home.social

#hrh — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #hrh, aggregated by home.social.

  1. Royal Families @[email protected] ·

    Tourists gather outside Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s temporary home

    Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s Norfolk residence has transformed into an unlikely tourist hotspot, with dozens of visitors passing by Wood…
    #RoyalFamilies #Royal #Royals #Europe #Europa #EU #Andrew #AndrewMountbattenWindsor #beatrice #BritishRoyalFamily #dukeofyork #Eugenie #HRH #MarshFarm #Mountbatten-Windsor #Princeandrew #princessbeatrice #PrincessEugenie #RoyalFamily #RoyalLodge #WoodFarm
    europesays.com/2881239/

    #woodfarm #royallodge #royalfamily #princesseugenie #princessbeatrice #princeandrew
  2. Royal Families @[email protected] ·

    Andrew’s most outrageous demands exposed as he leaves Royal Lodge

    Andrew Mountbatten Windsor seems to be making a move. The disgraced younger sibling of the King appears to…
    #RoyalFamilies #Royal #Royals #Europe #Europa #EU #Andrew #andrewlownie #AndrewMountbattenWindsor #beatrice #BritishRoyalFamily #dukeofyork #Eugenie #HRH #MarshFarm #Mountbatten-Windsor #Princeandrew #princessbeatrice #PrincessEugenie #royalcollectiontrust #RoyalFamily #RoyalLodge
    europesays.com/2854425/

    #royallodge #royalfamily #royalcollectiontrust #princesseugenie #princessbeatrice #princeandrew
  3. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Comparative analysis of workforce development models in the global malaria elimination agenda

    The stagnation in global malaria mortality reduction has forced a re-evaluation of the tools and strategies currently deployed in high-burden countries.

    While biological challenges such as insecticide resistance and parasite mutations are well-documented, a critical bottleneck remains the capacity of the human workforce to implement technical strategies with precision.

    The transition from control to elimination requires a fundamental shift in workforce development.

    It demands moving beyond the passive transmission of technical knowledge toward models that recognize the value of the health worker.

    People who work for health, especially those who engage directly with communities, are likely to possess unique insights into local transmission dynamics and community behavior.

    This analysis reviews four predominant capacity-building architectures currently active in the malaria landscape.

    These initiatives are assessed based on their ability to scale to the district and community levels, their cost-effectiveness, and their capacity to validate and utilize the tacit knowledge held by local staff.

    Malaria learning model 1. The academic massive open online course model

    The most prominent example of the digital transmission model is the MalariaX series offered by Harvard University.

    This initiative utilizes the Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) format to democratize access to high-level scientific knowledge.

    Strengths

    The primary strength of this model is the unparalleled quality of its technical content.

    It provides participants in low-resource settings with direct access to global experts and the latest scientific evidence regarding vector biology, epidemiology, and immunology.

    The digital format allows for infinite scalability in terms of access.

    Anyone with an internet connection can technically access the material.

    This eliminates the geographical barriers that often exclude peripheral health workers from elite training.

    Limitations

    The model suffers from the “know-do” gap.

    While it effectively transmits theoretical knowledge, it lacks a structural mechanism to ensure this knowledge is applied to local realities.

    The pedagogy relies heavily on passive consumption of video lectures which reinforces the hierarchy of “expert” versus “learner.”

    It fails to account for the specific needs of local health workers who must adapt global scientific principles to context-specific challenges, such as unexpected climate shifts or community resistance.

    The assessment mechanisms verify knowledge retention rather than the ability to navigate these local complexities.

    Consequently, it undervalues the learner’s own experience and offers no channel for the “global expert” to learn from the “local expert” who is managing the disease daily.

    Malaria learning model 2. The normative cascade training model

    The World Health Organization (WHO) and national malaria programs typically rely on the cascade model to disseminate new guidelines.

    This approach involves training a core group of master trainers at the national level who then train regional officers, who in turn train district and facility staff.

    Strengths

    This model ensures strong alignment with national policy and global normative guidance.

    It maintains a clear chain of command and reinforces the authority of the Ministry of Health.

    It is particularly effective for standardization, such as ensuring that a specific treatment protocol for severe malaria is introduced uniformly across the health system.

    Weaknesses

    The cascade model is plagued by the dilution of quality as training moves down the chain.

    Information is frequently distorted or simplified by the time it reaches the community health worker.

    Structurally, it treats the health worker as a passive vessel to be filled with instructions rather than a thinking professional who understands the local ecosystem.

    It is also prohibitively expensive and logistically heavy.

    It often relies on per diems that distort participant motivation and create a “training aristocracy” where access is determined by seniority rather than need.

    Crucially, this model often interprets local adaptation as non-compliance.

    It fails to recognize that frontline workers often deviate from protocols not out of ignorance but out of necessity, driven by supply chain ruptures or specific community demands that only they understand.

    Malaria learning model 3. The fellowship model

    Initiatives such as the African Leadership and Management Training for Impact in Malaria Eradication (ALAMIME) represent the fellowship model.

    These programs target high-potential program managers for intensive, long-term leadership development, often in partnership with universities.

    Strengths

    This model addresses the critical “soft skills” gap identified in malaria elimination policy reviews.

    It moves beyond technical biology to teach management, advocacy, and financial planning.

    By focusing on African leadership, it actively works to decolonize the expertise hierarchy and fosters strong regional ownership.

    The cohort-based approach builds deep professional bonds among future leaders of national malaria programs.

    Weaknesses

    The fundamental limitation is scalability and exclusivity.

    These programs are resource-intensive and reach a small number of individuals per year.

    While they produce high-quality leaders at the top, they cannot reach the critical mass of district and community personnel required to execute malaria strategies.

    This reinforces a top-heavy leadership structure that ignores the need for “micro-leadership” at the facility level.

    It overlooks the reality that a district nurse or community health worker must also exercise leadership and diplomacy every day to secure community trust.

    By focusing on the elite, this model inadvertently devalues the significance of the leadership required at the last mile.

    Malaria learning model 4. The field epidemiology training program model

    The Field Epidemiology Training Program (FETP) functions as a learning-by-doing apprenticeship.

    Residents work within the health system to investigate outbreaks and analyze surveillance data under the mentorship of experienced epidemiologists.

    Strengths

    This model closely aligns learning with work.

    It is an “applied” model where the output of the training is often a tangible public health product.

    It effectively builds data literacy and analytical capacity.

    It grounds the learner in the reality of the field rather than the theory of the classroom.

    Weaknesses

    Like the fellowship model, the FETP is difficult to scale due to the requirement for intense, one-on-one mentorship.

    It is a high-cost intervention per learner.

    Furthermore, the rigorous focus on surveillance and epidemiology often overshadows the operational implementation challenges faced by generalist health workers.

    While it produces excellent surveillance officers, it does not necessarily equip the broader workforce to utilize their own data for local decision-making.

    It often extracts data for central analysis rather than empowering local staff to interpret the trends they witness daily.

    This failure to devolve analytical power ignores the fact that local workers are often the first to notice anomalies, such as climate-driven shifts in vector behavior, long before they appear in national databases.

    Four recommendations to strengthen malaria learning and capacity-building

    The current landscape of malaria capacity building reveals a functional and epistemic schism.

    The academic and normative models excel at defining what needs to be done but fail to support the workforce in how to do it within their specific constraints.

    The fellowship and apprenticeship models build deep capacity but are structurally incapable of reaching the volume of workers necessary for elimination.

    A significant gap exists for a model that combines the scalability of digital platforms with the implementation rigor of the apprenticeship approach.

    To achieve malaria elimination, future initiatives need to:

    1. Move beyond knowledge verification to value validation.
    2. Recognize that local health workers are not the problem to be fixed but the owners of the solution.
    3. Utilize the existing workforce rather than parallel structures.
    4. Replace financial incentives with the professional motivation that comes from having one’s local knowledge recognized and used to solve the problems they face every day.

    References

    General context & the “know-do” gap

    Model 1: The academic MOOC model (MalariaX)

    Model 2: The normative cascade model and incentives

    Model 3: The fellowship model (ALAMIME)

    • ALAMIME. African Leadership and Management Training for Impact in Malaria Eradication. Makerere University School of Public Health.
      https://alamime.musph.ac.ug/
    • Couper, I., Ray, S., Blaauw, D., et al. (2018). Curriculum and training needs of mid-level health workers in Africa: a situational review from Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Uganda. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 553.
      https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3362-9

    Model 4: The Field Epidemiology Training Program (FETP)

    Strategic recommendations and value validation

    #globalHealth #globalMalariaEliminationAgenda #HRH #learningCulture #learningStrategy #malaria #workforceDevelopment
    #workforcedevelopment #malaria #learningstrategy #learningculture #hrh #globalmalariaeliminationagenda
  4. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Comparative analysis of workforce development models in the global malaria elimination agenda

    The stagnation in global malaria mortality reduction has forced a re-evaluation of the tools and strategies currently deployed in high-burden countries.

    While biological challenges such as insecticide resistance and parasite mutations are well-documented, a critical bottleneck remains the capacity of the human workforce to implement technical strategies with precision.

    The transition from control to elimination requires a fundamental shift in workforce development.

    It demands moving beyond the passive transmission of technical knowledge toward models that recognize the value of the health worker.

    People who work for health, especially those who engage directly with communities, are likely to possess unique insights into local transmission dynamics and community behavior.

    This analysis reviews four predominant capacity-building architectures currently active in the malaria landscape.

    These initiatives are assessed based on their ability to scale to the district and community levels, their cost-effectiveness, and their capacity to validate and utilize the tacit knowledge held by local staff.

    Malaria learning model 1. The academic massive open online course model

    The most prominent example of the digital transmission model is the MalariaX series offered by Harvard University.

    This initiative utilizes the Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) format to democratize access to high-level scientific knowledge.

    Strengths

    The primary strength of this model is the unparalleled quality of its technical content.

    It provides participants in low-resource settings with direct access to global experts and the latest scientific evidence regarding vector biology, epidemiology, and immunology.

    The digital format allows for infinite scalability in terms of access.

    Anyone with an internet connection can technically access the material.

    This eliminates the geographical barriers that often exclude peripheral health workers from elite training.

    Limitations

    The model suffers from the “know-do” gap.

    While it effectively transmits theoretical knowledge, it lacks a structural mechanism to ensure this knowledge is applied to local realities.

    The pedagogy relies heavily on passive consumption of video lectures which reinforces the hierarchy of “expert” versus “learner.”

    It fails to account for the specific needs of local health workers who must adapt global scientific principles to context-specific challenges, such as unexpected climate shifts or community resistance.

    The assessment mechanisms verify knowledge retention rather than the ability to navigate these local complexities.

    Consequently, it undervalues the learner’s own experience and offers no channel for the “global expert” to learn from the “local expert” who is managing the disease daily.

    Malaria learning model 2. The normative cascade training model

    The World Health Organization (WHO) and national malaria programs typically rely on the cascade model to disseminate new guidelines.

    This approach involves training a core group of master trainers at the national level who then train regional officers, who in turn train district and facility staff.

    Strengths

    This model ensures strong alignment with national policy and global normative guidance.

    It maintains a clear chain of command and reinforces the authority of the Ministry of Health.

    It is particularly effective for standardization, such as ensuring that a specific treatment protocol for severe malaria is introduced uniformly across the health system.

    Weaknesses

    The cascade model is plagued by the dilution of quality as training moves down the chain.

    Information is frequently distorted or simplified by the time it reaches the community health worker.

    Structurally, it treats the health worker as a passive vessel to be filled with instructions rather than a thinking professional who understands the local ecosystem.

    It is also prohibitively expensive and logistically heavy.

    It often relies on per diems that distort participant motivation and create a “training aristocracy” where access is determined by seniority rather than need.

    Crucially, this model often interprets local adaptation as non-compliance.

    It fails to recognize that frontline workers often deviate from protocols not out of ignorance but out of necessity, driven by supply chain ruptures or specific community demands that only they understand.

    Malaria learning model 3. The fellowship model

    Initiatives such as the African Leadership and Management Training for Impact in Malaria Eradication (ALAMIME) represent the fellowship model.

    These programs target high-potential program managers for intensive, long-term leadership development, often in partnership with universities.

    Strengths

    This model addresses the critical “soft skills” gap identified in malaria elimination policy reviews.

    It moves beyond technical biology to teach management, advocacy, and financial planning.

    By focusing on African leadership, it actively works to decolonize the expertise hierarchy and fosters strong regional ownership.

    The cohort-based approach builds deep professional bonds among future leaders of national malaria programs.

    Weaknesses

    The fundamental limitation is scalability and exclusivity.

    These programs are resource-intensive and reach a small number of individuals per year.

    While they produce high-quality leaders at the top, they cannot reach the critical mass of district and community personnel required to execute malaria strategies.

    This reinforces a top-heavy leadership structure that ignores the need for “micro-leadership” at the facility level.

    It overlooks the reality that a district nurse or community health worker must also exercise leadership and diplomacy every day to secure community trust.

    By focusing on the elite, this model inadvertently devalues the significance of the leadership required at the last mile.

    Malaria learning model 4. The field epidemiology training program model

    The Field Epidemiology Training Program (FETP) functions as a learning-by-doing apprenticeship.

    Residents work within the health system to investigate outbreaks and analyze surveillance data under the mentorship of experienced epidemiologists.

    Strengths

    This model closely aligns learning with work.

    It is an “applied” model where the output of the training is often a tangible public health product.

    It effectively builds data literacy and analytical capacity.

    It grounds the learner in the reality of the field rather than the theory of the classroom.

    Weaknesses

    Like the fellowship model, the FETP is difficult to scale due to the requirement for intense, one-on-one mentorship.

    It is a high-cost intervention per learner.

    Furthermore, the rigorous focus on surveillance and epidemiology often overshadows the operational implementation challenges faced by generalist health workers.

    While it produces excellent surveillance officers, it does not necessarily equip the broader workforce to utilize their own data for local decision-making.

    It often extracts data for central analysis rather than empowering local staff to interpret the trends they witness daily.

    This failure to devolve analytical power ignores the fact that local workers are often the first to notice anomalies, such as climate-driven shifts in vector behavior, long before they appear in national databases.

    Four recommendations to strengthen malaria learning and capacity-building

    The current landscape of malaria capacity building reveals a functional and epistemic schism.

    The academic and normative models excel at defining what needs to be done but fail to support the workforce in how to do it within their specific constraints.

    The fellowship and apprenticeship models build deep capacity but are structurally incapable of reaching the volume of workers necessary for elimination.

    A significant gap exists for a model that combines the scalability of digital platforms with the implementation rigor of the apprenticeship approach.

    To achieve malaria elimination, future initiatives need to:

    1. Move beyond knowledge verification to value validation.
    2. Recognize that local health workers are not the problem to be fixed but the owners of the solution.
    3. Utilize the existing workforce rather than parallel structures.
    4. Replace financial incentives with the professional motivation that comes from having one’s local knowledge recognized and used to solve the problems they face every day.

    References

    General context & the “know-do” gap

    Model 1: The academic MOOC model (MalariaX)

    Model 2: The normative cascade model and incentives

    Model 3: The fellowship model (ALAMIME)

    • ALAMIME. African Leadership and Management Training for Impact in Malaria Eradication. Makerere University School of Public Health.
      https://alamime.musph.ac.ug/
    • Couper, I., Ray, S., Blaauw, D., et al. (2018). Curriculum and training needs of mid-level health workers in Africa: a situational review from Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Uganda. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 553.
      https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3362-9

    Model 4: The Field Epidemiology Training Program (FETP)

    Strategic recommendations and value validation

    #globalHealth #globalMalariaEliminationAgenda #HRH #learningCulture #learningStrategy #malaria #workforceDevelopment
    #globalhealth #globalmalariaeliminationagenda #hrh #learningculture #learningstrategy #malaria
  5. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Rethinking human resources for malaria control and elimination in Africa

    The comprehensive policy review by Halima Mwenesi and colleagues “Rethinking human resources and capacity building needs for malaria control and elimination in Africa” argues that the stagnation in global malaria progress is fundamentally a human resources crisis rather than solely a biological or technical failure.

    The authors posit that the current workforce is insufficient in number and ill-equipped with the necessary skills to navigate the complex transition from malaria control to elimination.

    It is a critical indictment of the status quo in malaria training and offers a roadmap for structural reform.

    This article summarizes key points from the policy review and examines how The Geneva Learning Foundation’s peer learning-to-action model could be used by national programmes to transform the health workforce.

    The mismatch between training and operational needs

    The authors identify a severe imbalance in training priorities where capacity building has historically favored biomedical and basic sciences such as entomology and parasitology.

    While essential, this focus has led to a neglect of operational, translational, and implementation sciences.

    The report highlights that while the global community produces high-level scientists who understand the parasite, it fails to produce “translational scientists” who can bridge the gap between global guidelines and local realities.

    This has resulted, they argue, in a workforce lacking the practical competencies to operationalize complex elimination strategies that require precision and adaptation.

    The deficit in leadership and social sciences

    A major finding is the specific deficit in so-called “soft skills” and social sciences which are increasingly critical as programs move toward elimination.

    The authors argue that modern malaria control requires competencies in leadership, health diplomacy, anthropology, sociology, and political analysis.

    Program managers currently lack the training to navigate complex political landscapes, mobilize domestic resources, or engage effectively with communities to sustain interventions.

    The review emphasizes that understanding community behavior and social determinants is as critical as understanding vector behavior but this is rarely reflected in curricula.

    Data illiteracy and the failure of surveillance

    The paper identifies pervasive “data illiteracy” across the workforce.

    Health workers collect vast amounts of data to satisfy donor reporting requirements but often lack the skills to interpret or use it for local decision-making.

    This results in a “data-rich but information-poor” environment.

    As countries move toward elimination, the need for real-time, granular surveillance becomes paramount.

