11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A missing piece in the Health for Peace agenda: gender diverse leadership and governance

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The purpose of this paper is to explore how gender diverse leadership and governance of health systems may contribute to the Health for Peace Agenda. Despite recent momentum, the evidence base to support, implement and evaluate ‘Health for Peace’ programmes remains limited and policy-makers in conflict settings do not consider peace when developing and implementing interventions and health policies. Through this analysis, we found that gender diverse leadership in health systems during active conflict offers greater prospects for sustainable peace and more equitable social economic recovery in the post-conflict period. Therefore, focusing on gender diversity of leadership and governance in health systems strengthening offers a novel way of linking peace and health, particularly in active conflict settings. While components of health systems are beginning to incorporate a gender lens, there remains significant room for improvement particularly in complex and protracted conflicts. Two case studies are explored, north-west Syria and Afghanistan, to highlight that an all-encompassing health systems focus may provide an opportunity for further understanding the link between gender, peace and health in active conflict and advocate for long-term investment in systems impacted by conflict. This approach may enable women and gender minorities to have a voice in the decision-making of health programmes and interventions that supports systems, and enables the community-led and context-specific knowledge and action required to address the root causes of inequalities and inequities in systems and societies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references48

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Health workers and the weaponisation of health care in Syria: a preliminary inquiry for The Lancet –American University of Beirut Commission on Syria

          The conflict in Syria presents new and unprecedented challenges that undermine the principles and practice of medical neutrality in armed conflict. With direct and repeated targeting of health workers, health facilities, and ambulances, Syria has become the most dangerous place on earth for health-care providers. The weaponisation of health care-a strategy of using people's need for health care as a weapon against them by violently depriving them of it-has translated into hundreds of health workers killed, hundreds more incarcerated or tortured, and hundreds of health facilities deliberately and systematically attacked. Evidence shows use of this strategy on an unprecedented scale by the Syrian Government and allied forces, in what human rights organisations described as a war-crime strategy, although all parties seem to have committed violations. Attacks on health care have sparked a large-scale exodus of experienced health workers. Formidable challenges face health workers who have stayed behind, and with no health care a major factor in the flight of refugees, the effect extends well beyond Syria. The international community has left these violations of international humanitarian and human rights law largely unanswered, despite their enormous consequences. There have been repudiated denunciations, but little action on bringing the perpetrators to justice. This inadequate response challenges the foundation of medical neutrality needed to sustain the operations of global health and humanitarian agencies in situations of armed conflict. In this Health Policy, we analyse the situation of health workers facing such systematic and serious violations of international humanitarian law. We describe the tremendous pressures that health workers have been under and continue to endure, and the remarkable resilience and resourcefulness they have displayed in response to this crisis. We propose policy imperatives to protect and support health workers working in armed conflict zones.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Rebuilding health systems to improve health and promote statebuilding in post-conflict countries: a theoretical framework and research agenda.

            Violent conflicts claim lives, disrupt livelihoods, and halt delivery of essential services, such as health care and education. Health systems are often devastated in conflicts as health professionals flee, infrastructure is destroyed, and the supply of drugs and supplies is halted. We propose that early reconstruction of a functioning, equitable health system in countries recovering from conflict is an investment with a range of benefits for post-conflict countries. Building on the growing literature about health systems as social and political institutions, we elaborate a logic model that outlines how health systems may contribute not only to improved health status but also potentially to broader statebuilding and enhanced prospects for peace. Specifically, we propose that careful design of the core elements of the health system by national governments and their development partners can promote reliable provision of essential health services while demonstrating a commitment to equity, strengthening government accountability to citizens, and building the capacity of government to manage core social programs. We review the conceptual basis and extant empirical evidence for these mechanisms, identify knowledge gaps, and suggest a research agenda.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The effects of armed conflict on the health of women and children

              Women and children bear substantial morbidity and mortality as a result of armed conflicts. This Series paper focuses on the direct (due to violence) and indirect health effects of armed conflict on women and children (including adolescents) worldwide. We estimate that nearly 36 million children and 16 million women were displaced in 2017, on the basis of international databases of refugees and internally displaced populations. From geospatial analyses we estimate that the number of non-displaced women and children living dangerously close to armed conflict (within 50 km) increased from 185 million women and 250 million children in 2000, to 265 million women and 368 million children in 2017. Women's and children's mortality risk from non-violent causes increases substantially in response to nearby conflict, with more intense and more chronic conflicts leading to greater mortality increases. More than 10 million deaths in children younger than 5 years can be attributed to conflict between 1995 and 2015 globally. Women of reproductive ages living near high intensity conflicts have three times higher mortality than do women in peaceful settings. Current research provides fragmentary evidence about how armed conflict indirectly affects the survival chances of women and children through malnutrition, physical injuries, infectious diseases, poor mental health, and poor sexual and reproductive health, but major systematic evidence is sparse, hampering the design and implementation of essential interventions for mitigating the harms of armed conflicts.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Glob Health
                BMJ Glob Health
                bmjgh
                bmjgh
                BMJ Global Health
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2059-7908
                2022
                5 October 2022
                : 7
                : Suppl 8
                : e007742
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of War Studies , King's College London , London, UK
                [2 ]Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University Singapore , Singapore
                [3 ]departmentSchool of Geography and the Environment , Oxford University , Oxford, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Kristen Meagher; kristen.meagher@ 123456kcl.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8060-0505
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3875-453X
                Article
                bmjgh-2021-007742
                10.1136/bmjgh-2021-007742
                9535196
                36210063
                0420e59a-f946-4ef0-ad85-5c76efbab9bb
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 17 October 2021
                : 03 December 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR);
                Award ID: 131207
                Categories
                Analysis
                1506
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                health systems
                health systems

                Comments

                Comment on this article