Presentation to Asia Health Policy Program Palo Alto, CA 20 October 2011 ASIA PACIFIC OBSERVATORY ON HEALTH POLICIES AND SYSTEMS
Long history of trying to create an Asia Observatory Recent concerted effort by WHO, World Bank and ADB to advance the process Background
1. Builds upon the 13-year highly successful experience of the European Observatory (EO)* * Key Characteristics of the APO
2. Shared responsibility and ownership All partners share ownership of the APO, its identity and products Thus, no entity or group of entities “owns” the Observatory Key Characteristics of the APO
3. Will not substitute for routine activities of the individual partners Not a general purpose research organization investigating any and all health topics of interest Key Characteristics of the APO— What it will not do
4. Be a bridge between researchers and decision-makers to serve the policy needs of countries. Undertake comparative research on country health systems. Three main activities: HiTs ( in-depth profiles of health systems and policies, using a standardized template, adapted to the region) Thematic studies emerging out of comparative analyses Dissemination of the above Key Characteristics of the APO— What it will do
HiTs are the “bread and butter” observatory work. They can be used to: Examine different approaches to the organization, financing and delivery of health services and the role of key health system actors; Describe the institutional framework for and process, content and implementation of policy; Highlight challenges and areas requiring more detailed analysis; Health Systems in Transition (HiTs)
Provide a tool for disseminating information on health systems; Facilitate the exchange of reform experiences across countries Establish a baseline for assessing the impact of reforms; and Inform comparative analysis. HiTs continued
Consensus that APO can only succeed if there is: An independent, non-politicized research process underpinned by strong quality assurance mechanisms Financial sustainability (must cover the costs of doing business) Underlying Principles
Tripartite structure comprising a: Steering Committee Research Hubs and a Research Advisory Group Secretariat APO Governance
Guides the strategic direction of the Observatory, monitoring the implementation of its work plan and the quality of its products. Operates on the basis of consensus Annual membership fee of US$100,000 Governance— Steering Committee
Provide technical support and leadership and help to build capacity in country-based research teams, carry out studies directly, and engage with existing networks active in health systems research Three Research Hubs currently being considered Governance— Research Hubs
A core team of 4-5 researchers, working in their personal capacity, who have the dual function of: (a) advising on the process of quality control for Observatory research products, and (b) providing input on the strategic direction of the Observatory’s research agenda. Governance— Research Advisory Group
Responsible for the day-to-day management of the Observatory and its program of research. Run in a spirit of co-operation and partnership, with the Steering Committee guiding its work. Initially located in WPRO Office in Manila Governance— Secretariat
Countries: Hong Kong SAR, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand Organizations: Asian Development Bank, AusAid, The World Bank, WHO South-East Asia and Western Pacific Regional Offices Current Steering Committee Membership
APO formally established in Hong Kong in June 2011 Covers most Asia Pacific countries Research Hubs and RAG composition being decided Director position recently advertised Current Status
1. Politics, politics, and politics 2. Quality assurance 3. Comparable data Future Challenges
4. Bridging the gap between evidence and policy— “policy dialogue” How to populate the space between evidence and policy? Future Challenges continued
Bridging the gap continued-- Evidence side often does not have the entry point (or skills) to introduce evidence into policy making Key variables: Evidence quality and accessibility/interpretability Trust Timeliness Future Challenges continued
Comparative, transparent and peer reviewed Observatory style of working--researchers focused on policy relevance and involved in dissemination and policy engagement Concluding Remarks—Key Themes