    The current workforce is unable to perform the rapid data analysis required to detect and respond to outbreaks at the sub-national level.

    Fragmentation and lack of coordination

    The review critiques the fragmentation of investments in training, capacity-building, and technical assistance driven by donor agendas.

    It notes a lack of coordination among donors and agencies which leads to a proliferation of uncoordinated short courses and workshops that do not necessarily align with national strategic plans.

    This fragmentation is exacerbated by a lack of data on the workforce itself.

    Many countries lack a central registry of malaria personnel which makes it impossible to forecast needs, plan for attrition, or manage career pathways.

    The call for structural transformation

    The authors call for a radical shift toward “South-South” collaboration where African institutions take the lead in training.

    They advocate for moving away from ad hoc workshops toward institutionalized, long-term capacity building.

    Crucially, they recommend the use of digital platforms to democratize access to knowledge for mid-level and community-based cadres who are often excluded from elite fellowships.

    How can learning science help transform malaria training investments into tangible health worker performance?

    For a global health epidemiologist accustomed to viewing disease control through the lens of biological interventions and coverage rates, the human resource crisis described by Mwenesi and colleagues represents a “delivery failure” of validated tools.

    The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) learning science model functions as a structural intervention designed to repair broken delivery mechanisms in global health and humanitarian response.

    The following analysis translates the TGLF approach into terms recognizable to an epidemiologist or program manager who operates with the assumption that training is primarily about the transmission of technical knowledge.

    Moving from passive transmission to implementation fidelity

    Epidemiologists understand that a vaccine with high efficacy in a trial often has low effectiveness in the real world due to poor administration or cold chain failure.

    Similarly, Mwenesi et al. identify that technical malaria guidelines fail because the “human infrastructure” cannot implement them.

    Traditional training assumes that if you lecture health workers on a protocol, which is a transmission of information, they will execute it.

    This is a “single-loop” assumption.

    The TGLF model introduces an “implementation loop.”

    Instead of merely receiving information, learners in the TGLF network must design a micro-project to apply the new guideline in their specific district, execute it, and report back on the results using their own local data.

    This turns the workforce from passive recipients of protocols into active testers of implementation fidelity.

    It directly addresses the “translational science” gap identified in the paper by forcing the learner to translate theory into practice immediately.

    Sceptics often argue that this approach places an undue burden on an already overworked workforce.

    However, the TGLF model embeds learning into the workflow itself.

    This is not additional work but rather “learning-based work.”

    Participants do not create hypothetical projects.

    They identify a bottleneck they are currently facing, such as a specific pocket of malaria transmission, and use the learning cycle to address it.

    This transforms the training from an external interruption into an operational support mechanism.

    By embedding learning into the workflow, it operationalizes Mwenesi’s call for translational science.

    It considers the daily struggle of the health worker as a form of structured scientific inquiry: they hypothesize a solution, test it, and report the results.

    This is implementation as science.

    Operationalizing data use for local decision-making

    Mwenesi notes that health workers collect data but do not use it.

    In the TGLF model, data is not something sent “up” to the ministry.

    It is the raw material for peer support and feedback.

    In a TGLF peer learning exercise, a district medical officer in Ghana shares their case management data to compare performance with a peer in Uganda.

    They share because they want to, not because they are required to.

    This creates a social incentive to understand and analyze one’s own data.

    It builds the “data literacy” the authors call for not through abstract statistics courses but through the practical necessity of explaining one’s own performance to a colleague.

    This process transforms data from a compliance burden into a tool for local problem-solving.

    Is there a risk that peer learning will pool ignorance?

    Is there a valid concern regarding the risk of “pooled ignorance” where peers might reinforce incorrect practices?

    The TGLF model mitigates this through “structured emergence.”

    The model does not dismiss expert knowledge but uses global guidelines as the “anchor” for local problem-solving.

    In this system, a health worker cannot simply state an opinion.

    They must submit an action plan that is peer-reviewed against a rubric derived from WHO guidelines.

    This process ensures fidelity to technical standards while allowing for necessary local adaptation.

    The aggregation of thousands of these peer-reviewed plans creates a new form of rigorous, practice-based evidence that complements expert guidance.

    Scaling “soft skills” through structured peer review

    The review calls for leadership and diplomacy skills but notes these are hard to teach in workshops.

    The TGLF model builds these skills implicitly through its pedagogical structure.

    When a participant submits an action plan, they must receive and respond to critical feedback from peers in other countries.

    They must negotiate differing viewpoints and defend their technical choices.

    This mimics the “health diplomacy” and leadership dynamics required in real-world program management.

    Furthermore, because they must engage community stakeholders to implement their projects, they practice the anthropological and social engagement skills Mwenesi identifies as missing.

    They learn leadership not by studying a theory of leadership but by leading a change initiative in their facility.

    While some experts argue that soft skills require “hard contact” in physical spaces, TGLF results suggest that physical proximity often limits a worker to their known environment and existing biases.

    The TGLF model introduces a form of “cosmopolitan localism.”

    When a nurse in rural Nigeria must explain her challenge to a peer in urban India, she is forced to articulate her context with a clarity and diplomacy not required when speaking to a neighbor.

    This defiance of distance fosters a quantum leap in communication capabilities.

    Participants report that the skills learned in negotiating these digital, cross-cultural peer relationships directly translate to better engagement with their physical-world colleagues and community leaders.

    Addressing the incentive structure and correcting expertise asymmetry

    The paper critiques the “brain drain” and the reliance on experts from the Global North.

    TGLF operationalizes the “South-South” collaboration recommended by the authors by creating a flat digital hierarchy.

    In this model, the “expert” is not a visiting consultant from Geneva but a peer who has successfully solved the problem in their own context.

    A nurse in Nigeria learns how to improve bed net usage from a nurse in Kenya who solved that exact refusal issue last month.

    This actually results in greater interest, comprehension, and use of official guidelines.

    It also validates local knowledge and creates the “critical mass of thinking professionals” that Mwenesi argues is essential for elimination.

    It shifts the source of authority from external experts to the collective intelligence of the network.

    Transforming the economy of per diem

    A common critique of moving away from face-to-face training is the reliance of health workers on per diems for financial survival.

    Mwenesi implies that the current system is unsustainable.

    The TGLF model operates on the evidence that per diem-driven training often restricts access to a “training aristocracy” of recurrent participants while excluding the frontline workers who most need the knowledge.

    TGLF replaces the financial incentive with a professional survival incentive.

    In the Nigeria Immunization Collaborative, over 4,300 health workers participated without per diems.

    They did so because the program addressed the specific pain points of their daily work.

    This filters the workforce for “positive deviants,” or those with high intrinsic motivation who are most likely to drive elimination efforts, rather than those primarily motivated by daily subsistence allowances.

    A “surveillance system” for human resources and performance

    Finally, the review notes the lack of registries and data on the workforce itself.

    The TGLF digital network acts as a real-time sensor of workforce capacity.

    By engaging thousands of health workers simultaneously, the platform generates data on who is active, what problems they are facing, and where their skills are deficient.

    For an epidemiologist, this is equivalent to a surveillance system for human resources.

    It provides the visibility needed to forecast gaps and target interventions precisely, replacing the “blind” proliferation of uncoordinated workshops with a data-driven approach to capacity building.

    Regarding concerns that digital platforms fail in low-resource settings due to poor connectivity, TGLF utilizes a “cognitively quiet” design that functions on low-bandwidth connections and mobile devices.

    This design respects the technological reality of the African context.

    Data from the Teach to Reach program, which has engaged over 60,000 participants in remote, ongoing peer learning activities , demonstrates that when the technology is adapted to the user rather than the other way around, participation rates exceed those of physical workshops.

    This scale allows for the identification of systemic patterns and workforce gaps that would be invisible in a smaller, face-to-face cohort.

    Reference

    Mwenesi, H., Mbogo, C., Casamitjana, N., Castro, M.C., Itoe, M.A., Okonofua, F., Tanner, M., 2022. Rethinking human resources and capacity building needs for malaria control and elimination in Africa. PLOS Glob Public Health 2, e0000210. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000210

    Reda Sadki (2023). How do we reframe health performance management within complex adaptive systems?. Reda Sadki: Learning to make a difference. https://doi.org/10.59350/mx5qr-qet97

    Reda Sadki (2024). Prioritizing the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together. Reda Sadki: Learning to make a difference. https://doi.org/10.59350/zzqr4-9g482

    Reda Sadki (2024). Protect, invest, together: strengthening health workforce through new learning models. Reda Sadki: Learning to make a difference. https://doi.org/10.59350/g24b4-7fj64

    Reda Sadki (2024). What is double-loop learning in global health?. Reda Sadki: Learning to make a difference. https://doi.org/10.59350/s4xtw-b7274

    Reda Sadki (2024). World Malaria Day 2024: We need new ways to support health workers leading change with local communities. Reda Sadki: Learning to make a difference. https://doi.org/10.59350/yrn1r-hpz62

    #brainDrain #cosmopolitanLocalism #dataQualityAndUse #doubleLoopLearning #HalimaMwenesi #healthWorkerMotivation #healthWorkerPerformance #healthWorkforce #HRH #implementationScience #leadership #learningStrategy #learningBasedWork #localization #malaria #peerLearning #performance #softSkills #TeachToReach #translationalScience
    #translationalscience #teachtoreach #softskills #performance #peerlearning #malaria
  6. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Rethinking human resources for malaria control and elimination in Africa

    The comprehensive policy review by Halima Mwenesi and colleagues “Rethinking human resources and capacity building needs for malaria control and elimination in Africa” argues that the stagnation in global malaria progress is fundamentally a human resources crisis rather than solely a biological or technical failure.

    The authors posit that the current workforce is insufficient in number and ill-equipped with the necessary skills to navigate the complex transition from malaria control to elimination.

    It is a critical indictment of the status quo in malaria training and offers a roadmap for structural reform.

    This article summarizes key points from the policy review and examines how The Geneva Learning Foundation’s peer learning-to-action model could be used by national programmes to transform the health workforce.

    The mismatch between training and operational needs

    The authors identify a severe imbalance in training priorities where capacity building has historically favored biomedical and basic sciences such as entomology and parasitology.

    While essential, this focus has led to a neglect of operational, translational, and implementation sciences.

    The report highlights that while the global community produces high-level scientists who understand the parasite, it fails to produce “translational scientists” who can bridge the gap between global guidelines and local realities.

    This has resulted, they argue, in a workforce lacking the practical competencies to operationalize complex elimination strategies that require precision and adaptation.

    The deficit in leadership and social sciences

    A major finding is the specific deficit in so-called “soft skills” and social sciences which are increasingly critical as programs move toward elimination.

    The authors argue that modern malaria control requires competencies in leadership, health diplomacy, anthropology, sociology, and political analysis.

    Program managers currently lack the training to navigate complex political landscapes, mobilize domestic resources, or engage effectively with communities to sustain interventions.

    The review emphasizes that understanding community behavior and social determinants is as critical as understanding vector behavior but this is rarely reflected in curricula.

    Data illiteracy and the failure of surveillance

    The paper identifies pervasive “data illiteracy” across the workforce.

    Health workers collect vast amounts of data to satisfy donor reporting requirements but often lack the skills to interpret or use it for local decision-making.

    This results in a “data-rich but information-poor” environment.

    As countries move toward elimination, the need for real-time, granular surveillance becomes paramount.

    The current workforce is unable to perform the rapid data analysis required to detect and respond to outbreaks at the sub-national level.

    Fragmentation and lack of coordination

    The review critiques the fragmentation of investments in training, capacity-building, and technical assistance driven by donor agendas.

    It notes a lack of coordination among donors and agencies which leads to a proliferation of uncoordinated short courses and workshops that do not necessarily align with national strategic plans.

    This fragmentation is exacerbated by a lack of data on the workforce itself.

    Many countries lack a central registry of malaria personnel which makes it impossible to forecast needs, plan for attrition, or manage career pathways.

    The call for structural transformation

    The authors call for a radical shift toward “South-South” collaboration where African institutions take the lead in training.

    They advocate for moving away from ad hoc workshops toward institutionalized, long-term capacity building.

    Crucially, they recommend the use of digital platforms to democratize access to knowledge for mid-level and community-based cadres who are often excluded from elite fellowships.

    How can learning science help transform malaria training investments into tangible health worker performance?

    For a global health epidemiologist accustomed to viewing disease control through the lens of biological interventions and coverage rates, the human resource crisis described by Mwenesi and colleagues represents a “delivery failure” of validated tools.

    The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) learning science model functions as a structural intervention designed to repair broken delivery mechanisms in global health and humanitarian response.

    The following analysis translates the TGLF approach into terms recognizable to an epidemiologist or program manager who operates with the assumption that training is primarily about the transmission of technical knowledge.

    Moving from passive transmission to implementation fidelity

    Epidemiologists understand that a vaccine with high efficacy in a trial often has low effectiveness in the real world due to poor administration or cold chain failure.

    Similarly, Mwenesi et al. identify that technical malaria guidelines fail because the “human infrastructure” cannot implement them.

    Traditional training assumes that if you lecture health workers on a protocol, which is a transmission of information, they will execute it.

    This is a “single-loop” assumption.

    The TGLF model introduces an “implementation loop.”

    Instead of merely receiving information, learners in the TGLF network must design a micro-project to apply the new guideline in their specific district, execute it, and report back on the results using their own local data.

    This turns the workforce from passive recipients of protocols into active testers of implementation fidelity.

    It directly addresses the “translational science” gap identified in the paper by forcing the learner to translate theory into practice immediately.

    Sceptics often argue that this approach places an undue burden on an already overworked workforce.

    However, the TGLF model embeds learning into the workflow itself.

    This is not additional work but rather “learning-based work.”

    Participants do not create hypothetical projects.

    They identify a bottleneck they are currently facing, such as a specific pocket of malaria transmission, and use the learning cycle to address it.

    This transforms the training from an external interruption into an operational support mechanism.

    By embedding learning into the workflow, it operationalizes Mwenesi’s call for translational science.

    It considers the daily struggle of the health worker as a form of structured scientific inquiry: they hypothesize a solution, test it, and report the results.

    This is implementation as science.

    Operationalizing data use for local decision-making

    Mwenesi notes that health workers collect data but do not use it.

    In the TGLF model, data is not something sent “up” to the ministry.

    It is the raw material for peer support and feedback.

    In a TGLF peer learning exercise, a district medical officer in Ghana shares their case management data to compare performance with a peer in Uganda.

    They share because they want to, not because they are required to.

    This creates a social incentive to understand and analyze one’s own data.

    It builds the “data literacy” the authors call for not through abstract statistics courses but through the practical necessity of explaining one’s own performance to a colleague.

    This process transforms data from a compliance burden into a tool for local problem-solving.

    Is there a risk that peer learning will pool ignorance?

    Is there a valid concern regarding the risk of “pooled ignorance” where peers might reinforce incorrect practices?

    The TGLF model mitigates this through “structured emergence.”

    The model does not dismiss expert knowledge but uses global guidelines as the “anchor” for local problem-solving.

    In this system, a health worker cannot simply state an opinion.

    They must submit an action plan that is peer-reviewed against a rubric derived from WHO guidelines.

    This process ensures fidelity to technical standards while allowing for necessary local adaptation.

    The aggregation of thousands of these peer-reviewed plans creates a new form of rigorous, practice-based evidence that complements expert guidance.

    Scaling “soft skills” through structured peer review

    The review calls for leadership and diplomacy skills but notes these are hard to teach in workshops.

    The TGLF model builds these skills implicitly through its pedagogical structure.

    When a participant submits an action plan, they must receive and respond to critical feedback from peers in other countries.

    They must negotiate differing viewpoints and defend their technical choices.

    This mimics the “health diplomacy” and leadership dynamics required in real-world program management.

    Furthermore, because they must engage community stakeholders to implement their projects, they practice the anthropological and social engagement skills Mwenesi identifies as missing.

    They learn leadership not by studying a theory of leadership but by leading a change initiative in their facility.

    While some experts argue that soft skills require “hard contact” in physical spaces, TGLF results suggest that physical proximity often limits a worker to their known environment and existing biases.

    The TGLF model introduces a form of “cosmopolitan localism.”

    When a nurse in rural Nigeria must explain her challenge to a peer in urban India, she is forced to articulate her context with a clarity and diplomacy not required when speaking to a neighbor.

    This defiance of distance fosters a quantum leap in communication capabilities.

    Participants report that the skills learned in negotiating these digital, cross-cultural peer relationships directly translate to better engagement with their physical-world colleagues and community leaders.

    Addressing the incentive structure and correcting expertise asymmetry

    The paper critiques the “brain drain” and the reliance on experts from the Global North.

    TGLF operationalizes the “South-South” collaboration recommended by the authors by creating a flat digital hierarchy.

    In this model, the “expert” is not a visiting consultant from Geneva but a peer who has successfully solved the problem in their own context.

    A nurse in Nigeria learns how to improve bed net usage from a nurse in Kenya who solved that exact refusal issue last month.

    This actually results in greater interest, comprehension, and use of official guidelines.

    It also validates local knowledge and creates the “critical mass of thinking professionals” that Mwenesi argues is essential for elimination.

    It shifts the source of authority from external experts to the collective intelligence of the network.

    Transforming the economy of per diem

    A common critique of moving away from face-to-face training is the reliance of health workers on per diems for financial survival.

    Mwenesi implies that the current system is unsustainable.

    The TGLF model operates on the evidence that per diem-driven training often restricts access to a “training aristocracy” of recurrent participants while excluding the frontline workers who most need the knowledge.

    TGLF replaces the financial incentive with a professional survival incentive.

    In the Nigeria Immunization Collaborative, over 4,300 health workers participated without per diems.

    They did so because the program addressed the specific pain points of their daily work.

    This filters the workforce for “positive deviants,” or those with high intrinsic motivation who are most likely to drive elimination efforts, rather than those primarily motivated by daily subsistence allowances.

