Search

Background: Few studies look at policy making in the health sector in the aftermath of a conflict or crisis and even fewer specifically focus on Human Resources for Health, which is a critical domain for health sector performance. The main objective of the article is to shed light on the patterns and drivers of post-conflict policy-making. In particular, we explore whether the post-conflict period offers increased chances for the opening of 'windows for opportunity' for change and reform and the potential to reset health systems. Methods: This article uses a comparative policy analysis framework. It is based on qualitative data, collected using three main tools - stakeholder mapping, key informant interviews and document reviews - in Uganda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia and Zimbabwe. Results: We found that HRH challenges were widely shared across the four cases in the post-conflict period but that the policy trajectories were different - driven by the nature of the conflicts but also the wider context. Our findings suggest that there is no formula for whether or when a 'window of opportunity' will arise which allows health systems to be reset. Problems are well understood in all four cases but core issues - such as adequate pay, effective distribution and HRH management - are to a greater or lesser degree unresolved. These problems are not confined to post-conflict settings, but underlying challenges to addressing them - including fiscal space, political consensus, willingness to pursue public objectives over private, and personal and institutional capacity to manage technical solutions - are liable to be even more acute in these settings. The role of the MoH emerged as weaker than expected, while the shift from donor dependence was clearly not linear and can take a considerable time. Conclusions: Windows of opportunity for change and reform can occur but are by no means guaranteed by a crisis - rather they depend on a constellation of leadership, financing, and capacity. Recognition of urgency is certainly a facilitator but not sufficient alone. Post-conflict environments face particularly severe challenges to evidence-based policy making and policy implementation, which also constrain their ability to effectively use the windows which are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sierra Leone has faced a shortage and maldistribution of staff in its post-conflict period. This long-standing challenge is now exacerbated by the systemic shock and damage wrought by Ebola. This study aimed to investigate the importance of different motivation factors in rural areas in Sierra Leone and thus to contribute to better decisions on financial and non-financial incentive packages, here and in similar contexts.Methods: This article is based on participatory life histories, conducted in 2013 with 23 health workers (doctors, nurses, midwives and Community Health Officers) in four regions of Sierra Leone who had worked in the sector since 2000. Although the interviews covered a wide range of themes, here we present findings on motivating and demotivating factors for staff, especially those in rural areas, based on thematic analysis of transcripts.Results: Rural health workers face particular challenges, some of which stem from the difficult terrain, which add to common disadvantages of rural living (poor social amenities, etc.). Poor working conditions, emotional and financial costs of separation from families, limited access to training, longer working hours (due to staff shortages) and the inability to earn from other sources make working in rural areas less attractive. Moreover, rules on rotation which should protect staff from being left too long in rural areas are not reported to be respected. By contrast, poor management had more resonance in urban areas, with reports of poor delegation, favouritism and a lack of autonomy for staff. Tensions within the team over unclear roles and absenteeism are also significant demotivating factors in general.Conclusions: This study provides important policy-focused insights into motivation of health workers and can contribute towards building a resilient and responsive health system, incorporating the priorities and needs of health workers. Their voices and experiences should be taken into account as the post-Ebola landscape is shaped. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]