Repository logo
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Srpski (lat)
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Српски
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register. Have you forgotten your password?
Repository logo
  • Communities & Collections
  • Browse UWCScholar
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Srpski (lat)
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Српски
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register. Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Shamba, Donat"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Who is at the table and who has the power? Case study analysis of decision-making processes for the Global Financing Facility in Tanzania
    (Taylor and Francis Ltd., 2025) Kinney, Mary; George, Asha; Shamba, Donat
    Background: In 2015, Tanzania joined the Global Financing Facility (GFF), a global health initiative for Reproductive, Maternal, Newborn, Child, and Adolescent Health and Nutrition (RMNCAH-N). Despite its resource mobilization goals, little is known about power dynamics in GFF policy processes. This paper presents the first power analysis of Tanzania’s GFF engagement. Objective: To examine policy processes in developing GFF documents during its first two phases in Tanzania. Methods: An exploratory qualitative case study using document reviews (*n* = 22) and key informant interviews (*n* = 21) conducted in 2022–2023. Data were thematically analyzed and interpreted using Gaventa’s power cube (levels, spaces, and forms of power). Results: Stakeholders praised the GFF’s country-led, evidence-based approach and local autonomy. However, closed-door decision-making in phase one excluded civil society and the private sector. Invisible power imbalances in funding allocations left stillbirths and adolescent health without dedicated budgets, while vulnerable groups (e.g. people with disabilities) were overlooked.

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2025 LYRASIS

  • Cookie settings
  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback