Structural power was manifested socially, culturally, politically, legally and economically. Dispositional power was the most complex form of power expressed both overtly and covertly. Transitive power was used to challenge the government to think of implementation issues often forgotten during policy-making processes. Power was applied negatively during the dialogues, for example when position was used to control and shape dialogues, which limited innovation, and when knowledge power was used to influence decisions and the direction of the dialogues. Our study found that power was applied positively during the dialogues to prioritise agendas, fast-track processes, reorganise positions, focus attention on certain items and foster involvement of the community. Arts and Tatenhove conceptualise power in policy-making in relational, dispositional and structural layers. Reference is made to the Arts and Tatenhove conceptual framework on power dimensions to understand how power featured during the policy dialogues in African health contexts.
#Who said power to the people plus
This paper utilises these data plus document review to understand how power was manifested during the policy dialogues. An interview guide was developed with standardised questions and probes on the policy dialogues in each country. Data were collected using key informant interviews. This exploratory study, which used qualitative methods, had the main aim of learning about and understanding policy dialogues in five African countries and how power influences such processes. Though power exerts a profound role in policy-making, empirical evidence suggests that health policy analysis has paid only limited attention to the role of power, particularly in policy dialogues. Power and its role are some of its core components. Policy-making is a dynamic process involving the interplay of various factors.
0 kommentar(er)