    A “surveillance system” for human resources and performance

    Finally, the review notes the lack of registries and data on the workforce itself.

    The TGLF digital network acts as a real-time sensor of workforce capacity.

    By engaging thousands of health workers simultaneously, the platform generates data on who is active, what problems they are facing, and where their skills are deficient.

    For an epidemiologist, this is equivalent to a surveillance system for human resources.

    It provides the visibility needed to forecast gaps and target interventions precisely, replacing the “blind” proliferation of uncoordinated workshops with a data-driven approach to capacity building.

    Regarding concerns that digital platforms fail in low-resource settings due to poor connectivity, TGLF utilizes a “cognitively quiet” design that functions on low-bandwidth connections and mobile devices.

    This design respects the technological reality of the African context.

    Data from the Teach to Reach program, which has engaged over 60,000 participants in remote, ongoing peer learning activities , demonstrates that when the technology is adapted to the user rather than the other way around, participation rates exceed those of physical workshops.

    This scale allows for the identification of systemic patterns and workforce gaps that would be invisible in a smaller, face-to-face cohort.

    Reference

    Mwenesi, H., Mbogo, C., Casamitjana, N., Castro, M.C., Itoe, M.A., Okonofua, F., Tanner, M., 2022. Rethinking human resources and capacity building needs for malaria control and elimination in Africa. PLOS Glob Public Health 2, e0000210. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000210

    Reda Sadki (2023). How do we reframe health performance management within complex adaptive systems?. Reda Sadki: Learning to make a difference. https://doi.org/10.59350/mx5qr-qet97

    Reda Sadki (2024). Prioritizing the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together. Reda Sadki: Learning to make a difference. https://doi.org/10.59350/zzqr4-9g482

    Reda Sadki (2024). Protect, invest, together: strengthening health workforce through new learning models. Reda Sadki: Learning to make a difference. https://doi.org/10.59350/g24b4-7fj64

    Reda Sadki (2024). What is double-loop learning in global health?. Reda Sadki: Learning to make a difference. https://doi.org/10.59350/s4xtw-b7274

    Reda Sadki (2024). World Malaria Day 2024: We need new ways to support health workers leading change with local communities. Reda Sadki: Learning to make a difference. https://doi.org/10.59350/yrn1r-hpz62

    #brainDrain #cosmopolitanLocalism #dataQualityAndUse #doubleLoopLearning #HalimaMwenesi #healthWorkerMotivation #healthWorkerPerformance #healthWorkforce #HRH #implementationScience #leadership #learningStrategy #learningBasedWork #localization #malaria #peerLearning #performance #softSkills #TeachToReach #translationalScience
    #braindrain #cosmopolitanlocalism #dataqualityanduse #doublelooplearning #halimamwenesi #healthworkermotivation
  7. Australia News Beep @[email protected] ·

    Prince Andrew has been excised from the royal family. Should the monarchy do more?

    Anyone else wondering why the royal family has not just catapulted Prince Andrew to a deserted island, or…
    #NewsBeep #News #Entertainment #AU #Australia #DukeofYork #emilymaitlis #epsteinfiles #hrh #investigation #JeffreyEpstein #juliabaird #KingCharles #memoir #PrinceAndrew #princeandrewtitles #SarahFerguson #virginiagiuffre
    newsbeep.com/au/240513/

    #virginiagiuffre #sarahferguson #princeandrewtitles #princeandrew #memoir #kingcharles
  8. UK @[email protected] ·

    europesays.com/uk/527532/ Prince Andrew has been excised from the royal family. Should the monarchy do more? #DukeOfYork #EmilyMaitlis #EpsteinFiles #HRH #investigation #JeffreyEpstein #JuliaBaird #KingCharles #memoir #PrinceAndrew #PrinceAndrewTitles #Royal #RoyalFamilies #RoyalFamily #Royals #SarahFerguson #VirginiaGiuffre

    #virginiagiuffre #sarahferguson #royals #royalfamily #royalfamilies #royal
  9. Australia News Beep @[email protected] ·

    Prince Andrew, Harry, Meghan and King Edward VIII show what losing a title says about the House of Windsor

    Prince Andrew finally fell on his sword on the weekend and announced he would give up using his…
    #NewsBeep #News #Entertainment #AU #Australia #churchill #dukeofsussex #DukeofYork #hrh #JeffreyEpstein #kindcharles #meghan #PrinceAndrew #PrinceHarry #PrinceWilliam #queenelizabeth #RoyalFamily #SarahFerguson #scandal #titles #winston
    newsbeep.com/au/228219/

    #winston #titles #scandal #sarahferguson #royalfamily #queenelizabeth
  10. UK @[email protected] ·

    europesays.com/uk/399965/ Katharine, Duchess of Kent and Wimbledon’s Most Compassionate Royal, Dies at 92 | UK #BasilHume #BuckinghamPalace #DuchessOfKent #DukeOfKent #ElizabethII #HRH #JanaNovotna #Katharine #KatharineWorsley #katherine #KatherineDeath #KatherineDuchessOfKent #Kent #KingAndQueen #PrinceCharles #PrinceEdward #PrincessAnne #RomanCatholicism #Royal #RoyalFamilies #RoyalFamily #Royals #TheDuchessOfKent #TimesNow #UK #WansbeckPrimarySchool #WhoIsTheDuchessOfKent #Wimbledon #Yorkshire

    #yorkshire #wimbledon #whoistheduchessofkent #wansbeckprimaryschool #uk #timesnow
  11. UK @[email protected] ·

    europesays.com/uk/216658/ There’s More Drama Around Prince Harry & Meghan Markle’s Kids’ Royal Titles Than We Ever Realized #BritishRoyalFamily #DuchessOfSussex #DukeOfSussex #Harry #HRH #Meghan #MeghanMarkle #Prince #PrinceArchie #PrinceHarry #PrinceWilliam #PrincessLilibet #RoyalFamilies #RoyalFamily #RoyalTitles #UKRoyalFamily

    #ukroyalfamily #royaltitles #royalfamily #royalfamilies #princesslilibet #princewilliam
  12. UK @[email protected] ·

    europesays.com/uk/186897/ Prince William Will Allegedly Make a Drastic Move Against Meghan & Harry’s Children’s Royal Future #Celebrities #Entertainment #HarryAndMeghan #HRH #Lilibet #MeghanMarkle #PrinceHarry #PrinceWilliam #TheRoyalFamily #UK #UnitedKingdom

    #unitedkingdom #uk #theroyalfamily #princewilliam #princeharry #meghanmarkle
  13. NewsTainmentOra @[email protected] ·

    Prince Harry and Meghan Markle asked to give up their royal titles
    newstainmentora.blogspot.com/2
    #PrinceHarry #MeghanMarkle #RoyalFamily #hrh #hrhduchessofsussex #hrhduchessmeghan #royaltitles

    #princeharry #meghanmarkle #royalfamily #hrh #hrhduchessofsussex #hrhduchessmeghan
  14. NewsTainmentOra @[email protected] ·

    Prince Harry and Meghan Markle still rely on royal ties
    newstainmentora.blogspot.com/2
    #PrinceHarry #MeghanMarkIe #RoyalFamily #hrh #hrhtitles #hrhduchessmeghan #hrhduchessofsussex

    #princeharry #meghanmarkie #royalfamily #hrh #hrhtitles #hrhduchessmeghan
  15. NewsTainmentOra @[email protected] ·

    Insider selects royal to strip Harry and Meghan's royal status that is 'not worth it'
    newstainmentora.blogspot.com/2
    #princeharry #MeghanMarkle #RoyalFamily #hrh #hrhtitles #hrhduchessmeghan #duchessofsussex

    #princeharry #meghanmarkle #royalfamily #hrh #hrhtitles #hrhduchessmeghan
  16. NewsTainmentOra @[email protected] ·

    Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are labeled 'hypocrites' for their attitude
    newstainmentora.blogspot.com/2
    #MeghanMarkle #PrinceHarry #RoyalFamily #hrh #hrhduchessmeghan

    #meghanmarkle #princeharry #royalfamily #hrh #hrhduchessmeghan
  17. NewsTainmentOra @[email protected] ·

    Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'not shocked' by William's decision to remove their titles
    newstainmentora.blogspot.com/2
    #PrinceHarry #MeghanMarkle #princewilliam #hrh #hrhduchessmeghan #duchessofsussex #hrhtitle #RoyalFamily

    #princeharry #meghanmarkle #princewilliam #hrh #hrhduchessmeghan #duchessofsussex
  18. NewsTainmentOra @[email protected] ·

    Meghan Markle is mocked for sticking to ancient titles by 'destroyers'
    newstainmentora.blogspot.com/2
    #MeghanMarkle #hrhduchessmeghan #hrh #hrhtitle #duchessmeghan #duchessofsussex

    #meghanmarkle #hrhduchessmeghan #hrh #hrhtitle #duchessmeghan #duchessofsussex
  19. NewsTainmentOra @[email protected] ·

    Meghan Markle's 'egocentric affectation' toward her HRH title takes an ugly turn
    newstainmentora.blogspot.com/2
    #MeghanMarkle #duchessofsussex #hrh #hrhtitle #RoyalFamily #duchessmeghan

    #meghanmarkle #duchessofsussex #hrh #hrhtitle #royalfamily #duchessmeghan
  20. NewsTainmentOra @[email protected] ·

    Meghan Markle accused of utilizing her HRH title to get privileged access
    newstainmentora.blogspot.com/2
    #MeghanMarkle #duchessofsussex #RoyalFamily #hrh #hrhtitle

    #meghanmarkle #duchessofsussex #royalfamily #hrh #hrhtitle
  21. NewsTainmentOra @[email protected] ·

    Meghan Markle addressed Netflix executives using the HRH title?
    newstainmentora.blogspot.com/2
    #MeghanMarkle #Netflix #duchessofsussex #hrhtitle #hrh

    #meghanmarkle #netflix #duchessofsussex #hrhtitle #hrh
  22. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Artificial intelligence, accountability, and authenticity: knowledge production and power in global health crisis

    I know and appreciate Joseph, a Kenyan health leader from Murang’a County, for years of diligent leadership and contributions as a Scholar of The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF). Recently, he began submitting AI-generated responses to Teach to Reach Questions that were meant to elicit narratives grounded in his personal experience.

    Seemingly unrelated to this, OpenAI just announced plans for specialized AI agents—autonomous systems designed to perform complex cognitive tasks—with pricing ranging from $2,000 monthly for a “high-income knowledge worker” equivalent to $20,000 monthly for “PhD-level” research capabilities.

    This is happening at a time when traditional funding structures in global health, development, and humanitarian response face unprecedented volatility.

    These developments intersect around fundamental questions of knowledge economics, authenticity, and power in global health contexts.

    I want to explore three questions:

    • What happens when health professionals in resource-constrained settings experiment with AI technologies within accountability systems that often penalize innovation?
    • How might systems claiming to replicate human knowledge work transform the economics and ethics of knowledge production?
    • And how should we navigate the tensions between technological adoption and authentic knowledge creation?

    Artificial intelligence within punitive accountability structures of global health

    For years, Joseph had shared thoughtful, context-rich contributions based on his direct experiences. All of a sudden, he was submitting generic mush with all the trappings of bad generative AI content.

    Should we interpret this as disengagement from peer learning?

    Given his history of diligence and commitment, I could not dismiss his exploration of AI tools as diminished engagement. Instead, I understood it as an attempt to incorporate new capabilities into his professional repertoire. This was confirmed when I got to chat with him on a WhatsApp call.

    Our current Teach to Reach Questions system has not yet incorporated the use of AI. Our “old” system did not provide any way for Joseph to communicate what he was exploring.

    Hence, the quality limitations in AI-generated narratives highlight not ethical failings but a developmental process requiring support rather than judgment.

    But what does this look like when situated within global health accountability structures?

    Health workers frequently operate within highly punitive systems where performance evaluation directly impacts funding decisions. International donors maintain extensive surveillance of program implementation, creating environments where experimentation carries significant risk. When knowledge sharing becomes entangled with performance evaluation, the incentives for transparency about AI “co-working” (i.e., collaboration between human and AI in work) diminish dramatically.

    Seen through this lens, the question becomes not whether to prohibit AI-generated contributions but how to create environments where practitioners can explore technological capabilities without fear that disclosure will lead to automatic devaluation of their knowledge, regardless of its substantive quality. This heavily depends on the learning culture, which remains largely ignored or dismissed in global health.

    The transparency paradox: disclosure and devaluation of artificial intelligence in global health

    This case illustrates what might be called the “transparency paradox”—when disclosure or recognition of AI contribution triggers automatic devaluation regardless of substantive quality. Current attitudes create a problematic binary: acknowledge AI assistance and have contributions dismissed regardless of quality, or withhold disclosure and risk accusations of misrepresentation or worse.

    This paradox creates perverse incentives against transparency, particularly in contexts where knowledge production undergoes intensive evaluation linked to resource allocation. The global health sector’s evaluation systems often emphasize compliance over innovation, creating additional barriers to technological experimentation. When every submission potentially affects funding decisions, incentives for technological experimentation become entangled with accountability pressures.

    This dynamic particularly affects practitioners in Global South contexts, who face more intense scrutiny while having less institutional protection for experimentation. The punitive nature of global health accountability systems deserves particular emphasis. Health workers operate within hierarchical structures where performance is consistently monitored by both national governments and international donors. Surveillance extends from quantitative indicators to qualitative assessments of knowledge and practice.

    In environments where funding depends on demonstrating certain types of knowledge or outcomes, the incentive to leverage artificial intelligence in global health may conflict with values of authenticity and transparency. This surveillance culture creates uniquely challenging conditions for technological experimentation. When performance evaluation drives resource allocation decisions, health workers face considerable risk in acknowledging technological assistance—even as they face pressure to incorporate emerging technologies into their practice.

    The economics of knowledge in global health contexts

    OpenAI’s announced “agents” represent a substantial evolution beyond simple chatbots or language models. If they are able to deliver what they just announced, these specialized systems would autonomously perform complex tasks simulating the cognitive work of highly-skilled professionals. The most expensive tier, priced at $20,000 monthly, purportedly offers “PhD-level” research capabilities, working continuously without the limitations of human scheduling or attention.

    These claims, while unproven, suggest a potential future where knowledge work economics fundamentally change. For global health organizations operating in Geneva, where even a basic intern position for a recent master’s degree graduate cost more than 200 times that of a ChatGPT subscription, the economic proposition of systems working 24/7 for potentially comparable costs merits careful examination.

    However, the global health sector has historically operated with significant labor stratification, where personnel in Global North institutions command substantially higher compensation than those working in Global South contexts. Local health workers often provide critical knowledge at compensation rates far below those of international consultants or staff at Northern institutions. This creates a different economic equation than suggested by Geneva-based comparisons. Many organizations have long relied on substantially lower local labor costs, often justified through capacity-building narratives that mask underlying power asymmetries.

    Given this history, the risk that artificial intelligence in global health would replace local knowledge workers might initially appear questionable. Furthermore, the sector has demonstrated considerable resistance to technological adoption, particularly when it might disrupt established operational patterns. However, this analysis overlooks how economic pressures interact with technological change during periods of significant disruption.

    The recent decisions of many government to donors to suddenly and drastically cut funding and shut down programs illustrates how rapidly even established funding structures can collapse. In such environments, organizations face existential questions about maintaining operational capacity, potentially creating conditions where technological substitution becomes more attractive despite institutional resistance.

    A new AI divide

    ChatGPT and other generative AI tools were initially “geo-locked”, making them more difficult to access from outside Europe and North America.

    Now, the stratified pricing structure of OpenAI’s announced agents raises profound equity concerns. With the most sophisticated capabilities reserved for those able to pay high costs for the most capable agents, we face the potential emergence of an “AI divide” that threatens to reinforce existing knowledge power imbalances.

    This divide presents particular challenges for global health organizations working across diverse contexts. If advanced AI capabilities remain the exclusive province of Northern institutions while Southern partners operate with limited or no AI augmentation, how might this affect knowledge dynamics already characterized by significant inequities?

    The AI divide extends beyond simple access to include quality differentials in available systems. Even as simple AI tools become widely available, sophisticated capabilities that genuinely enhance knowledge work may remain concentrated within well-resourced institutions. This could lead to a scenario where practitioners in resource-constrained settings use rudimentary AI tools that produce low-quality outputs, further reinforcing perceptions of capability gaps between North and South.

    Confronting power dynamics in AI integration

    Traditional knowledge systems in global health position expertise in academic and institutional centers, with information flowing outward to practitioners who implement standardized solutions. This existing structure reflects and reinforces global power imbalances. 

    The integration of AI within these systems could either exacerbate these inequities—by further concentrating knowledge production capabilities within well-resourced institutions—or potentially disrupt them by enabling more distributed knowledge creation processes.

    Joseph’s journey demonstrates this tension. His adoption of AI tools might be viewed as an attempt to access capabilities otherwise reserved for those with greater institutional resources. The question becomes not whether to allow such adoption, but how to ensure it serves genuine knowledge democratization rather than simply producing more sophisticated simulations of participation.

    These emerging dynamics require us to fundamentally rethink how knowledge is valued, created, and shared within global health networks. The transparency paradox, economic pressures, and emerging AI divide suggest that technological integration will not occur within neutral space but rather within contexts already characterized by significant power asymmetries.

    Developing effective responses requires moving beyond simple prescriptions about AI adoption toward deeper analysis of how these technologies interact with existing power structures—and how they might be intentionally directed toward either reinforcing or transforming these structures.

    My framework for Artificial Intelligence as co-worker to support networked learning and local action is intended to contribute to such efforts.

