Explore the vast range of titles available.

A Health in All Policies approach requires creating and sustaining intersectoral partnerships for promoting population health. This scoping review of the international literature on partnership functioning provides a narrative synthesis of findings related to processes that support and inhibit health promotion partnership functioning. Searching a range of databases, the review includes 26 studies employing quantitative (n = 8), qualitative (n = 10) and mixed method (n = 8) designs examining partnership processes published from January 2007 to June 2015. Using the Bergen Model of Collaborative Functioning as a theoretical framework for analyzing the findings, nine core elements were identified that constitute positive partnership processes that can inform best practices: (i) develop a shared mission aligned to the partners’individual or institutional goals; (ii) include a broad range of participation from diverse partners and a balance of human and financial resources; (iii) incorporate leadership that inspires trust, confidence and inclusiveness; (iv) monitor how communication is perceived by partners and adjust accordingly; (v) balance formal and informal roles/structures depending upon mission; (vi) build trust between partners from the beginning and for the duration of the partnership; (vii) ensure balance between maintenance and production activities; (viii) consider the impact of political, economic, cultural, social and organizational contexts; and (ix) evaluate partnerships for continuous improvement. Future research is needed to examine the relationship between these processes and how they impact the longer-term outcomes of intersectoral partnerships.

Abstract The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) lay the foundations for supporting global health and international development work for the next 15 years. Thirty years ago, the Ottawa Charter defined health promotion and outlined key principles for global action on health, including the importance of advocating, enabling and mediating for health equity. Advocacy underscores a human right to health and suggests political action to support its attainment. Enabling speaks to health promotion’s focus on the empowerment of people and communities to take control over their health and aspirations. Mediation draws attention to the critical intersectoral partnerships required to address health and social inequities. Underpinned by this approach, the aim of this paper is to consider how key health promotion principles, namely, rights, empowerment and partnership feature (and are framed) within the SDGs and to consider how these framings may shape future directions for health promotion. To that end, a critical frame analysis of the Transforming Our World document was conducted. The analysis interrogated varying uses and meanings of partnerships, empowerment and rights (and their connections) within the SDGs. The analysis here presents three framings from the SDGs: (1) a moral code for global action on (in)equity; (2) a future orientation to address global issues yet devoid of history; and (3) a reductionist framing of health as the absence of disease. These framings raise important questions about the underpinning values of the SDGs and pathways to health equity – offering both challenges and opportunities for defining the nature and scope of health promotion.

Background Partnerships between Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the global north and south have commonly been used as a vehicle to drive global health research and initiatives. Among these initiatives, include health system strengthening, research capacity building, and human resource training in developing countries. However, the partnership functioning of many global north-south partnerships still carry legacies of colonialism through unrecognized behavior patterns, attitudes, and belief systems in how they function. Even with research literature calling for a shift from equality to equity in the functioning of these partnerships, many still struggle with issues of complex and unspoken power dynamics. To understand the successes and challenges of north-south partnerships, this paper explored partnership development and functioning of a northern and multi-southern HEIs partnership focused on nutrition education and research. Methods A qualitative research approach was used; data were collected through in-depth interviews (IDIs) with questions developed from the Bergen Model of Collective Functioning (BMCF). Thirteen IDIs were conducted with partners from all institutions including stakeholders. Findings The partnership was built on the foundation of experiences and lessons of a previous partnership. Partners used these experiences and lessons to devise strategies to improve partnership inputs, communication, leadership, roles and structures, and maintenance and communication tasks. However, these strategies had an impact on partnership functioning giving rise to issues of inequitable power dynamics. The northern partner had two roles: one as an equal partner and another as distributor of project funds; this caused a conflict in roles for this partner. The partners distinguished themselves according to partner resources – two partners were named implementing partners and two named supportive partners. Roles and partner resources were the greatest contributors to power imbalances and caused delays in project activities. Conclusion Using the BMCF to examine partnership dynamics illuminated that power imbalances caused a hierarchical stance in the partnership with northern partners having overall control and power of decision-making in the partnership. This could impact the effectiveness and sustainability of project in the southern institutions going forward.

Background The late 1990s and early 2000s have seen a growth in north–south health research partnerships resulting from scientific developments such as those in genetic studies and development of statistical techniques and technological requirements for the analysis of large datasets. Despite these efforts, there is inadequate information representing the voice of African researchers as stakeholders experiencing partnership arrangements, particularly in Zambia. Furthermore, very little attention has been paid to capturing the practice of guidelines within partnerships. In this paper, we present achievements and highlight challenges faced by southern partners in north–south health research partnerships. Methods A qualitative inquiry was employed using in-depth interviews developed using the Bergen Model of Collaborative Functioning with 20 key informants in Lusaka district in Zambia purposively sampled from a wide range of health research partnerships. Results Partnerships produce benefits for southern partners, including evidence generation to influence policy, improved service delivery, infrastructure development and designing interventions to improve the healthcare of populations in greatest need. Most importantly, through partnerships, there is availability of financial resources to accomplish partnership goals. For success to be achieved, there must be effective communication and leadership, values and accountability that go into the process of partnership functioning. Trust interacts with different elements that create partnerships where there is co-ownership of study rewards. Challenging aspects of the interaction are largely due to funding mechanisms where 90% of the funding for health research is from northern partners. This funding mechanism results in power imbalances that lead to publication challenges, dictation of research agenda and ownership of samples and data leading to a general lack of motivation to collaborate. Conclusion Mistrust has implications on joint working such that partners find it difficult to work together and produce results greater than their individual efforts. Property rights and resource sharing must be resolved early in the partnership and each partner’s contributions recognised. These findings highlight areas that partnerships need to focus on to make the most of guidelines on research partnership with developing countries.