Presentation to Asia Health Policy Program

Palo Alto, CA20 October 2011

ASIA PACIFIC OBSERVATORYON 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)*

*http://www.euro.who.int/en/home/projects/observatory

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 analysesDissemination 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 countriesEstablish a baseline for assessing the impact of reforms; andInform 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/interpretabilityTrustTimeliness

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