    Illustration: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

    References

    Frehywot, S., Vovides, Y., 2024. Contextualizing algorithmic literacy framework for global health workforce education. AIH 0, 4903. https://doi.org/10.36922/aih.4903

    Hazarika, I., 2020. Artificial intelligence: opportunities and implications for the health workforce. International Health 12, 241–245. https://doi.org/10.1093/inthealth/ihaa007

    John, A., Newton-Lewis, T., Srinivasan, S., 2019. Means, Motives and Opportunity: determinants of community health worker performance. BMJ Glob Health 4, e001790. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001790

    Newton-Lewis, T., Munar, W., Chanturidze, T., 2021. Performance management in complex adaptive systems: a conceptual framework for health systems. BMJ Glob Health 6, e005582. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005582

    Newton-Lewis, T., Nanda, P., 2021. Problematic problem diagnostics: why digital health interventions for community health workers do not always achieve their desired impact. BMJ Glob Health 6, e005942. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005942

    Artificial Intelligence and the health workforce: Perspectives from medical associations on AI in health (OECD Artificial Intelligence Papers No. 28), 2024. , OECD Artificial Intelligence Papers. https://doi.org/10.1787/9a31d8af-en

    Sadki, R. (2025). A global health framework for Artificial Intelligence as co-worker to support networked learning and local action. Reda Sadki. https://doi.org/10.59350/gr56c-cdd51

    #accountability #accountabilityOverloads #ArtificialIntelligence #compliance #conservatism #globalHealth #healthWorkers #HRH #incentives #innovation #learningCulture #performanceMonitoring #TeachToReach

    #teachtoreach #performancemonitoring #learningculture #innovation #incentives #hrh
  23. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Artificial intelligence, accountability, and authenticity: knowledge production and power in global health crisis

    I know and appreciate Joseph, a Kenyan health leader from Murang’a County, for years of diligent leadership and contributions as a Scholar of The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF). Recently, he began submitting AI-generated responses to Teach to Reach Questions that were meant to elicit narratives grounded in his personal experience.

    Seemingly unrelated to this, OpenAI just announced plans for specialized AI agents—autonomous systems designed to perform complex cognitive tasks—with pricing ranging from $2,000 monthly for a “high-income knowledge worker” equivalent to $20,000 monthly for “PhD-level” research capabilities.

    This is happening at a time when traditional funding structures in global health, development, and humanitarian response face unprecedented volatility.

    These developments intersect around fundamental questions of knowledge economics, authenticity, and power in global health contexts.

    I want to explore three questions:

    • What happens when health professionals in resource-constrained settings experiment with AI technologies within accountability systems that often penalize innovation?
    • How might systems claiming to replicate human knowledge work transform the economics and ethics of knowledge production?
    • And how should we navigate the tensions between technological adoption and authentic knowledge creation?

    Artificial intelligence within punitive accountability structures of global health

    For years, Joseph had shared thoughtful, context-rich contributions based on his direct experiences. All of a sudden, he was submitting generic mush with all the trappings of bad generative AI content.

    Should we interpret this as disengagement from peer learning?

    Given his history of diligence and commitment, I could not dismiss his exploration of AI tools as diminished engagement. Instead, I understood it as an attempt to incorporate new capabilities into his professional repertoire. This was confirmed when I got to chat with him on a WhatsApp call.

    Our current Teach to Reach Questions system has not yet incorporated the use of AI. Our “old” system did not provide any way for Joseph to communicate what he was exploring.

    Hence, the quality limitations in AI-generated narratives highlight not ethical failings but a developmental process requiring support rather than judgment.

    But what does this look like when situated within global health accountability structures?

    Health workers frequently operate within highly punitive systems where performance evaluation directly impacts funding decisions. International donors maintain extensive surveillance of program implementation, creating environments where experimentation carries significant risk. When knowledge sharing becomes entangled with performance evaluation, the incentives for transparency about AI “co-working” (i.e., collaboration between human and AI in work) diminish dramatically.

    Seen through this lens, the question becomes not whether to prohibit AI-generated contributions but how to create environments where practitioners can explore technological capabilities without fear that disclosure will lead to automatic devaluation of their knowledge, regardless of its substantive quality. This heavily depends on the learning culture, which remains largely ignored or dismissed in global health.

    The transparency paradox: disclosure and devaluation of artificial intelligence in global health

    This case illustrates what might be called the “transparency paradox”—when disclosure or recognition of AI contribution triggers automatic devaluation regardless of substantive quality. Current attitudes create a problematic binary: acknowledge AI assistance and have contributions dismissed regardless of quality, or withhold disclosure and risk accusations of misrepresentation or worse.

    This paradox creates perverse incentives against transparency, particularly in contexts where knowledge production undergoes intensive evaluation linked to resource allocation. The global health sector’s evaluation systems often emphasize compliance over innovation, creating additional barriers to technological experimentation. When every submission potentially affects funding decisions, incentives for technological experimentation become entangled with accountability pressures.

    This dynamic particularly affects practitioners in Global South contexts, who face more intense scrutiny while having less institutional protection for experimentation. The punitive nature of global health accountability systems deserves particular emphasis. Health workers operate within hierarchical structures where performance is consistently monitored by both national governments and international donors. Surveillance extends from quantitative indicators to qualitative assessments of knowledge and practice.

    In environments where funding depends on demonstrating certain types of knowledge or outcomes, the incentive to leverage artificial intelligence in global health may conflict with values of authenticity and transparency. This surveillance culture creates uniquely challenging conditions for technological experimentation. When performance evaluation drives resource allocation decisions, health workers face considerable risk in acknowledging technological assistance—even as they face pressure to incorporate emerging technologies into their practice.

    The economics of knowledge in global health contexts

    OpenAI’s announced “agents” represent a substantial evolution beyond simple chatbots or language models. If they are able to deliver what they just announced, these specialized systems would autonomously perform complex tasks simulating the cognitive work of highly-skilled professionals. The most expensive tier, priced at $20,000 monthly, purportedly offers “PhD-level” research capabilities, working continuously without the limitations of human scheduling or attention.

    These claims, while unproven, suggest a potential future where knowledge work economics fundamentally change. For global health organizations operating in Geneva, where even a basic intern position for a recent master’s degree graduate cost more than 200 times that of a ChatGPT subscription, the economic proposition of systems working 24/7 for potentially comparable costs merits careful examination.

    However, the global health sector has historically operated with significant labor stratification, where personnel in Global North institutions command substantially higher compensation than those working in Global South contexts. Local health workers often provide critical knowledge at compensation rates far below those of international consultants or staff at Northern institutions. This creates a different economic equation than suggested by Geneva-based comparisons. Many organizations have long relied on substantially lower local labor costs, often justified through capacity-building narratives that mask underlying power asymmetries.

    Given this history, the risk that artificial intelligence in global health would replace local knowledge workers might initially appear questionable. Furthermore, the sector has demonstrated considerable resistance to technological adoption, particularly when it might disrupt established operational patterns. However, this analysis overlooks how economic pressures interact with technological change during periods of significant disruption.

    The recent decisions of many government to donors to suddenly and drastically cut funding and shut down programs illustrates how rapidly even established funding structures can collapse. In such environments, organizations face existential questions about maintaining operational capacity, potentially creating conditions where technological substitution becomes more attractive despite institutional resistance.

    A new AI divide

    ChatGPT and other generative AI tools were initially “geo-locked”, making them more difficult to access from outside Europe and North America.

    Now, the stratified pricing structure of OpenAI’s announced agents raises profound equity concerns. With the most sophisticated capabilities reserved for those able to pay high costs for the most capable agents, we face the potential emergence of an “AI divide” that threatens to reinforce existing knowledge power imbalances.

    This divide presents particular challenges for global health organizations working across diverse contexts. If advanced AI capabilities remain the exclusive province of Northern institutions while Southern partners operate with limited or no AI augmentation, how might this affect knowledge dynamics already characterized by significant inequities?

    The AI divide extends beyond simple access to include quality differentials in available systems. Even as simple AI tools become widely available, sophisticated capabilities that genuinely enhance knowledge work may remain concentrated within well-resourced institutions. This could lead to a scenario where practitioners in resource-constrained settings use rudimentary AI tools that produce low-quality outputs, further reinforcing perceptions of capability gaps between North and South.

    Confronting power dynamics in AI integration

    Traditional knowledge systems in global health position expertise in academic and institutional centers, with information flowing outward to practitioners who implement standardized solutions. This existing structure reflects and reinforces global power imbalances. 

    The integration of AI within these systems could either exacerbate these inequities—by further concentrating knowledge production capabilities within well-resourced institutions—or potentially disrupt them by enabling more distributed knowledge creation processes.

    Joseph’s journey demonstrates this tension. His adoption of AI tools might be viewed as an attempt to access capabilities otherwise reserved for those with greater institutional resources. The question becomes not whether to allow such adoption, but how to ensure it serves genuine knowledge democratization rather than simply producing more sophisticated simulations of participation.

    These emerging dynamics require us to fundamentally rethink how knowledge is valued, created, and shared within global health networks. The transparency paradox, economic pressures, and emerging AI divide suggest that technological integration will not occur within neutral space but rather within contexts already characterized by significant power asymmetries.

    Developing effective responses requires moving beyond simple prescriptions about AI adoption toward deeper analysis of how these technologies interact with existing power structures—and how they might be intentionally directed toward either reinforcing or transforming these structures.

    My framework for Artificial Intelligence as co-worker to support networked learning and local action is intended to contribute to such efforts.

    Illustration: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

    References

    Frehywot, S., Vovides, Y., 2024. Contextualizing algorithmic literacy framework for global health workforce education. AIH 0, 4903. https://doi.org/10.36922/aih.4903

    Hazarika, I., 2020. Artificial intelligence: opportunities and implications for the health workforce. International Health 12, 241–245. https://doi.org/10.1093/inthealth/ihaa007

    John, A., Newton-Lewis, T., Srinivasan, S., 2019. Means, Motives and Opportunity: determinants of community health worker performance. BMJ Glob Health 4, e001790. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001790

    Newton-Lewis, T., Munar, W., Chanturidze, T., 2021. Performance management in complex adaptive systems: a conceptual framework for health systems. BMJ Glob Health 6, e005582. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005582

    Newton-Lewis, T., Nanda, P., 2021. Problematic problem diagnostics: why digital health interventions for community health workers do not always achieve their desired impact. BMJ Glob Health 6, e005942. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005942

    Artificial Intelligence and the health workforce: Perspectives from medical associations on AI in health (OECD Artificial Intelligence Papers No. 28), 2024. , OECD Artificial Intelligence Papers. https://doi.org/10.1787/9a31d8af-en

    Sadki, R. (2025). A global health framework for Artificial Intelligence as co-worker to support networked learning and local action. Reda Sadki. https://doi.org/10.59350/gr56c-cdd51

    #accountability #accountabilityOverloads #ArtificialIntelligence #compliance #conservatism #globalHealth #healthWorkers #HRH #incentives #innovation #learningCulture #performanceMonitoring #TeachToReach

    #accountability #accountabilityoverloads #artificialintelligence #compliance #conservatism #globalhealth
  24. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Health at COP29: Workforce crisis meets climate crisis

    Health workers are already being transformed by climate change. COP29 stakeholders can either support this transformation to strengthen health systems, or risk watching the health workforce collapse under mounting pressures.

    The World Health Organization’s “COP29 Special Report on Climate Change and Health: Health is the Argument for Climate Action“ highlights the health sector’s role in climate action.

    Health professionals are eyewitnesses and first responders to climate impacts on people and communities firsthand – from escalating respiratory diseases to spreading infections and increasing humanitarian disasters.

    The report positions health workers as “trusted members of society” who are “uniquely positioned” to champion climate action.

    The context is stark: WHO projects a global shortage of 10 million health workers by 2030, with six million in climate-vulnerable sub-Saharan Africa. Meanwhile, our communities and healthcare systems already bear the costs of climate change through increasing disease burdens and system strain.

    Health workers are responding, because they have to. Their daily engagement with climate-affected communities offers insights that can strengthen both health systems and climate response – if we learn to listen.

    A “fit-for-purpose” workforce requires rethinking learning and leadership

    WHO’s report acknowledges that “scale-up and increased investments are necessary to build a well-distributed, fit-for-purpose workforce that can meet accelerating needs, especially in already vulnerable settings.” The report emphasizes that “governments and partners must prioritize access to decent jobs, resources, and support to deliver high-quality, climate-resilient health services.” This includes ensuring “essential protective equipment, supplies, fair compensation, and safe working conditions such as adequate personnel numbers, skills mix, and supervisory capacity.”

    Resources, skills, and supervision are building blocks of every health system.

    They are necessary but likely to be insufficient.

    Such investments could be maximized through cost-effective, scalable peer learning networks that enable rapid knowledge sharing and solution development – as well as their locally-led implementation.

    The WHO report calls for “community-led initiatives that harness local knowledge and practices.”

    Our analyses – formed by listening to and learning from thousands of health professionals participating in the Teach to Reach peer learning platform – suggest that the expertise developed by health professionals through daily engagement with communities facing climate impacts is key to problem-solving, to implementing local solutions, and to ensure that communities are part and parcel of such solutions.

    Why move beyond seeing health workers as implementers of policies or recipients of training?

    We stand to gain much more if their leadership is recognized, nurtured, and supported.

    This is a notion of leadership that diverges from convention: if health workers have leadership potential, it is because they are uniquely positioned to turn what they know – because they are there every day – into action.

    Peer learning has the potential to significantly accelerate progress toward country and global goals for climate change and health.

    By making connections, a health professional expands the horizon of what they are able to know.

    At the Geneva Learning Foundation, we have seen that such leadership emerges when health workers are empowered to:

    • share and validate their experiential knowledge;
    • develop, test, and implement solutions with the communities they serve, using local resources;
    • connect with peers facing similar challenges; and
    • inform policy based on ground-level realities.

    Working with a global community of community-based health workers, we co-developed the Teach to Reach platform, community, and network to listen and learn at scale. Unlike traditional training programs, Teach to Reach creates a peer learning ecosystem where:

    • Health workers from over 70 countries connect directly to share experiences.
    • Solutions are crowdsourced from those closest to the challenges.
    • Knowledge flows horizontally rather than just vertically.
    • Local innovations are rapidly shared and adapted across contexts.

    For example, in June 2024, over 21,000 health professionals participated in Teach to Reach 10, generating hundreds of real-world stories and insights about climate change impacts on health.

    The platform has proven particularly valuable in fragile contexts and resource-limited settings, where traditional capacity building approaches often struggle to reach or engage health workers effectively.

    This approach does not replace formal institutions or traditional scientific methods – instead, it creates new pathways for knowledge to flow rapidly between communities, while building the collective capacity needed to respond to accelerating climate impacts on health.

    Already, this demonstrates the untapped potential for health workers to contribute to our collective understanding and response.

    But we do not stop there.

    As we count down to Teach to Reach 11, participants are now sharing how they have actually used and applied this peer knowledge to make progress against their local challenges.

    They cannot do it alone.

    This is why we ask global partners to join and contribute to this emergent, locally-led leadership for change.

    How different is this ‘ask’ from that of global partners asking health workers to contribute to the climate change and health agenda?

    WHO’s COP29 report makes a powerful case that “community-led initiatives that harness local knowledge and practices in both climate action and health strategies are fundamental for creating interventions that are both culturally appropriate and effective.”

    Furthermore, it recognizes that “these initiatives ensure that climate and health solutions are tailored to the specific needs and realities of those most impacted by climate change but also grounded in their lived realities.”

    What framework for collaboration?

    The path forward requires what the report describes as “cooperation across sectors, stakeholders and rights-holders – governmental institutions, local authorities, local leaders including religious authorities and traditional medicine practitioners, NGOs, businesses, the health community, Indigenous Peoples as well as local communities.”

    Our experience with Teach to Reach demonstrates how such cooperation can be facilitated at scale through digital platforms that enable peer learning and knowledge sharing. Key elements include:

    • a structured yet flexible framework for sharing experiences and insights;
    • direct connections between health workers at all levels of the system;
    • rapid feedback loops between local implementation and broader learning;
    • support for health workers to document and share their innovations; and
    • mechanisms to validate and spread effective local solutions.

    WHO’s recognition that health workers have “a moral, professional and public responsibility to protect and promote health, which includes advocating for climate action, leveraging prevention for climate mitigation and cost savings, and safeguarding healthy environments” sets a clear mandate.

    This WHO report highlights the need for new ways of supporting community-led learning and action to:

    1. support the rapid sharing of local solutions;
    2. build health worker capacity through peer learning;
    3. connect communities facing similar challenges; and
    4. enable health workers to lead change in their communities

    Reference

    Neira, M. et al. (2024) COP 29 Special Report on Climate Change and Health: Health is the Argument for Climate Action. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    Share this:

    #climateAction #climateAndHealth #COP29 #COP29SpecialReportOnClimateChangeAndHealthHealthIsTheArgumentForClimateAction #healthWorkers #HRH #leadership #localAction #MariaNeira #resilience #WorldHealthOrganization

    #climateandhealth #worldhealthorganization #resilience #marianeira #localaction #leadership
  25. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Health at COP29: Workforce crisis meets climate crisis

    Health workers are already being transformed by climate change. COP29 stakeholders can either support this transformation to strengthen health systems, or risk watching the health workforce collapse under mounting pressures.

    The World Health Organization’s “COP29 Special Report on Climate Change and Health: Health is the Argument for Climate Action“ highlights the health sector’s role in climate action.

    Health professionals are eyewitnesses and first responders to climate impacts on people and communities firsthand – from escalating respiratory diseases to spreading infections and increasing humanitarian disasters.

    The report positions health workers as “trusted members of society” who are “uniquely positioned” to champion climate action.

    The context is stark: WHO projects a global shortage of 10 million health workers by 2030, with six million in climate-vulnerable sub-Saharan Africa. Meanwhile, our communities and healthcare systems already bear the costs of climate change through increasing disease burdens and system strain.

