Civil society influence on global health policy

CSOs have become increasingly influential in global policy processes. The UN draws information and expertise from CSOs and increasingly integrates CSO inputs and collaboration in UN processes. In relation to global health policy, CSOs have intervened around trade agreements; drug prices and treatment access; tobacco control; patient rights; promotion of breastfeeding and control of infant formula; rights of people with HIV/AIDS, and primary health care. Civil society visibility and influence in health policy has grown, with the growth in capacity and increasingly widely connected networks of civil society, supported by an expansion in access to information and increased concerted action.

This paper reviews literature on CSO influence on global health policy. While this paper followed the search criteria used in other papers, viz. publicly accessible or published research on the theme area, it also included review and position papers on global policies from CSOs and descriptions of global policy processes, given the nature of the theme, the paucity of traditional research and the wider use of social science and content analysis in this area. This paper discusses the findings on how civil society is intervening in global policy processes, from what sections of civil society, through what processes, using what evidence and with what impact. The overview discusses the knowledge gained and the knowledge gaps in our understanding of civil society influences on global health policy processes. (Introduction)

The largely descriptive research to date provides general insights, but leaves largely unanswered the analysis of the determinants of effective outcomes of CSO intervention in global health policy. Most importantly, the literature signals a need for research to explore further the differential access by different types of CSOs to policy processes and its impact on policy interests and outcomes. In particular, evidence of the differential access to global health policy processes between CSOs (largely Northern) that comment greater access to processes, power and resources compared to those without (largely Southern) needs to be further explored. This raises research questions in terms of the impact on gender, economic and political equity in CSO participation in health policy and on global health policy outcomes.

(Conclusion)