PERSONAL REFLECTIONS ON THE THIRD MEETING OF THE GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP TO ROLL BACK MALARIA
(FEBRUARY 2ND AND 3RD 2000)
DRAFT
David Nabarro: February 10th 2000
1. For me this was an exceptional event. The partnership secretariat hosted over a hundred visitors from different partner Governments, agencies, organisations and institutions. Delegates from countries, staff from development assistance agencies, colleagues from WHO country, regional and headquarters offices invested much time and energy in creating the environment for a rewarding event.
THE SECRETARIAT'S INTENTIONS
2. We in the secretariat planned for the achievement of several outcomes by partners working together. We wanted partners to have the chance to shape the future of the partnership. We wanted partners to examine the role being played by WHO in relation to the partnership, and to indicate how WHO - at all levels - could make the partnership more effective. We hoped that partners would agree that consensus has developed on RBM strategies within different country groups, on technical issues, and on WHO's contribution as reflected in the composite WHO workplan for its contribution to rolling back malaria. It seemed to me that these objectives were fulfilled, though we would be pleased to hear from partners if they felt otherwise. The general impressions gained by most partners seemed to be that the RBM effort is progressing pretty well, but there is much more to be done and this depends on all partners making synchronised contributions.
MY INTERPRETATION OF PARTNERS' VIEWS
3. Partners established some important agreements on the challenges of scaling up, ensuring better support for country action, establishing approaches to monitoring and evaluation, and key technical issues in RBM. These will be summarised in the reports of the tracks (to appear within a month) and have already been captured in the presentations by track rapporteurs (to be posted on the RBM website - who.int/rbm - within the next few days).
4. Partners agreed that their collective goal is to halve the world malaria burden by the year 2010, through a set of agreed priorities including
all implemented at community level within the context of health sector and human development
5. Partners also endorsed the continuation of the global partnership as an outcome-oriented network held together by agreed principles and characterised by "the strength of weak ties". Its principles and values seem to be well accepted, though the partnership itself will be shaped, over the next year, by the emphases that emerged during this meeting. I sensed that partners were generally positive on the role of WHO as secretariat to the partnership. The World Bank offered to host the next meeting of the partnership.
6. The Global partnership now has strong roots in malaria-affected countries. Partner governments had much to contribute: several indicated that they felt pleased to be involved, energised by the process, and determined to do more, both using their resources, and through co-operating with external agency partners at the country level.
THE EVOLUTION OF THE PARTNERSHIP
7. Emerging emphases within the partnership:
7.1 The partnership now reflects a broader ownership of RBM than was evident at the second meeting in July 1999, and the secretariat will need to communicate regularly into the full group as represented at the meeting. Communications should be designed to elicit feedback, so as to encourage the evolution of the partnership in a way that reflects the interests of all
7.2 All of us global partners need more of a country focus in all our work. To do this the secretariat (WHO) must maintain an emphasis on tracking progress and monitoring action, and must do this using information gleaned from country partnerships for action to RBM. But partners can go further, identifying inter-country RBM initiatives that are moving (or under development) and helping to establish these as viable entities, identifying - clearly - key issues in each and spelling them out. Their efforts will increasingly concentrate on support for district and community level action for people-responsive health systems. At this inter-country level, partners can do more to bring together thinking and action among a range of priorities for poor people's health (malaria, maternal health, HIV and TB, for example). This inter-country and country focus is a must for 2000.
7.3 Partners also recognise that it is now important to be chronicling results. We heard of good progress - in the excellent Mekong presentations and satellite meeting, in the discussions with our Eritrean colleagues, in presentations from Tajikhistan, the Gambia, Benin and Afghanistan. We will all have to be more explicit about progress, through all our communications, and capsulate our results in clear and short messages. The secretariat will do what it can to support this process, but is dependent on receiving news from all partners. Hopefully the emerging web-based information system for the RBM partnership will help.
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE WORK OF THE SECRETARIAT
8. There are (as always) things that the secretariat can do more of, or do better:
8.1 Ensure that all colleagues in WHO, active on RBM, have a clear place in the WHO RBM Project and build links with colleagues in WHO who are not yet active, to keep them involved. Those active in RBM at WHO HQ need to ensure that regional and country WHO personnel are fully involved in secretariat functions: this means that all - whatever their location - need to communicate in a structured and effective manner.
8.2 The secretariat needs to do more to help private sector and NGO groups to be engaged in the partnership, and to ensure that ongojng initiatives - such as the Integrated management of childhood Illness - benefit from the emphasis on country and community action to RBM.
8.3 The secretariat must work hard on its links with existing partners (understanding their priorities) and help other development agencies - such as the regional banks - to be fully engaged.
8.4 The secretariat can help the research community co-operate with the partnership, or - better still - become fully engaged within it.
8.5 The secretariat should write brief documents, with greater clarity and simplicity about what is being done and why. It should spell out more clearly the potential roles of different partners, especially at country and inter-country levels.
9 Partners need to prepare now for the Africa Summit on Roll Back Malaria in Abuja on April 25th 2000. The secretariat needs to help partners communicate with each other about this.
THANKS TO ALL
10 Before the third meeting of the RBM partnership many people (particularly from WHO regional offices and headquarters) worked hard to establish scenarios for the meeting that would lead to the involvement of all partners. They wanted the provide an opportunity for the involvement of those who have been at the core of the partnership, and those who are newly engaged.
10.1 All the partners, and I, know that the preparation of the event involved many people in intense work. We are particularly grateful to Malayah Harper, team leader of the Global Partnership Secretariat in the WHO headquarter Roll Back Malaria Project. The effort was worthwhile. Many of the partners have expressed to me their gratitude to all those who took on the task of preparing for and then managing the meeting, whether as organisers, facilitators, chairs, rapporteurs or presenters.
10.2 We are particularly grateful to those responsible for the meeting arrangements
I propose to finalise this personal report by 17th February and would welcome comments - ideally as drafting changes - before that date.
David Nabarro
Project Manager
Roll Back Malaria in the World Health Organisation
Geneva
February 10th 2000