    Health workers are responding, because they have to. Their daily engagement with climate-affected communities offers insights that can strengthen both health systems and climate response – if we learn to listen.

    A “fit-for-purpose” workforce requires rethinking learning and leadership

    WHO’s report acknowledges that “scale-up and increased investments are necessary to build a well-distributed, fit-for-purpose workforce that can meet accelerating needs, especially in already vulnerable settings.” The report emphasizes that “governments and partners must prioritize access to decent jobs, resources, and support to deliver high-quality, climate-resilient health services.” This includes ensuring “essential protective equipment, supplies, fair compensation, and safe working conditions such as adequate personnel numbers, skills mix, and supervisory capacity.”

    Resources, skills, and supervision are building blocks of every health system.

    They are necessary but likely to be insufficient.

    Such investments could be maximized through cost-effective, scalable peer learning networks that enable rapid knowledge sharing and solution development – as well as their locally-led implementation.

    The WHO report calls for “community-led initiatives that harness local knowledge and practices.”

    Our analyses – formed by listening to and learning from thousands of health professionals participating in the Teach to Reach peer learning platform – suggest that the expertise developed by health professionals through daily engagement with communities facing climate impacts is key to problem-solving, to implementing local solutions, and to ensure that communities are part and parcel of such solutions.

    Why move beyond seeing health workers as implementers of policies or recipients of training?

    We stand to gain much more if their leadership is recognized, nurtured, and supported.

    This is a notion of leadership that diverges from convention: if health workers have leadership potential, it is because they are uniquely positioned to turn what they know – because they are there every day – into action.

    Peer learning has the potential to significantly accelerate progress toward country and global goals for climate change and health.

    By making connections, a health professional expands the horizon of what they are able to know.

    At the Geneva Learning Foundation, we have seen that such leadership emerges when health workers are empowered to:

    • share and validate their experiential knowledge;
    • develop, test, and implement solutions with the communities they serve, using local resources;
    • connect with peers facing similar challenges; and
    • inform policy based on ground-level realities.

    Working with a global community of community-based health workers, we co-developed the Teach to Reach platform, community, and network to listen and learn at scale. Unlike traditional training programs, Teach to Reach creates a peer learning ecosystem where:

    • Health workers from over 70 countries connect directly to share experiences.
    • Solutions are crowdsourced from those closest to the challenges.
    • Knowledge flows horizontally rather than just vertically.
    • Local innovations are rapidly shared and adapted across contexts.

    For example, in June 2024, over 21,000 health professionals participated in Teach to Reach 10, generating hundreds of real-world stories and insights about climate change impacts on health.

    The platform has proven particularly valuable in fragile contexts and resource-limited settings, where traditional capacity building approaches often struggle to reach or engage health workers effectively.

    This approach does not replace formal institutions or traditional scientific methods – instead, it creates new pathways for knowledge to flow rapidly between communities, while building the collective capacity needed to respond to accelerating climate impacts on health.

    Already, this demonstrates the untapped potential for health workers to contribute to our collective understanding and response.

    But we do not stop there.

    As we count down to Teach to Reach 11, participants are now sharing how they have actually used and applied this peer knowledge to make progress against their local challenges.

    They cannot do it alone.

    This is why we ask global partners to join and contribute to this emergent, locally-led leadership for change.

    How different is this ‘ask’ from that of global partners asking health workers to contribute to the climate change and health agenda?

    WHO’s COP29 report makes a powerful case that “community-led initiatives that harness local knowledge and practices in both climate action and health strategies are fundamental for creating interventions that are both culturally appropriate and effective.”

    Furthermore, it recognizes that “these initiatives ensure that climate and health solutions are tailored to the specific needs and realities of those most impacted by climate change but also grounded in their lived realities.”

    What framework for collaboration?

    The path forward requires what the report describes as “cooperation across sectors, stakeholders and rights-holders – governmental institutions, local authorities, local leaders including religious authorities and traditional medicine practitioners, NGOs, businesses, the health community, Indigenous Peoples as well as local communities.”

    Our experience with Teach to Reach demonstrates how such cooperation can be facilitated at scale through digital platforms that enable peer learning and knowledge sharing. Key elements include:

    • a structured yet flexible framework for sharing experiences and insights;
    • direct connections between health workers at all levels of the system;
    • rapid feedback loops between local implementation and broader learning;
    • support for health workers to document and share their innovations; and
    • mechanisms to validate and spread effective local solutions.

    WHO’s recognition that health workers have “a moral, professional and public responsibility to protect and promote health, which includes advocating for climate action, leveraging prevention for climate mitigation and cost savings, and safeguarding healthy environments” sets a clear mandate.

    This WHO report highlights the need for new ways of supporting community-led learning and action to:

    1. support the rapid sharing of local solutions;
    2. build health worker capacity through peer learning;
    3. connect communities facing similar challenges; and
    4. enable health workers to lead change in their communities

    Reference

    Neira, M. et al. (2024) COP 29 Special Report on Climate Change and Health: Health is the Argument for Climate Action. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    Share this:

    #climateAction #climateAndHealth #COP29 #COP29SpecialReportOnClimateChangeAndHealthHealthIsTheArgumentForClimateAction #healthWorkers #HRH #leadership #localAction #MariaNeira #resilience #WorldHealthOrganization

    #climateandhealth #climateaction #cop29 #cop29specialreportonclimatechangeandhealthhealthistheargumentforclimateaction #healthworkers #hrh
  26. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Discussions at the World Health Summit in Berlin this week have rightly emphasized the role of health workers, especially those directly serving local communities.

    Health workers stand at the intersection of climate change and community health.

    They are first-hand eyewitnesses and the first line of defense against the impacts of climate on health.

    There is real horror in the climate impacts on health they describe.

    Read the Health Worker Eyewitness reports “Climate change and health: Health workers on climate, community, and the urgent need for action“ and “On the frontline of climate change and health: A health worker eyewitness report”.

    There is also real hope in the local solutions and strategies they are already implementing to help communities survive such impacts, most often without support from their government or from the global community.

    There is no alternative to the health workforce as the ones most likely to drive effective adaptation strategies and build trust when it comes to climate change and health.

    Their unique value stems from several key factors:

    1. Firsthand experience: Health workers witness the direct and indirect health impacts of climate change daily, providing valuable insights.
    2. Community trust: As respected figures in their communities, health workers can effectively communicate climate-health risks and promote adaptive behaviors.
    3. Local knowledge: Their deep understanding of local contexts allows for the development of tailored, culturally appropriate solutions.
    4. Existing infrastructure: Health workers represent an established network that is already having to respond to climate change.

    As Dr. Maria Neira from the World Health Organization emphasized at Teach to Reach 10 in June 2024: “We need to use our voice, the power of the voice of health, to convince governments to do three things. First, accelerate the transition to clean sources of energy to stop this disaster. Second, to accelerate the transition to sustainable food systems. And third, to accelerate the transition to better planning of urban areas…” Learn more about Teach to Reach.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ai5RlHRt70A

    However, current global health investments often overlook the potential of health workers.

    Furthermore, there is a tendency to see them as instruments to implement national plans and policies and recipients for knowledge about climate change that they are assumed to be lacking.

    This fails to recognize the potential of health workers to lead, not just execute plans, in the face of climate change impacts on health.

    It also fails to recognize the significance and value of local knowledge and experience that health workers hold because they are there every day.

    A shift in focus could make health workers the most obvious “best buy” for governments and international funders.

    By investing in health workers as agents of change, we can leverage an existing, trusted workforce to rapidly scale up adaptation efforts and rebuild trust in global health initiatives.

    One innovative model developed by The Geneva Learning Foundation has shown promise in this area, connecting over 60,000 health practitioners across 137 countries and reaching frontline government staff working for health in conflict zones and other challenging contexts.

    This approach not only maximizes the impact of climate-health investments but also strengthens health systems overall, creating a win-win scenario for global health and climate resilience.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    Share this:

    https://redasadki.me/2024/10/15/world-health-summit-to-rebuild-trust-in-global-health-recognize-health-workers-as-community-leaders/

    #climateChange #climateInjustice #community #health #HRH #MariaNeira #trust #WHOInvestmentRound #WorldHealthSummit

    #worldhealthsummit #whoinvestmentround #trust #marianeira #hrh #health
  27. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Discussions at the World Health Summit in Berlin this week have rightly emphasized the role of health workers, especially those directly serving local communities.

    Health workers stand at the intersection of climate change and community health.

    They are first-hand eyewitnesses and the first line of defense against the impacts of climate on health.

    There is real horror in the climate impacts on health they describe.

    Read the Health Worker Eyewitness reports “Climate change and health: Health workers on climate, community, and the urgent need for action“ and “On the frontline of climate change and health: A health worker eyewitness report”.

    There is also real hope in the local solutions and strategies they are already implementing to help communities survive such impacts, most often without support from their government or from the global community.

    There is no alternative to the health workforce as the ones most likely to drive effective adaptation strategies and build trust when it comes to climate change and health.

    Their unique value stems from several key factors:

    1. Firsthand experience: Health workers witness the direct and indirect health impacts of climate change daily, providing valuable insights.
    2. Community trust: As respected figures in their communities, health workers can effectively communicate climate-health risks and promote adaptive behaviors.
    3. Local knowledge: Their deep understanding of local contexts allows for the development of tailored, culturally appropriate solutions.
    4. Existing infrastructure: Health workers represent an established network that is already having to respond to climate change.

    As Dr. Maria Neira from the World Health Organization emphasized at Teach to Reach 10 in June 2024: “We need to use our voice, the power of the voice of health, to convince governments to do three things. First, accelerate the transition to clean sources of energy to stop this disaster. Second, to accelerate the transition to sustainable food systems. And third, to accelerate the transition to better planning of urban areas…” Learn more about Teach to Reach.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ai5RlHRt70A

    However, current global health investments often overlook the potential of health workers.

    Furthermore, there is a tendency to see them as instruments to implement national plans and policies and recipients for knowledge about climate change that they are assumed to be lacking.

    This fails to recognize the potential of health workers to lead, not just execute plans, in the face of climate change impacts on health.

    It also fails to recognize the significance and value of local knowledge and experience that health workers hold because they are there every day.

    A shift in focus could make health workers the most obvious “best buy” for governments and international funders.

    By investing in health workers as agents of change, we can leverage an existing, trusted workforce to rapidly scale up adaptation efforts and rebuild trust in global health initiatives.

    One innovative model developed by The Geneva Learning Foundation has shown promise in this area, connecting over 60,000 health practitioners across 137 countries and reaching frontline government staff working for health in conflict zones and other challenging contexts.

    This approach not only maximizes the impact of climate-health investments but also strengthens health systems overall, creating a win-win scenario for global health and climate resilience.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    Share this:

    https://redasadki.me/2024/10/15/world-health-summit-to-rebuild-trust-in-global-health-recognize-health-workers-as-community-leaders/

    #climateChange #climateInjustice #community #health #HRH #MariaNeira #trust #WHOInvestmentRound #WorldHealthSummit

    #climatechange #climateinjustice #community #health #hrh #marianeira
  28. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    7 take-aways from Nigeria’s first Immunization Collaborative peer learning exercise

    On August 6, 2024, the Nigeria Immunization Agenda 2030 Collaborative concluded its first peer learning exercise with a final Assembly.

    This groundbreaking initiative, a partnership between The Geneva Learning Foundation, Nigeria’s National Primary Health Care Development Agency (NPHCDA), and UNICEF, has already engaged over 4,400 health workers from all 36 States and more than 300 Local Government Areas (LGAs) across Nigeria.

    The Collaborative’s innovative approach focuses on empowering health workers to identify root causes of local immunization challenges and develop practical, context-specific solutions.

    As the initiative continues to grow, with new members joining daily, it could help shift how Nigeria approaches immunization capacity building and problem-solving.

    Right after the final Assembly on 6 August 2024, Nigeria immunization specialist Jenny Sequeira and The Geneva Learning Foundation’s deputy director Charlotte Mbuh shared their initial thoughts about the exercise.

    Here are 7 key takeaways from their discussion.

    https://youtu.be/Y8ei3sXDZpg

    1. Critical Thinking Evolution: Participants made significant progress in their analytical skills, moving from vague problem statements to nuanced understanding of local immunization challenges. The “5 Whys” technique proved particularly effective.

    2. Power of Peer Review: The structured, time-bound peer review process emerged as a practical learning tool, fostering self-reflection and exposing participants to diverse perspectives.

    3. Leveling the Playing Field: The Collaborative created an environment where hierarchies dissolved, enabling workers from the local levels to engage laterally with state and national-level participants.

    4. Focus on Actionable Solutions: Participants were encouraged to identify root causes within their control, promoting practical, context-specific solutions.

    5. Importance of Community Engagement: The process highlighted the crucial role of engaging communities and addressing barriers to improve vaccine uptake.

    6. Emphasis on Implementation: While the RCA exercise was valuable, leaders stressed the critical need for follow-through and implementation of proposed solutions.

    7. Cross-Sector Collaboration: The collaborative saw participation from diverse stakeholders, including government agencies, civil society organizations, and private sector entities.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    #CommunityHealthWorkers #healthWorkers #HRH #IA2030 #immunization #ImmunizationAgenda2030 #Nigeria #NPHCDA #UNICEF #zeroDose
    #zerodose #unicef #nphcda #nigeria #immunizationagenda2030 #immunization
  29. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    7 take-aways from Nigeria’s first Immunization Collaborative peer learning exercise

    On August 6, 2024, the Nigeria Immunization Agenda 2030 Collaborative concluded its first peer learning exercise with a final Assembly.

    This groundbreaking initiative, a partnership between The Geneva Learning Foundation, Nigeria’s National Primary Health Care Development Agency (NPHCDA), and UNICEF, has already engaged over 4,400 health workers from all 36 States and more than 300 Local Government Areas (LGAs) across Nigeria.

    The Collaborative’s innovative approach focuses on empowering health workers to identify root causes of local immunization challenges and develop practical, context-specific solutions.

    As the initiative continues to grow, with new members joining daily, it could help shift how Nigeria approaches immunization capacity building and problem-solving.

    Right after the final Assembly on 6 August 2024, Nigeria immunization specialist Jenny Sequeira and The Geneva Learning Foundation’s deputy director Charlotte Mbuh shared their initial thoughts about the exercise.

    Here are 7 key takeaways from their discussion.

    https://youtu.be/Y8ei3sXDZpg

    1. Critical Thinking Evolution: Participants made significant progress in their analytical skills, moving from vague problem statements to nuanced understanding of local immunization challenges. The “5 Whys” technique proved particularly effective.

    2. Power of Peer Review: The structured, time-bound peer review process emerged as a practical learning tool, fostering self-reflection and exposing participants to diverse perspectives.

    3. Leveling the Playing Field: The Collaborative created an environment where hierarchies dissolved, enabling workers from the local levels to engage laterally with state and national-level participants.

    4. Focus on Actionable Solutions: Participants were encouraged to identify root causes within their control, promoting practical, context-specific solutions.

    5. Importance of Community Engagement: The process highlighted the crucial role of engaging communities and addressing barriers to improve vaccine uptake.

    6. Emphasis on Implementation: While the RCA exercise was valuable, leaders stressed the critical need for follow-through and implementation of proposed solutions.

    7. Cross-Sector Collaboration: The collaborative saw participation from diverse stakeholders, including government agencies, civil society organizations, and private sector entities.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    #CommunityHealthWorkers #healthWorkers #HRH #IA2030 #immunization #ImmunizationAgenda2030 #Nigeria #NPHCDA #UNICEF #zeroDose
    #communityhealthworkers #healthworkers #hrh #ia2030 #immunization #immunizationagenda2030
  30. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    Integrating community-based monitoring (CBM) into a comprehensive learning-to-action model

    According to Gavi, “community-based monitoring” or “CBM” is a process where service users collect data on various aspects of health service provision to monitor program implementation, identify gaps, and collaboratively develop solutions with providers.

    • Community-based monitoring (CBM) has emerged as a promising strategy for enhancing immunization program performance and equity.
    • CBM interventions have been implemented across different settings and populations, including remote rural areas, urban poor, fragile/conflict-affected regions, and marginalized groups such as indigenous populations and people living with HIV.

    By engaging service users, CBM aims to foster greater accountability and responsiveness to local needs.

    • However, realizing CBM’s potential in practice has proven challenging.
    • Without a coherent approach, CBM risks becoming just another disconnected tool.

    The Geneva Learning Foundation’s innovative learning-to-action model offers a compelling framework within which CBM could be applied to immunization challenges.

    The model’s comprehensive design creates an enabling environment for effectively integrating diverse monitoring data sources – and this could include community perspectives.

    Health workers as trusted community advisers… and members of the community

    A distinctive feature of TGLF’s model is its emphasis on health workers’ role as trusted advisors to the communities they serve.

    The model recognizes that local health staff are not merely service providers, but often deeply embedded community members with intimate knowledge of local realities.

    For example, in TGLF’s immunization learning initiatives, participating health workers frequently share insights into the social, cultural, and economic factors shaping vaccine hesitancy and uptake in their communities.

    • They discuss the everyday barriers families face, from misinformation to transportation challenges, and strategize context-specific outreach approaches.
    • This grounding in community realities positions health workers as vital bridges for facilitating community engagement in monitoring.

    When local staff are empowered as active agents of learning and change, they can more effectively champion community participation, translating insights into tangible improvements.

    Could CBM fit into a more comprehensive system from local monitoring to action?

    TGLF’s model supports health workers in this bridging role by providing a comprehensive framework for local monitoring and action.

    Through peer learning networks and problem-solving cycles, the model equips health staff to collect, interpret, and act on unconventional monitoring data from their communities.

    For instance, in TGLF’s 2022 “Full Learning Cycle” initiative, 6,185 local health workers from 99 countries examined key immunization indicators to inform their analyses of root causes and then map out corrective actions.

