James Smith

African trypanosomiasis has been labelled as a ‘tool-deficient’ disease. This article reflects on the role that Product Development Partnerships (PDPs) have played in delivering new tools and innovations for the control and elimination of the African trypanosomiases. We analysed three product development partnerships—DNDi, FIND and GALVmed—that focus on delivering new drugs, diagnostic tests, and animal health innovations, respectively. We interviewed key informants within each of the organisations to understand how they delivered new innovations. While it is too early (and beyond the scope of this article) to assess the role of these three organisations in accelerating the elimination of the African trypanosomiases, all three organisations have been responsible for delivering new innovations for diagnosis and treatment through brokering and incentivising innovation and private sector involvement. It is doubtful that these innovations would have been delivered without them. To varying degrees, all three organisations are evolving towards a greater brokering role, away from only product development, prompted by donors. On balance, PDPs have an important role to play in delivering health innovations, and donors need to reflect on how best to incentivise them to focus and continue to deliver new products.

Neglected Tropical Diseases and Equity in the Post-2015 Health Agenda The IDS Bulletin is an open access, peer-reviewed journal exploring emerging international development topics.

While women in pastoralist communities are key stakeholders in the production of milk and dairy products for income generation, they are largely ignored in other areas of development such as health. The need to involve women self-help groups, in pastoralist areas in both animal health and human health development programmes, is essential, particularly given the high incidence of zoonotic diseases in these communities (Maudlin I, Eisler MC and Welburn SC, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1530):2777-2787, 2009). Understanding the process and impact of social networks on livelihoods is essential for any development programme that aims to prevent and control zoonotic diseases. This study examines the roles and responsibilities of women self-help groups in Kachia Grazing Reserve and Bokkos, Jos Plateau, Nigeria. The findings show that groups promoting social, physical and psychological health strongly motivated women’s involvement in self-help groups. Self-help activities showed commitment to effect a change in their livelihoods, despite constraining environmental, cultural and social factors. Engagement of women’s self-help groups in livestock development programmes offers a powerful instrument for driving forward the One Health practice in pastoralist communities, promoting human, animal and environmental health and well-being.

The recent adoption of the World Health Assembly Resolution 66.12 for neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) in May 2013 is an important turning point for advocacy regarding a number of endemic zoonotic infections, defined by the World Health Organization as the neglected zoonotic diseases (NZDs). In addition to NTD-listed zoonoses such as rabies, echinococcosis (hydatid disease), leishmaniasis, Human African trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness) and Taenia solium cysticercosis, the NZDs also include important bacterial zoonoses such as anthrax, bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis. To date, analysis of the processes that prioritize, develop and deliver zoonoses control programmes in many low- and middle-income countries is lacking, despite its potential to highlight significant evidence gaps and institutional constraints to the intersectoral approach required for their control. Policy process analysis was conducted via a series of semi-structured interviews with key policy actors within various ministries and institutes in Uganda and Nigeria. The study concluded that despite the rhetoric around ‘linear’ models of health policy development promoting consultation with a wide range of national stakeholders, the decision-making process for zoonotic disease control appears instead overtly influenced by the external political economy of trending pandemic threats, often overlooking national and regional zoonoses priorities. The inclusion of political systems remains a key factor in the zoonoses analysis matrix, enhancing our understanding of the intersectoral and transdisciplinary approaches required for their control. The authors consider policy process analysis to be a fundamental first step of any attempt to holistically strengthen human and animal health systems in a development context, particularly regarding the promotion of integrated control policies for regionally important zoonoses under the growing One Health movement.

The recent emergence of zoonotic diseases such as Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) have contributed to dominant Global Health narratives around health securitisation and pandemic preparedness, calling for greater co-operation between the health, veterinary and environmental sectors in the ever-evolving One Health movement. A decade later, One Health advocates face increasing pressure to translate the approach from theory into action. A qualitative case study methodology was used to examine the emerging relationships between international One Health dialogue and its practical implementation in the African health policy context. A series of Key Informant Interviews (n = 32) with policy makers, government officials and academics in Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda are presented as three separate case studies. Each case examines a significant aspect of One Health operationalisation, framed around the control of both emerging and Neglected Zoonotic Diseases including HPAI, Human African Trypanosomiasis and rabies. The research found that while there is general enthusiasm and a strong affirmative argument for adoption of One Health approaches in Africa, identifying alternative contexts away from a narrow focus on pandemics will help broaden its appeal, particularly for national or regionally significant endemic and neglected diseases not usually addressed under a “global” remit. There is no ‘one size fits all’ approach to achieving the intersectoral collaboration, significant resource mobilisation and political co-operation required to realise a One Health approach. Individual country requirements cannot be underestimated, dismissed or prescribed in a top down manner. This article contributes to the growing discussion regarding not whether One Health should be operationalised, but how this may be achieved. The One Health movement requires more robust evidence around its practical implementation if it is to truly become a way forwards for addressing health issues at the human, animal and ecosystem interface. The research in this paper discusses some of the recent successes and challenges with both Emerging and Neglected zoonoses in the sub-Saharan Africa context. Through speaking to various human and animal health practitioners and policy makers in Uganda, Nigeria and Tanzania, the authors have created three case studies highlighting the various successes of the approach to date, but also clarifying areas where the approach will take longer to implement, often as a result of the wide institutional and policy changes required in many countries. The authors conclude that whilst the “goodwill” is certainly there, the reality of planning, executing and budgeting for joint interventions – particularly at the national or regional level – proves in many cases more difficult than first thought. It is hoped however that through gaining better insight from those charged with the decision-making in these countries, One Health practitioners will be encouraged to build on the momentum through addressing some of the issues that arise with its implementation.

Progress toward meeting Millennium Development Goal 5, which aims to improve maternal and reproductive health outcomes, is behind schedule. This is despite ever increasing volumes of official development aid targeting the goal, calling into question the distribution and efficacy of aid. The 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness represented a global commitment to reform aid practices in order to improve development outcomes, encouraging a shift toward collaborative aid arrangements which support the national plans of aid recipient countries (and discouraging unaligned donor projects). We conducted a systematic review to summarise the evidence of the impact on MDG 5 outcomes of official development aid delivered in line with Paris aid effectiveness principles and to compare this with the impact of aid in general on MDG 5 outcomes. Searches of electronic databases identified 30 studies reporting aid-funded interventions designed to improve maternal and reproductive health outcomes. Aid interventions appear to be associated with small improvements in the MDG indicators, although it is not clear whether changes are happening because of the manner in which aid is delivered. The data do not allow for a meaningful comparison between Paris style and general aid. The review identified discernible gaps in the evidence base on aid interventions targeting MDG 5, notably on indicators MDG 5.4 (adolescent birth rate) and 5.6 (unmet need for family planning). This review presents the first systematic review of the impact of official development aid delivered according to the Paris principles and aid delivered outside this framework on MDG 5 outcomes. Its findings point to major gaps in the evidence base and should be used to inform new approaches and methodologies aimed at measuring the impact of official development aid.