"The Actor Is Policy": Application of Elite Theory to Explore Actors’ Interests and Power Underlying Maternal Health Policies in Uganda, 2000-2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The persistence of high maternal mortality and consistent failure in low- and middle-income countries to achieve global targets such as Millennium Development Goal five (MDG 5) is usually explained from epidemiological, interventional and health systems perspectives. The role of policy elites and their interests remains inadequately explored in this debate. This study examined elites and how their interests drove maternal health policies and actions in ways that could explain policy failure for MDG 5 in Uganda. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective qualitative study of Uganda's maternal health policies from 2000 to 2015 (MDG period). Thirty key informant interviews and 2 focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with national policy-makers, who directly participated in the formulation of Uganda's maternal health policies during the MDG period. We reviewed 9 National Maternal Health Policy documents. Data were analysed inductively using elite theory. RESULTS: Maternal health policies were mainly driven by a small elite group comprised of Senior Ministry of Health (MoH) officials, some members of cabinet and health development partners (HDPs) who wielded more power than other actors. The resulting policies often appeared to be skewed towards elites' personal political and economic interests, rather than maternal mortality reduction. For a few, however, interests aligned with reducing maternal mortality. Since complying with the government policy-making processes would have exposed elites' personal interests, they mainly drafted policies as service standards and programme documents to bypass the formal policy process. CONCLUSION: Uganda's maternal health policies were mainly influenced by the elites' personal interests rather than by the goal of reducing maternal mortality. This was enabled by the formal guidance for policy-making which gives elites control over the policy process. Accelerating maternal mortality reduction will require re-engineering the policy process to prevent public officials from infusing policies with their interests, and enable percolation of ideas from the public and frontline.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".