    • Participants began monitoring their own local health indicators, such as vaccination coverage rates.
    • For many, this was the first time they had been prompted to use this data for problem-solving a real-world challenge they face, rather than just reporting up the next level of the health system.

    They discussed many factors critical for tailoring immunization strategies.

    This transition – from being passive data collectors to active data users – has proven transformative.

    It positions health workers not as cogs in a reporting machine, but as empowered analysts and strategists.

    By discussing real metrics with peers, participants make data actionable and contextually meaningful.

    Guided by expert-designed rubrics and facilitated discussions, health workers translated this localized monitoring data into practical improvement plans.

    For an epidemiologist, this represents a significant shift from traditional top-down monitoring paradigms.

    By valuing and actioning local knowledge, TGLF’s model demonstrates how community insights can be systematically integrated into immunization decision-making.

    However, until now, its actors have been health workers, many of them members of the communities they serve, not service users themselves.

    CBM’s focus on monitoring is important – but leaves out key issues around community participation, decision-making autonomy, and strategy.

    How could we integrate CBM into a transformative approach?

    TGLF’s experiences suggest that CBM could be embedded within comprehensive learning-to-action systems focused on locally-led change.

    TGLF’s model is more than a monitoring intervention.

    • It combines structured learning, rapid solution sharing, root cause analysis, action planning, and peer accountability to drive measurable improvements.
    • These mutually reinforcing components create an enabling environment for health workers to translate insights into impact.

    In this framing, community monitoring becomes one critical input within a continuous, collaborative process of problem-solving and adaptation.

    Several features of TGLF’s model illustrate how this integration could work in practice:

    1. Peer accountability structures, where health workers regularly convene to review progress, share challenges, and iterate solutions, create natural entry points for discussing and actioning community feedback.
    2. Rapid dissemination channels, like TGLF’s “Ideas Engine” for spreading promising practices across contexts, enable local innovations in response to community-identified gaps to be efficiently scaled.
    3. Emphasis on root cause analysis and systemic thinking equips health workers to interpret community insights within a broader ecosystem lens, connecting localized issues to upstream determinants.
    4. Cultivation of connected leadership empowers local actors to champion community priorities and navigate complex change processes.

    TGLF’s extensive digital network connects health workers across system levels and contexts, enabling them to learn from each other’s experiences with no upper limit to the number of participants.

    By contrast, CBM seems to assume that a community is limited to a physical area, which fails to recognize that problem-solving complex challenges requires expanding the range of inputs used.

    Within a networked approach that connects both community members and health workers across boundaries of geography, health system level, and roles, CBM could become an integral component of a transformative approach to health system improvement – one that recognizes communities and local health workers as capable architects of context-responsive solutions.

    Fundamentally, the TGLF model invites a shift in mindset about whose expertise counts in monitoring and driving system change.

    CBM could provide the ‘connective tissue’ for health workers to revise how they listen and learn with the communities they serve.

    For immunization programs grappling with persistent inequities, this shift from passive compliance to proactive local problem-solving is critical.

    As the COVID-19 crisis has underscored, rapidly evolving public health challenges demand localized action that harnesses the full range of community expertise.

    TGLF’s model offers a tested framework for actualizing this vision at scale.

    By investing in local health workers’ capacity to learn, adapt, and lead change in partnership with the communities they serve, the model illuminates a promising pathway for integrating CBM into immunization monitoring and beyond.

    For epidemiologists and global health practitioners, TGLF’s approach invites a reframing of how we conceptualize and operationalize community engagement in health system monitoring.

    It challenges us to move beyond tokenistic participation towards genuine co-design and co-ownership of monitoring processes with local actors.

    Realizing this vision will require significant shifts in mindsets, power dynamics, and resource flows.

    But as TGLF’s initiatives demonstrate, when we invest in the leadership of those closest to the challenges we seek to solve, transformative possibilities emerge.

    Further rigorous research comparing the impacts of different CBM integration models could help accelerate this paradigm shift, surfacing critical lessons for the immunization field and global health more broadly.

    TGLF’s model not only offers compelling lessons for reimagining monitoring and improvement in immunization programs, it also provides a pathway for integrating CBM into a system that supports actual change.

    CBM practitioners are likely to struggle with how to incorporate it into existing practices.

    By investing in frontline health workers as change agents, and surrounding them with an empowering learning ecosystem, the model offers a path to then bring in community monitoring.

    Without such leadership from health workers, it is unlikely that communities are able to participate.

    The journey to authentic community engagement in health system monitoring is undoubtedly complex.

    But if we are to deliver on the promise of equitable immunization for all, it is a journey we must undertake.

    TGLF’s model lights one promising path forward – one that positions communities and local health workers as the beating heart of a learning health system.

    While Gavi’s evidence brief affirms the promise of CBM for immunization, TGLF’s experience with its own model suggests the full potential of CBM may be realized by embedding it within more comprehensive, digitally-enabled learning systems that activate health workers as agents of change – and do so with both physical and digital communities implementing new forms of peer and community accountability that complement conventional kinds (supervision, administration, donor, etc.).

    Share this:

    #communityBasedMonitoring #continuousLearning #globalHealth #healthWorkers #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #immunization #ImmunizationAgenda2030 #learningStrategy #TheGenevaLearningFoundation #zeroDoseChildren #ZeroDoseLearningHubZDLH_

    #communitybasedmonitoring #continuouslearning #globalhealth #healthworkers #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth
  31. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The global health community has long grappled with the challenge of providing effective, scalable training to health workers, particularly in resource-constrained settings.

    In recent years, digital learning platforms have emerged as a potential solution, promising to deliver accessible, engaging, and impactful training at scale.

    Imagine a digital platform intended to train health workers at scale.

    Their theory of change rests on a few key assumptions:

    1. Offering simplified, mobile-friendly courses will make training more accessible to health workers.
    2. Incorporating videos and case studies will keep learners engaged.
    3. Quizzes and knowledge checks will ensure learning happens.
    4. Certificates, continuing education credits, and small incentives will motivate course completion.
    5. Growing the user base through marketing and partnerships is the path to impact.

    On the surface, this seems sensible.

    Mobile optimization recognizes health workers’ technological realities.

    Multimedia content seems more engaging than pure text.

    Assessments appear to verify learning.

    Incentives promise to drive uptake.

    Scale feels synonymous with success.

    While well-intentioned, such a platform risks falling into the trap of a behaviorist learning agenda.

    This is an approach that, despite its prevalence, is a pedagogical dead-end with limited potential for driving meaningful, sustained improvements in health worker performance and health outcomes.

    It is a paradigm that views learners as passive recipients of information, where exposure equals knowledge acquisition.

    It is a model that privileges standardization over personalization, content consumption over knowledge creation, and extrinsic rewards over intrinsic motivation.

    It fails to account for the rich diversity of prior experiences, contexts, and challenges that health workers bring to their learning.

    Most critically, it neglects the higher-order skills – the critical thinking, the adaptive expertise, the self-directed learning capacity – that are most predictive of real-world performance.

    Clicking through screens of information about neonatal care, for example, is not the same as developing the situational judgment to adapt guidelines to a complex clinical scenario, nor the reflective practice to continuously improve.

    Moreover, the metrics typically prioritized by behaviorist platforms – user registrations, course completions, assessment scores – are often vanity metrics.

    They create an illusion of progress while obscuring the metrics that truly matter: behavior change, performance improvement, and health outcomes.

    A health worker may complete a generic course on neonatal care, for example, but this does not necessarily translate into the situational judgment to adapt guidelines to complex clinical scenarios, nor the reflective practice to continuously improve.

    The behaviorist paradigm’s emphasis on information transmission and standardized content may stem from an implicit assumption that health workers at the community level do not require higher-order critical thinking skills – that they simply need a predetermined set of knowledge and procedures.

    This view is not only paternalistic and insulting, but it is also fundamentally misguided.

    A robust body of scientific evidence on learning culture and performance demonstrates that the most effective organizations are those that foster continuous learning, critical reflection, and adaptive problem-solving at all levels.

    Health workers at the frontlines face complex, unpredictable challenges that demand situational judgment, creative thinking, and the ability to learn from experience.

    Failing to cultivate these capacities not only underestimates the potential of these health workers, but it also constrains the performance and resilience of health systems as a whole.

    Even if such a platform achieves its growth targets, it is unlikely to realize its impact goals.

    Health workers may dutifully click through courses, but genuine transformative learning remains elusive.

    The alternative lies in a learning agenda grounded in advances of the last three decades learning science.

    These advances remain largely unknown or ignored in global health.

    This approach positions health workers as active, knowledgeable agents, rich in experience and expertise.

    It designs learning experiences not merely to transmit information, but to foster critical reflection, dialogue, and problem-solving.

    It replaces generic content with authentic, context-specific challenges, and isolated study with collaborative sense-making in peer networks.

    It recognizes intrinsic motivation – the desire to grow, to serve, to make a difference – as the most potent driver of learning.

    Here, success is measured not in superficial metrics, but in meaningful outcomes: capacity to lead change in facilities and communities that leads to tangible improvements in the quality of care.

    Global health leaders faces a choice: to settle for the illusion of progress, or to invest in the deep, difficult work of authentic learning and systemic change, commensurate with the complexity and urgency of the task at hand.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    https://redasadki.me/2024/06/30/learn-health-but-beware-of-the-behaviorist-trap/

    #behaviorism #eLearning #healthTraining #HealthLearn #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #learningCulture #learningStrategy #workforceDevelopment

    #behaviorism #elearning #healthtraining #healthlearn #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth
  32. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The global health community has long grappled with the challenge of providing effective, scalable training to health workers, particularly in resource-constrained settings.

    In recent years, digital learning platforms have emerged as a potential solution, promising to deliver accessible, engaging, and impactful training at scale.

    Imagine a digital platform intended to train health workers at scale.

    Their theory of change rests on a few key assumptions:

    1. Offering simplified, mobile-friendly courses will make training more accessible to health workers.
    2. Incorporating videos and case studies will keep learners engaged.
    3. Quizzes and knowledge checks will ensure learning happens.
    4. Certificates, continuing education credits, and small incentives will motivate course completion.
    5. Growing the user base through marketing and partnerships is the path to impact.

    On the surface, this seems sensible.

    Mobile optimization recognizes health workers’ technological realities.

    Multimedia content seems more engaging than pure text.

    Assessments appear to verify learning.

    Incentives promise to drive uptake.

    Scale feels synonymous with success.

    While well-intentioned, such a platform risks falling into the trap of a behaviorist learning agenda.

    This is an approach that, despite its prevalence, is a pedagogical dead-end with limited potential for driving meaningful, sustained improvements in health worker performance and health outcomes.

    It is a paradigm that views learners as passive recipients of information, where exposure equals knowledge acquisition.

    It is a model that privileges standardization over personalization, content consumption over knowledge creation, and extrinsic rewards over intrinsic motivation.

    It fails to account for the rich diversity of prior experiences, contexts, and challenges that health workers bring to their learning.

    Most critically, it neglects the higher-order skills – the critical thinking, the adaptive expertise, the self-directed learning capacity – that are most predictive of real-world performance.

    Clicking through screens of information about neonatal care, for example, is not the same as developing the situational judgment to adapt guidelines to a complex clinical scenario, nor the reflective practice to continuously improve.

    Moreover, the metrics typically prioritized by behaviorist platforms – user registrations, course completions, assessment scores – are often vanity metrics.

    They create an illusion of progress while obscuring the metrics that truly matter: behavior change, performance improvement, and health outcomes.

    A health worker may complete a generic course on neonatal care, for example, but this does not necessarily translate into the situational judgment to adapt guidelines to complex clinical scenarios, nor the reflective practice to continuously improve.

    The behaviorist paradigm’s emphasis on information transmission and standardized content may stem from an implicit assumption that health workers at the community level do not require higher-order critical thinking skills – that they simply need a predetermined set of knowledge and procedures.

    This view is not only paternalistic and insulting, but it is also fundamentally misguided.

    A robust body of scientific evidence on learning culture and performance demonstrates that the most effective organizations are those that foster continuous learning, critical reflection, and adaptive problem-solving at all levels.

    Health workers at the frontlines face complex, unpredictable challenges that demand situational judgment, creative thinking, and the ability to learn from experience.

    Failing to cultivate these capacities not only underestimates the potential of these health workers, but it also constrains the performance and resilience of health systems as a whole.

    Even if such a platform achieves its growth targets, it is unlikely to realize its impact goals.

    Health workers may dutifully click through courses, but genuine transformative learning remains elusive.

    The alternative lies in a learning agenda grounded in advances of the last three decades learning science.

    These advances remain largely unknown or ignored in global health.

    This approach positions health workers as active, knowledgeable agents, rich in experience and expertise.

    It designs learning experiences not merely to transmit information, but to foster critical reflection, dialogue, and problem-solving.

    It replaces generic content with authentic, context-specific challenges, and isolated study with collaborative sense-making in peer networks.

    It recognizes intrinsic motivation – the desire to grow, to serve, to make a difference – as the most potent driver of learning.

    Here, success is measured not in superficial metrics, but in meaningful outcomes: capacity to lead change in facilities and communities that leads to tangible improvements in the quality of care.

    Global health leaders faces a choice: to settle for the illusion of progress, or to invest in the deep, difficult work of authentic learning and systemic change, commensurate with the complexity and urgency of the task at hand.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    https://redasadki.me/2024/06/30/learn-health-but-beware-of-the-behaviorist-trap/

    #behaviorism #eLearning #healthTraining #HealthLearn #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #learningCulture #learningStrategy #workforceDevelopment

    #behaviorism #elearning #healthtraining #healthlearn #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth
  33. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The global health community has long grappled with the challenge of providing effective, scalable training to health workers, particularly in resource-constrained settings.

    In recent years, digital learning platforms have emerged as a potential solution, promising to deliver accessible, engaging, and impactful training at scale.

    Imagine a digital platform intended to train health workers at scale.

    Their theory of change rests on a few key assumptions:

    1. Offering simplified, mobile-friendly courses will make training more accessible to health workers.
    2. Incorporating videos and case studies will keep learners engaged.
    3. Quizzes and knowledge checks will ensure learning happens.
    4. Certificates, continuing education credits, and small incentives will motivate course completion.
    5. Growing the user base through marketing and partnerships is the path to impact.

    On the surface, this seems sensible.

    Mobile optimization recognizes health workers’ technological realities.

    Multimedia content seems more engaging than pure text.

    Assessments appear to verify learning.

    Incentives promise to drive uptake.

    Scale feels synonymous with success.

    While well-intentioned, such a platform risks falling into the trap of a behaviorist learning agenda.

    This is an approach that, despite its prevalence, is a pedagogical dead-end with limited potential for driving meaningful, sustained improvements in health worker performance and health outcomes.

    It is a paradigm that views learners as passive recipients of information, where exposure equals knowledge acquisition.

    It is a model that privileges standardization over personalization, content consumption over knowledge creation, and extrinsic rewards over intrinsic motivation.

    It fails to account for the rich diversity of prior experiences, contexts, and challenges that health workers bring to their learning.

    Most critically, it neglects the higher-order skills – the critical thinking, the adaptive expertise, the self-directed learning capacity – that are most predictive of real-world performance.

    Clicking through screens of information about neonatal care, for example, is not the same as developing the situational judgment to adapt guidelines to a complex clinical scenario, nor the reflective practice to continuously improve.

    Moreover, the metrics typically prioritized by behaviorist platforms – user registrations, course completions, assessment scores – are often vanity metrics.

    They create an illusion of progress while obscuring the metrics that truly matter: behavior change, performance improvement, and health outcomes.

    A health worker may complete a generic course on neonatal care, for example, but this does not necessarily translate into the situational judgment to adapt guidelines to complex clinical scenarios, nor the reflective practice to continuously improve.

    The behaviorist paradigm’s emphasis on information transmission and standardized content may stem from an implicit assumption that health workers at the community level do not require higher-order critical thinking skills – that they simply need a predetermined set of knowledge and procedures.

    This view is not only paternalistic and insulting, but it is also fundamentally misguided.

    A robust body of scientific evidence on learning culture and performance demonstrates that the most effective organizations are those that foster continuous learning, critical reflection, and adaptive problem-solving at all levels.

    Health workers at the frontlines face complex, unpredictable challenges that demand situational judgment, creative thinking, and the ability to learn from experience.

    Failing to cultivate these capacities not only underestimates the potential of these health workers, but it also constrains the performance and resilience of health systems as a whole.

    Even if such a platform achieves its growth targets, it is unlikely to realize its impact goals.

    Health workers may dutifully click through courses, but genuine transformative learning remains elusive.

    The alternative lies in a learning agenda grounded in advances of the last three decades learning science.

    These advances remain largely unknown or ignored in global health.

    This approach positions health workers as active, knowledgeable agents, rich in experience and expertise.

    It designs learning experiences not merely to transmit information, but to foster critical reflection, dialogue, and problem-solving.

    It replaces generic content with authentic, context-specific challenges, and isolated study with collaborative sense-making in peer networks.

    It recognizes intrinsic motivation – the desire to grow, to serve, to make a difference – as the most potent driver of learning.

    Here, success is measured not in superficial metrics, but in meaningful outcomes: capacity to lead change in facilities and communities that leads to tangible improvements in the quality of care.

    Global health leaders faces a choice: to settle for the illusion of progress, or to invest in the deep, difficult work of authentic learning and systemic change, commensurate with the complexity and urgency of the task at hand.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    https://redasadki.me/2024/06/30/learn-health-but-beware-of-the-behaviorist-trap/

    #behaviorism #eLearning #healthTraining #HealthLearn #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #learningCulture #learningStrategy #workforceDevelopment

    #behaviorism #elearning #healthtraining #healthlearn #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth
  34. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The global health community has long grappled with the challenge of providing effective, scalable training to health workers, particularly in resource-constrained settings.

