health—had been marginalized by the prevailing focus on child survival in international health efforts (Rosenfield and Maine 1985; Starrs 1987)

  • We worked as researchers within an interdisciplinary Research Programme Consortium on maternal and newborn health funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID), which gave us access to debates about the PMNCH as they played out within expert communities and at focusing events, such as the first PMNCH high-level meeting in India in 2005

  • According to informants who had worked within international health at the time, by the early 1980s international public health specialists started voicing concern that maternal health was being neglected in favour of child health

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In 1987, the Safe Motherhood Initiative (SMI) was launched to bring attention to the ‘neglected tragedy’ of maternal mortality, amidst frustration that the M in MCH—maternal and child health—had been marginalized by the prevailing focus on child survival in international health efforts (Rosenfield and Maine 1985; Starrs 1987). First is the long-standing recognition that global health initiatives have often been unproductively fragmented according to disease-based expertise and that to remedy this problem, greater attention to ‘integration’ at the level of policy, governance, financing strategies, research and actual programme implementation is needed (Travis et al 2004; McCoy 2009; Atun et al 2010). Much of this debate about integration concerns how to reconcile the tension between narrowly targeted interventions and those providing broader system-wide support (Buffardi 2014). The two largest partnerships, the Global Fund and GAVI (the Vaccine Alliance), almost single-handedly brought about the 4-fold increase in development assistance to the health sector between 1999 and 2005 (Ravishankar et al 2009)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call