Private sector engagement strategies with implications for NCD prevention and control: focus on ten international organisations.

IF 4.6 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Téa E Collins, Svetlana Akselrod, Daria Berlina, Amanda Karapici, Flaminia Ortenzi, Fatima Bashir, Luke N Allen
{"title":"Private sector engagement strategies with implications for NCD prevention and control: focus on ten international organisations.","authors":"Téa E Collins, Svetlana Akselrod, Daria Berlina, Amanda Karapici, Flaminia Ortenzi, Fatima Bashir, Luke N Allen","doi":"10.1186/s41256-025-00448-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>International organisations and development agencies have important roles to play in addressing noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) and their risk factors at the nexus of health, socioeconomic, and environmental development challenges. Much of this work occurs through direct engagement with the private sector. We aimed to assess the types of private sector engagement (PSE) approaches and the degree of alignment across ten major international organisations whose work is critical to achieving global NCD and mental health goals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We examined the publicly available PSE strategy documents for a purposive sample of ten major international development partners. We obtained copies of each organisation's publicly available PSE policy documents and extracted data on the stated purpose, processes, and types of engagement. We used thematic analysis and triangulation to identify areas of agreement, dissonance and silence across the policy approaches.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Whilst all PSE documents emphasised the importance of conducting due diligence, they varied widely in their approach to the risk of engagement and the sophistication of potential conflict of interest management strategies. Many documents were silent on prohibited industries, managing reputational risks, and guidance to Member States. The proactive engagement stance in USAID and World Bank policy documents contrasted starkly with more conservative approaches advanced by UNDP, FAO, and WHO.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The core practices of conducting due diligence and risk mitigation are common to all of the major international organizations we assessed, however, the framing, content, and PSE processes vary widely. The potential impact of these findings is that WHO and other partners can focus on adopting common approaches wherever possible for greater coherence and smoother coordination across the wider development system.</p>","PeriodicalId":52405,"journal":{"name":"Global Health Research and Policy","volume":"10 1","pages":"47"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12476035/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Health Research and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41256-025-00448-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: International organisations and development agencies have important roles to play in addressing noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) and their risk factors at the nexus of health, socioeconomic, and environmental development challenges. Much of this work occurs through direct engagement with the private sector. We aimed to assess the types of private sector engagement (PSE) approaches and the degree of alignment across ten major international organisations whose work is critical to achieving global NCD and mental health goals.

Methods: We examined the publicly available PSE strategy documents for a purposive sample of ten major international development partners. We obtained copies of each organisation's publicly available PSE policy documents and extracted data on the stated purpose, processes, and types of engagement. We used thematic analysis and triangulation to identify areas of agreement, dissonance and silence across the policy approaches.

Results: Whilst all PSE documents emphasised the importance of conducting due diligence, they varied widely in their approach to the risk of engagement and the sophistication of potential conflict of interest management strategies. Many documents were silent on prohibited industries, managing reputational risks, and guidance to Member States. The proactive engagement stance in USAID and World Bank policy documents contrasted starkly with more conservative approaches advanced by UNDP, FAO, and WHO.

Conclusions: The core practices of conducting due diligence and risk mitigation are common to all of the major international organizations we assessed, however, the framing, content, and PSE processes vary widely. The potential impact of these findings is that WHO and other partners can focus on adopting common approaches wherever possible for greater coherence and smoother coordination across the wider development system.

对非传染性疾病预防和控制有影响的私营部门参与战略:重点关注十个国际组织。
背景:国际组织和发展机构在处理与健康、社会经济和环境发展挑战相关的非传染性疾病及其风险因素方面可发挥重要作用。这些工作大部分是通过与私营部门的直接接触进行的。我们旨在评估私营部门参与(PSE)方法的类型以及十个主要国际组织的协调程度,这些组织的工作对实现全球非传染性疾病和精神卫生目标至关重要。方法:我们以十个主要国际发展伙伴为目标样本,审查了公开可用的PSE战略文件。我们获得了每个组织公开可用的PSE政策文件的副本,并提取了关于声明目的、流程和参与类型的数据。我们使用专题分析和三角测量来确定政策方法中一致、不一致和沉默的领域。结果:虽然所有PSE文件都强调进行尽职调查的重要性,但它们在处理参与风险和潜在利益冲突管理策略的复杂性方面差异很大。许多文件对被禁止的行业、管理声誉风险以及对会员国的指导只字未提。美国国际开发署和世界银行政策文件中的积极参与立场与联合国开发计划署、粮农组织和世界卫生组织提出的更为保守的做法形成鲜明对比。结论:在我们评估的所有主要国际组织中,进行尽职调查和风险缓解的核心实践是共同的,然而,框架、内容和PSE过程差异很大。这些发现的潜在影响是,世卫组织和其他伙伴可以尽可能集中精力采取共同办法,在更广泛的发展系统中加强一致性和更顺畅的协调。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Health Research and Policy
Global Health Research and Policy Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
1.10%
发文量
43
审稿时长
5 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Health Research and Policy, an open-access, multidisciplinary journal, publishes research on various aspects of global health, addressing topics like health equity, health systems and policy, social determinants of health, disease burden, population health, and other urgent global health issues. It serves as a forum for high-quality research focused on regional and global health improvement, emphasizing solutions for health equity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信