    In recent years, digital learning platforms have emerged as a potential solution, promising to deliver accessible, engaging, and impactful training at scale.

    Imagine a digital platform intended to train health workers at scale.

    Their theory of change rests on a few key assumptions:

    1. Offering simplified, mobile-friendly courses will make training more accessible to health workers.
    2. Incorporating videos and case studies will keep learners engaged.
    3. Quizzes and knowledge checks will ensure learning happens.
    4. Certificates, continuing education credits, and small incentives will motivate course completion.
    5. Growing the user base through marketing and partnerships is the path to impact.

    On the surface, this seems sensible.

    Mobile optimization recognizes health workers’ technological realities.

    Multimedia content seems more engaging than pure text.

    Assessments appear to verify learning.

    Incentives promise to drive uptake.

    Scale feels synonymous with success.

    While well-intentioned, such a platform risks falling into the trap of a behaviorist learning agenda.

    This is an approach that, despite its prevalence, is a pedagogical dead-end with limited potential for driving meaningful, sustained improvements in health worker performance and health outcomes.

    It is a paradigm that views learners as passive recipients of information, where exposure equals knowledge acquisition.

    It is a model that privileges standardization over personalization, content consumption over knowledge creation, and extrinsic rewards over intrinsic motivation.

    It fails to account for the rich diversity of prior experiences, contexts, and challenges that health workers bring to their learning.

    Most critically, it neglects the higher-order skills – the critical thinking, the adaptive expertise, the self-directed learning capacity – that are most predictive of real-world performance.

    Clicking through screens of information about neonatal care, for example, is not the same as developing the situational judgment to adapt guidelines to a complex clinical scenario, nor the reflective practice to continuously improve.

    Moreover, the metrics typically prioritized by behaviorist platforms – user registrations, course completions, assessment scores – are often vanity metrics.

    They create an illusion of progress while obscuring the metrics that truly matter: behavior change, performance improvement, and health outcomes.

    A health worker may complete a generic course on neonatal care, for example, but this does not necessarily translate into the situational judgment to adapt guidelines to complex clinical scenarios, nor the reflective practice to continuously improve.

    The behaviorist paradigm’s emphasis on information transmission and standardized content may stem from an implicit assumption that health workers at the community level do not require higher-order critical thinking skills – that they simply need a predetermined set of knowledge and procedures.

    This view is not only paternalistic and insulting, but it is also fundamentally misguided.

    A robust body of scientific evidence on learning culture and performance demonstrates that the most effective organizations are those that foster continuous learning, critical reflection, and adaptive problem-solving at all levels.

    Health workers at the frontlines face complex, unpredictable challenges that demand situational judgment, creative thinking, and the ability to learn from experience.

    Failing to cultivate these capacities not only underestimates the potential of these health workers, but it also constrains the performance and resilience of health systems as a whole.

    Even if such a platform achieves its growth targets, it is unlikely to realize its impact goals.

    Health workers may dutifully click through courses, but genuine transformative learning remains elusive.

    The alternative lies in a learning agenda grounded in advances of the last three decades learning science.

    These advances remain largely unknown or ignored in global health.

    This approach positions health workers as active, knowledgeable agents, rich in experience and expertise.

    It designs learning experiences not merely to transmit information, but to foster critical reflection, dialogue, and problem-solving.

    It replaces generic content with authentic, context-specific challenges, and isolated study with collaborative sense-making in peer networks.

    It recognizes intrinsic motivation – the desire to grow, to serve, to make a difference – as the most potent driver of learning.

    Here, success is measured not in superficial metrics, but in meaningful outcomes: capacity to lead change in facilities and communities that leads to tangible improvements in the quality of care.

    Global health leaders faces a choice: to settle for the illusion of progress, or to invest in the deep, difficult work of authentic learning and systemic change, commensurate with the complexity and urgency of the task at hand.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    https://redasadki.me/2024/06/30/learn-health-but-beware-of-the-behaviorist-trap/

    #behaviorism #eLearning #healthTraining #HealthLearn #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #learningCulture #learningStrategy #workforceDevelopment

    #workforcedevelopment #learningstrategy #learningculture #humanresourcesforhealth #hrh #healthlearn
  35. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The global health community has long grappled with the challenge of providing effective, scalable training to health workers, particularly in resource-constrained settings.

    In recent years, digital learning platforms have emerged as a potential solution, promising to deliver accessible, engaging, and impactful training at scale.

    Imagine a digital platform intended to train health workers at scale.

    Their theory of change rests on a few key assumptions:

    1. Offering simplified, mobile-friendly courses will make training more accessible to health workers.
    2. Incorporating videos and case studies will keep learners engaged.
    3. Quizzes and knowledge checks will ensure learning happens.
    4. Certificates, continuing education credits, and small incentives will motivate course completion.
    5. Growing the user base through marketing and partnerships is the path to impact.

    On the surface, this seems sensible.

    Mobile optimization recognizes health workers’ technological realities.

    Multimedia content seems more engaging than pure text.

    Assessments appear to verify learning.

    Incentives promise to drive uptake.

    Scale feels synonymous with success.

    While well-intentioned, such a platform risks falling into the trap of a behaviorist learning agenda.

    This is an approach that, despite its prevalence, is a pedagogical dead-end with limited potential for driving meaningful, sustained improvements in health worker performance and health outcomes.

    It is a paradigm that views learners as passive recipients of information, where exposure equals knowledge acquisition.

    It is a model that privileges standardization over personalization, content consumption over knowledge creation, and extrinsic rewards over intrinsic motivation.

    It fails to account for the rich diversity of prior experiences, contexts, and challenges that health workers bring to their learning.

    Most critically, it neglects the higher-order skills – the critical thinking, the adaptive expertise, the self-directed learning capacity – that are most predictive of real-world performance.

    Clicking through screens of information about neonatal care, for example, is not the same as developing the situational judgment to adapt guidelines to a complex clinical scenario, nor the reflective practice to continuously improve.

    Moreover, the metrics typically prioritized by behaviorist platforms – user registrations, course completions, assessment scores – are often vanity metrics.

    They create an illusion of progress while obscuring the metrics that truly matter: behavior change, performance improvement, and health outcomes.

    A health worker may complete a generic course on neonatal care, for example, but this does not necessarily translate into the situational judgment to adapt guidelines to complex clinical scenarios, nor the reflective practice to continuously improve.

    The behaviorist paradigm’s emphasis on information transmission and standardized content may stem from an implicit assumption that health workers at the community level do not require higher-order critical thinking skills – that they simply need a predetermined set of knowledge and procedures.

    This view is not only paternalistic and insulting, but it is also fundamentally misguided.

    A robust body of scientific evidence on learning culture and performance demonstrates that the most effective organizations are those that foster continuous learning, critical reflection, and adaptive problem-solving at all levels.

    Health workers at the frontlines face complex, unpredictable challenges that demand situational judgment, creative thinking, and the ability to learn from experience.

    Failing to cultivate these capacities not only underestimates the potential of these health workers, but it also constrains the performance and resilience of health systems as a whole.

    Even if such a platform achieves its growth targets, it is unlikely to realize its impact goals.

    Health workers may dutifully click through courses, but genuine transformative learning remains elusive.

    The alternative lies in a learning agenda grounded in advances of the last three decades learning science.

    These advances remain largely unknown or ignored in global health.

    This approach positions health workers as active, knowledgeable agents, rich in experience and expertise.

    It designs learning experiences not merely to transmit information, but to foster critical reflection, dialogue, and problem-solving.

    It replaces generic content with authentic, context-specific challenges, and isolated study with collaborative sense-making in peer networks.

    It recognizes intrinsic motivation – the desire to grow, to serve, to make a difference – as the most potent driver of learning.

    Here, success is measured not in superficial metrics, but in meaningful outcomes: capacity to lead change in facilities and communities that leads to tangible improvements in the quality of care.

    Global health leaders faces a choice: to settle for the illusion of progress, or to invest in the deep, difficult work of authentic learning and systemic change, commensurate with the complexity and urgency of the task at hand.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    https://redasadki.me/2024/06/30/learn-health-but-beware-of-the-behaviorist-trap/

    #behaviorism #eLearning #healthTraining #HealthLearn #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #learningCulture #learningStrategy #workforceDevelopment

    #behaviorism #elearning #healthtraining #healthlearn #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth
  36. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    As world leaders gathered for the COP28 climate conference, the Geneva Learning Foundation called for the insights of health workers on the frontlines of climate and health to be heard amidst the global dialogue.

    Ahead of Teach to Reach 10, a new eyewitness report analyses 219 new insights shared by 122 health professionals – primarily those working in local communities across Africa, Asia and Latin America – to two critical questions: How is climate change affecting the health of the communities you serve right now? And what actions must world leaders take to help you protect the people in your care?

    (Teach to Reach is a regular peer learning event. The tenth edition on 20-21 June 2024 is expected to gather over 20,000 community-based health workers to share experience of climate change impacts on health. Request your invitation here.)

    Their answers paint a picture of the accelerating health crisis unfolding in the world’s most climate-vulnerable regions. Community nurses, doctors, midwives and public health officers detail how volatile weather patterns are driving up malnutrition, infectious disease, mental illness, and more – while simultaneously battering health systems and blocking patient access to care.

    Yet woven throughout are also threads of resilience, ingenuity and hope. Health advocates are not just passively observing the impacts of climate change, but actively responding – often with scarce resources. From spearheading tree-planting initiatives to strengthening infectious disease surveillance to promoting climate literacy, they are innovating locally-tailored solutions.

    Importantly, respondents emphasize that climate impacts cannot be viewed in isolation, but rather as one facet of the interlocking crises of environmental destruction, poverty, and health inequity. Their insights make clear that climate action and community health are two sides of the same coin – and that neither will be achieved without deep investment in local health workforces and systems.

    Rooted in direct lived experience and charged with moral urgency, these frontline voices offer a stirring reminder that climate change is not some distant specter, but a life-and-death challenge already at the doorsteps of the global poor. As this new collection of insights implores, it’s high time their perspectives moved from the margins to the center of the climate debate.

    As Charlotte Mbuh of The Geneva Learning Foundation explains: “We hope that the chorus of voices will grow to strengthen the case for  why and how investment in human resources for health is likely to be a ‘best buy’ for community-focused efforts to build the climate resilience of public health systems.”

    Jones, I., Mbuh, C., Sadki, R., & Steed, I. (2024). Climate change and health: Health workers on climate, community, and the urgent need for action (1.0). The Geneva Learning Foundation. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11194918

    Share this:

    https://redasadki.me/2024/05/20/climate-change-and-health-health-workers-on-climate-community-and-the-urgent-need-for-action/

    #climateChange #communityHealth #health #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #localAction #TheGenevaLearningFoundation

    #climatechange #communityhealth #health #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth #localaction
  37. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    English version | Version française

    GENEVA, Switzerland, 8 March 2024 – The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) is sharing a collection of stories titled “Women inspiring women”, shared by 177 women on the frontlines of health and humanitarian action.

    Download: The Geneva Learning Foundation. (2024). Women inspiring women: International Women’s Day 2024 (1.0). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10783218

    The collection is a vibrant tapestry of women’s voices from the frontlines of health and humanitarian action, woven together to showcase the resilience, passion, and leadership of women who are making a difference in the face of war, disease, and climate change.

    TGLF reached out to women in its global network of more than 60,000 health workers, inviting them to share their heartfelt advice and vision for the future with young women and girls.

    Health workers in this network, men and women, are on the frontlines of adversity: they work in remote rural areas or with the urban poor. Many support the needs of nomadic and migrant populations, refugees, and internally-displaced populations (IDPs). 

    Imagine being able to sit down with a community health worker in Nigeria, a nurse in India, or a doctor in Brazil, and listen to their stories of triumph and struggle. “Women Inspiring Women” makes that possible, bringing together voices that are rarely heard on the global stage.

    The responses are raw, honest, and deeply moving.

    From remote villages to urban slums, women work to build a better future for their communities.

    What makes this collection truly unique is its authenticity and diversity. 

    “In a world of war, disease, and a worsening climate, literacy is vital for the next generation of women and girls to make better choices concerning health, marriage, and income. Literacy is key in transforming households out of poverty, no matter who they are or where they are born.” – Hauwa Abbas, Public health specialist (MPH), Nigeria

    Through their words, these women offer invaluable guidance to the next generation of female leaders. They share the lessons they’ve learned, the challenges they’ve faced, and the hopes they hold for a world where every girl can live a healthy, fulfilling life, no matter where she is born.

    “Serving humanity as a health or humanitarian worker is one of the most rewarding careers one can engage in. Though it requires a lot of hard work more importantly and what is usually not thought about is the heart work it involves. The ability to empathize with the sick and those in humanitarian needs is a key ingredient for success.” – Ngozi Kennedy MB ChB, MPH, Public health specialist, Ethiopia

    “This collection is a celebration of the incredible resilience and leadership of women health workers and humanitarians worldwide,” said TGLF Executive Director Reda Sadki. “It’s a testament to the power of storytelling to inspire change and unite us in our shared vision for a better future.”

    “Insist on making generational impact as a woman against ALL odds! Don’t give up, don’t give in, don’t give way! Persistence wears out resistance! This is my success story today as I battled many challenges to establish rotavirus surveillance in my country as well as rotavirus vaccine introduction advocacy which has finally culminated in the vaccine introduction in Nigeria.” – Professor Beckie Tagbo, Doctor, Institute of Child Health, University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu, Nigeria

    In the lead up to International Women’s Day, TGLF has been sharing sneak peeks of the stories and quotes on its social media platforms. Follow along on LinkedIn, Twitter/X, Facebook, Instagram and Telegram to get a glimpse of the inspiration that awaits.

    “Women Inspiring Women” is more than just a collection of stories. It’s a rallying cry for gender equality, a celebration of women’s leadership, and a reminder of the incredible impact one voice can have. Get ready to be inspired, moved, and empowered by the voices of women health workers and humanitarians worldwide.

    Join us in amplifying the voices of these extraordinary women and creating a world where every girl can thrive.

    “Resilience and determination in the face of difficulties will be essential – it is vital not to be deterred or discouraged when faced with setbacks of adversity, which are an inevitability in these spheres. Health or humanitarian work is all about people. There may be days where you question your decision and that is where determination keeps you going.” – Genise Pascal-Ferrer Iglesias, Coordinator of Imaging Services, Goodwill, Dominica

    “Empowered women empower women. Ever since you were born, I kept you with me in all my philanthropic activities. […] I wish you all the blessings, happiness and success in life. Someday, you will write a similar letter to your own daughter saying, ‘Empowered women empower women’.” – Dr Faiza Rabbani, Public health specialist (MPH), Lahore District, Punjab Province, Pakistan

    Download “Women inspiring women” via this link https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10783218

    About the Geneva Learning Foundation

    Learn more about The Geneva Learning Foundation: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7316466

    Created by a group of learning innovators and scientists with the mission to discover new ways to lead change, TGLF’s team combines over 70 years of experience with both country-based (field) work and country, region, and global partners.

    • Our small, fully remote agile team already supports over 60,000 health practitioners leading change in 137 countries.
    • We reach the front lines: 21% face armed conflict; 25% work with refugees or internally-displaced populations; 62% work in remote rural areas; 47% with the urban poor; 36% support the needs of nomadic/migrant populations.

    TGLF’s unique package:

    1. Helps local actors take action with communities to tackle local challenges, and
    2. provides the tools to build a global network, platform, and community of health workers that can scale up local impact for global health.

    In 2019, research showed that TGLF’s approach can accelerate locally-led implementation of innovative strategies by 7X, and works especially well in fragile contexts.

    Photo: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    Share this:

    https://redasadki.me/2024/03/07/womens-voices-from-the-frontlines-of-health-and-humanitarian-action/

    #gender #globalHealth #healthWorkers #HRH #InternationalWomenSDay #IWD2024 #WomenInspiringWomen

    #gender #globalhealth #healthworkers #hrh #internationalwomensday #iwd2024
  38. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    English version | Version française

    GENÈVE, Suisse, le 8 mars 2024 — La Fondation Apprendre Genève (TGLF) partage une collection de récits intitulée « Des femmes pour la santé », partagées par 177 femmes en première ligne de la santé et de l’action humanitaire.

    Télécharger la collection: La Fondation Apprendre Genève (2024).  Des femmes pour la santé : Journée internationale de la femme 2024 (1.0). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10792027

    La collection réunit des voix de femmes provenant des premières lignes de la santé et de l’action humanitaire. Ensemble, elles mettent en valeur la résilience, la passion et le leadership des femmes qui font la différence face à la guerre, à la maladie et au changement climatique.

    La Fondation a lancé l’appel aux femmes de son réseau international de plus de 60 000 professionnels de la santé, les invitant à partager avec les jeunes femmes et les filles leurs conseils sincères et leur vision de l’avenir.

    Les membres de ce réseau, hommes et femmes, sont en première ligne face à l’adversité : ils travaillent dans des zones rurales isolées ou auprès des populations urbaines pauvres. Nombre d’entre eux répondent aux besoins des populations nomades et migrantes, des réfugiés et des personnes déplacées à l’intérieur de leur propre pays.

    Imaginez que vous puissiez partager un moment avec un agent de santé communautaire au Nigéria, une infirmière en Inde ou un médecin au Brésil, et écouter leurs histoires de triomphe et de lutte. C’est ce que permet « Des femmes pour la santé ».

    Les réponses sont sincères et profondément émouvantes.

    Des villages reculés aux bidonvilles urbains, les femmes s’efforcent de construire un avenir meilleur pour leurs communautés.

    Ce qui rend cette collection vraiment unique, c’est son authenticité et sa diversité.

    « Dans un monde marqué par la guerre, la maladie et la détérioration du climat, l’alphabétisation est vitale pour que la prochaine génération de femmes et de jeunes filles puisse faire de meilleurs choix en matière de santé, de mariage et de revenus. L’alphabétisation est essentielle pour sortir les ménages de la pauvreté, quels qu’ils soient et où qu’ils soient nés.» — Hauwa Abbas, spécialiste en santé publique, Nigéria.

    Par leurs paroles, ces femmes offrent des conseils inestimables à la prochaine génération de dirigeantes. Elles partagent les leçons qu’elles ont apprises, les défis auxquels elles ont été confrontées et les espoirs qu’elles nourrissent pour un monde où chaque fille peut vivre une vie saine et épanouie, quel que soit son lieu de naissance.

    «Servir l’humanité en tant que travailleur sanitaire ou humanitaire est l’une des carrières les plus gratifiantes qui soient. Bien qu’elle exige beaucoup de travail, le plus important, et ce à quoi on ne pense généralement pas, c’est le travail du cœur qu’elle implique. La capacité d’empathie avec les malades et les personnes ayant des besoins humanitaires est un ingrédient clé de la réussite ». — Ngozi Kennedy MB ChB, MPH, spécialiste de la santé publique, Éthiopie

    « Cette collection est une célébration de l’incroyable résilience et du leadership des travailleuses de la santé et des humanitaires du monde entier », a déclaré Reda Sadki, directeur exécutif de la Fondation. « Elle témoigne du pouvoir de la narration pour inspirer le changement et nous unir dans notre vision commune d’un avenir meilleur.»

    «Insistez pour avoir un impact générationnel en tant que femme contre TOUTE attente ! N’abandonnez pas, ne cédez pas, ne cédez pas ! La persévérance a raison de la résistance ! C’est ma réussite aujourd’hui, car j’ai relevé de nombreux défis pour mettre en place une surveillance du rotavirus dans mon pays ainsi qu’un plaidoyer pour l’introduction du vaccin contre le rotavirus, qui a finalement abouti à l’introduction du vaccin au Nigéria.» — Professeur Beckie Tagbo, médecin, Institut de la santé infantile, hôpital universitaire de l’université du Nigéria, Enugu, Nigéria.

    À l’approche de la Journée internationale de la femme, la Fondation a partagé des aperçus des histoires et des citations sur ses plateformes de médias sociaux. Suivez-les sur LinkedIn, Twitter/X, Facebook, Instagram et Telegram pour avoir un aperçu de l’inspiration qui vous attend.

    «Les femmes inspirent les femmes » est plus qu’une simple collection d’histoires. C’est un cri de ralliement pour l’égalité des sexes, une célébration du leadership des femmes et un rappel de l’impact incroyable qu’une seule voix peut avoir. Préparez-vous à être inspirés, émus et responsabilisés par les voix des travailleuses de la santé et des humanitaires du monde entier.

    Rejoignez-nous pour amplifier les voix de ces femmes extraordinaires et créer un monde où chaque fille peut s’épanouir.

    « La résilience et la détermination face aux difficultés seront essentielles — il est vital de ne pas se laisser dissuader ou décourager face aux revers de l’adversité, qui sont une inévitabilité dans ces sphères. Le travail dans le domaine de la santé ou de l’humanitaire est avant tout une affaire de personnes. Il peut y avoir des jours où vous remettez votre décision en question et c’est là que la détermination vous permet de continuer.» — Genise Pascal-Ferrer Iglesias, coordinatrice des services d’imagerie, Goodwill, Dominique

    «Les femmes autonomes donnent du pouvoir aux femmes. Depuis votre naissance, je vous ai accompagnée dans toutes mes activités philanthropiques. […] Je vous souhaite toutes les bénédictions, le bonheur et le succès dans la vie. Un jour, vous écrirez une lettre similaire à votre propre fille en lui disant : “Les femmes autonomes autonomisent les femmes.» — Dr Faiza Rabbani, spécialiste de la santé publique (MPH), district de Lahore, province du Pendjab, Pakistan

    Téléchargez « Des femmes pour la santé » via ce lien https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10783218

    A propos de la Fondation Apprendre Genève

    Pour en savoir plus sur La Fondation Apprendre Genève : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7316466

    • Créée par un groupe d’innovateurs et de scientifiques de l’apprentissage ayant pour mission de découvrir de nouvelles façons de conduire le changement, l’équipe de la Fondation combine plus de 70 ans d’expérience à la fois avec un travail basé dans le pays (sur le terrain) et avec des partenaires nationaux, régionaux et internationaux.
    • Notre petite équipe agile, entièrement à distance, soutient déjà plus de 60 000 professionnels de la santé qui conduisent le changement dans 137 pays.
    • Nous sommes en première ligne : 21 % sont confrontés à des conflits armés ; 25 % travaillent avec des réfugiés ou des populations déplacées à l’intérieur du pays ; 62 % travaillent dans des zones rurales éloignées ; 47 % avec les pauvres des villes ; 36 % soutiennent les besoins des populations nomades/migrantes.

    Le modèle innovant de la Fondation :

    1. aide les acteurs locaux à agir avec les communautés pour relever les défis locaux, et
    2. fournit les outils pour construire un réseau mondial, une plateforme et une communauté d’agents de santé qui peuvent augmenter l’impact local pour la santé internationale.

    En 2019, la recherche a montré que l’approche de la Fondation peut accélérer de 7X la mise en œuvre de stratégies innovantes menées localement, et fonctionne particulièrement bien dans les contextes fragiles.

    Share this:

    https://redasadki.me/2024/03/07/voix-de-femmes-en-premiere-ligne-de-la-sante-et-de-laction-humanitaire/

    #francophone #gender #globalHealth #HRH #InternationalWomenSDay #IWD2024 #JournéeInternationaleDesFemmes #WomenInspiringWomen

    #francophone #gender #globalhealth #hrh #internationalwomensday #iwd2024
  39. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    In “Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together,” Agyeman-Manu et al. assert that the COVID-19 pandemic aggravated longstanding health workforce deficiencies globally, especially in under-resourced nations. 

    With projected shortages of 10 million health workers concentrated in Africa and the Middle East by 2030, the authors urgently call for policymakers to commit to retaining and expanding national health workforces. 

    They propose common-sense solutions: increased, coordinated financing and collaboration across government agencies managing health, finance, economic development, education and labor portfolios.

    But how can such interconnected, long-term investments be designed for maximum sustainable impact?

    And what is the role of education?

    Rethinking health worker learning

    In a 2021 WHO survey across 159 countries, most health workers reported lacking adequate training to respond effectively to pandemic demands. This exposed systemic weaknesses in how health workforces develop skills at scale. Long before the COVID-19 pandemic, limitations of traditional learning approaches were already obvious.

    Prevailing modalities overly rely on passive knowledge transfer rather than active learner empowerment and engagement with real-world complexities. While assessment and credentialing are important, ultimately learning must be judged by its relevance, application and impact on people’s lives and health systems.

    Between April and June 2020, I had the privilege of working with a group of 600 of Scholars of The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) from 86 countries. Together, we designed an immersive learning cycle integrating skill-building and peer exchange for those on the frontlines of the epidemic. We called it the “COVID-19 Peer Hub”. 

    It grew into an ecosystem that connected over 6,000 health professionals across 86 countries to share unfiltered insights, give voice to on-the-ground needs, and turn shared experience into action.

    Within three months, a third of participants had already implemented COVID-19 recovery plans, citing peer support as the main driver for turning their commitment into results.

    By the end of 2020, TGLF’s immunization platform, network, and community had tripled in size.

    In 2022, this network transformed into a Movement for Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030).

    Informing health workforce decisions

    What insights can health workforce policymakers draw from the Geneva Learning Foundation’s unique work to achieve the ambitious growth and support targets outlined by Agyeman-Manu et al.?

    First, expert-driven, top-down  approaches alone cannot handle emergent real-world complexities. In TGLF’s learning cycles, the most significant learning often occurs in lateral, one-to-one networking meetings between peers. These defy boundaries of geography, gender, ethnicity, religion, and job roles.

    Second, thoughtfully-applied technology can exponentially accelerate learning’s reach, access and connections following learner needs. New digital modalities opened by pandemic disruptions must be sustained and optimized post-crisis, despite the tendency to revert back to previous norms of learning through high-cost, low-volume formal trainings and workshop.

    Third, relevance heightens learning and application. Learning and teaching should not just be centered on learners’ needs and problems to boost motivation and effectiveness. Learning cannot be detached from its context.

    Finally, nurturing cultures that support effective learning matters for performance and human achievement. Systems enabling peer reward and accountability build resilience.

    Protect, invest, together in a learning workforce

    Health policymakers are manifesting intent to act on the health workforce crisis.

    Alongside urgent investments, applying systemic perspectives from learning innovations like those The Geneva Learning Foundation has pioneered presents a path to growing motivated, capable workforces ready for the challenges ahead.

    Rethinking assumptions opens eyes – when we commit to support health workers holistically, the rewards radiate across health ecosystems.

    Reference: Agyeman-Manu et al. Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together. The Lancet Global Health (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00224-3

    Share this:

    https://redasadki.me/2024/02/12/protect-invest-together-strengthening-health-workforce-through-new-learning-models/

    #healthWorkforce #healthWorkforceShortage #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #learningCulture #performance

    #healthworkforce #healthworkforceshortage #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth #learningculture #performance
  40. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The severe global shortage of health and care workers poses a dangerous threat to health systems, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The authors of the article “Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together”, including six health ministers and the WHO Director-General, assert that this workforce crisis requires urgent action and propose “protect, invest, together” to tackle it.

    Deep protection of the existing workforce, they assert, is needed through improved working conditions, fair compensation, upholding rights, addressing discrimination and violence, closing gender inequities, and implementing the WHO Global Health and Care Worker Compact to ensure dignified working environments. All countries must prioritize retaining workers to build resilient health systems.

    Significantly increased and strategic long-term investments are imperative in both training new health workers through educational channels and sustaining their employment. Countries should designate workforce development, especially at the primary care level, as crucial human capital investments impacting population health outcomes. Intersectoral financing is key, bringing together domestic funds, grants, concessional sources, and private sector partners into coordinated national plans. Global solidarity is required to resource-constrained LMIC health workforces.

    Intersectoral collaboration between ministries of health, finance, economic development, education and employment can develop integrated health workforce strategies. South-South partnerships offer pathways for health worker training and mobility to address regional shortages. Small island nations confront severe but overlooked workforce obstacles requiring specially tailored policy approaches.

    The severe projected health workforce shortfall urgently necessitates that actors globally protect existing health workers, strategically invest in growing national workforces, and unite intersectorally behind robust health employment systems, especially in lower resourced contexts. As the authors emphasize, “there can be no health, health systems, or emergency response without the health and care workforce.”

    What about the role of education?

    This article does not provide much direct discussion of health education systems related to the global health workforce shortage. However, it makes the following relevant points:

    1. Chronic underinvestment in the health and care workforce, including in education and training, has contributed to long-standing shortages.
    2. There is a need for strategic investments in health and care worker education and lifelong learning, with a focus on primary health care, to help address shortages.
    3. Investments in standalone health infrastructure will have little effect unless matched by investments in developing the health workforce through education and training.
    4. Increasing, smarter and sustained long-term financing is crucial for health and care worker education and employment.
    5. Regional and subregional collaboration should be explored to bring together resources and capacities for health workforce education and training.
    6. Intersectoral collaboration between health, education, finance and other sectors is important for developing policies and making investments in health workforce education.

    Read more to understand what this means for health education: Protect, invest, together: strengthening health workforce through new learning models

    Reference: Agyeman-Manu et al. Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together. The Lancet Global Health (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00224-3

    Illustration: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    https://redasadki.me/2024/02/12/prioritizing-the-health-and-care-workforce-shortage-protect-invest-together/

    #globalShortage #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #workforce

    #globalshortage #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth #workforce
  41. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The severe global shortage of health and care workers poses a dangerous threat to health systems, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The authors of the article “Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together”, including six health ministers and the WHO Director-General, assert that this workforce crisis requires urgent action and propose “protect, invest, together” to tackle it.

    Deep protection of the existing workforce, they assert, is needed through improved working conditions, fair compensation, upholding rights, addressing discrimination and violence, closing gender inequities, and implementing the WHO Global Health and Care Worker Compact to ensure dignified working environments. All countries must prioritize retaining workers to build resilient health systems.

    Significantly increased and strategic long-term investments are imperative in both training new health workers through educational channels and sustaining their employment. Countries should designate workforce development, especially at the primary care level, as crucial human capital investments impacting population health outcomes. Intersectoral financing is key, bringing together domestic funds, grants, concessional sources, and private sector partners into coordinated national plans. Global solidarity is required to resource-constrained LMIC health workforces.

    Intersectoral collaboration between ministries of health, finance, economic development, education and employment can develop integrated health workforce strategies. South-South partnerships offer pathways for health worker training and mobility to address regional shortages. Small island nations confront severe but overlooked workforce obstacles requiring specially tailored policy approaches.

    The severe projected health workforce shortfall urgently necessitates that actors globally protect existing health workers, strategically invest in growing national workforces, and unite intersectorally behind robust health employment systems, especially in lower resourced contexts. As the authors emphasize, “there can be no health, health systems, or emergency response without the health and care workforce.”

    What about the role of education?

    This article does not provide much direct discussion of health education systems related to the global health workforce shortage. However, it makes the following relevant points:

    1. Chronic underinvestment in the health and care workforce, including in education and training, has contributed to long-standing shortages.
    2. There is a need for strategic investments in health and care worker education and lifelong learning, with a focus on primary health care, to help address shortages.
    3. Investments in standalone health infrastructure will have little effect unless matched by investments in developing the health workforce through education and training.
    4. Increasing, smarter and sustained long-term financing is crucial for health and care worker education and employment.
    5. Regional and subregional collaboration should be explored to bring together resources and capacities for health workforce education and training.
    6. Intersectoral collaboration between health, education, finance and other sectors is important for developing policies and making investments in health workforce education.

    Read more to understand what this means for health education: Protect, invest, together: strengthening health workforce through new learning models

    Reference: Agyeman-Manu et al. Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together. The Lancet Global Health (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00224-3

    Illustration: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    https://redasadki.me/2024/02/12/prioritizing-the-health-and-care-workforce-shortage-protect-invest-together/

    #globalShortage #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #workforce

    #globalshortage #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth #workforce
  42. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The severe global shortage of health and care workers poses a dangerous threat to health systems, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The authors of the article “Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together”, including six health ministers and the WHO Director-General, assert that this workforce crisis requires urgent action and propose “protect, invest, together” to tackle it.

    Deep protection of the existing workforce, they assert, is needed through improved working conditions, fair compensation, upholding rights, addressing discrimination and violence, closing gender inequities, and implementing the WHO Global Health and Care Worker Compact to ensure dignified working environments. All countries must prioritize retaining workers to build resilient health systems.

    Significantly increased and strategic long-term investments are imperative in both training new health workers through educational channels and sustaining their employment. Countries should designate workforce development, especially at the primary care level, as crucial human capital investments impacting population health outcomes. Intersectoral financing is key, bringing together domestic funds, grants, concessional sources, and private sector partners into coordinated national plans. Global solidarity is required to resource-constrained LMIC health workforces.

    Intersectoral collaboration between ministries of health, finance, economic development, education and employment can develop integrated health workforce strategies. South-South partnerships offer pathways for health worker training and mobility to address regional shortages. Small island nations confront severe but overlooked workforce obstacles requiring specially tailored policy approaches.

    The severe projected health workforce shortfall urgently necessitates that actors globally protect existing health workers, strategically invest in growing national workforces, and unite intersectorally behind robust health employment systems, especially in lower resourced contexts. As the authors emphasize, “there can be no health, health systems, or emergency response without the health and care workforce.”

    What about the role of education?

    This article does not provide much direct discussion of health education systems related to the global health workforce shortage. However, it makes the following relevant points:

    1. Chronic underinvestment in the health and care workforce, including in education and training, has contributed to long-standing shortages.
    2. There is a need for strategic investments in health and care worker education and lifelong learning, with a focus on primary health care, to help address shortages.
    3. Investments in standalone health infrastructure will have little effect unless matched by investments in developing the health workforce through education and training.
    4. Increasing, smarter and sustained long-term financing is crucial for health and care worker education and employment.
    5. Regional and subregional collaboration should be explored to bring together resources and capacities for health workforce education and training.
    6. Intersectoral collaboration between health, education, finance and other sectors is important for developing policies and making investments in health workforce education.

    Read more to understand what this means for health education: Protect, invest, together: strengthening health workforce through new learning models

    Reference: Agyeman-Manu et al. Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together. The Lancet Global Health (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00224-3

    Illustration: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    https://redasadki.me/2024/02/12/prioritizing-the-health-and-care-workforce-shortage-protect-invest-together/

    #globalShortage #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #workforce

    #globalshortage #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth #workforce
  43. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The severe global shortage of health and care workers poses a dangerous threat to health systems, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The authors of the article “Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together”, including six health ministers and the WHO Director-General, assert that this workforce crisis requires urgent action and propose “protect, invest, together” to tackle it.

    Deep protection of the existing workforce, they assert, is needed through improved working conditions, fair compensation, upholding rights, addressing discrimination and violence, closing gender inequities, and implementing the WHO Global Health and Care Worker Compact to ensure dignified working environments. All countries must prioritize retaining workers to build resilient health systems.

    Significantly increased and strategic long-term investments are imperative in both training new health workers through educational channels and sustaining their employment. Countries should designate workforce development, especially at the primary care level, as crucial human capital investments impacting population health outcomes. Intersectoral financing is key, bringing together domestic funds, grants, concessional sources, and private sector partners into coordinated national plans. Global solidarity is required to resource-constrained LMIC health workforces.

    Intersectoral collaboration between ministries of health, finance, economic development, education and employment can develop integrated health workforce strategies. South-South partnerships offer pathways for health worker training and mobility to address regional shortages. Small island nations confront severe but overlooked workforce obstacles requiring specially tailored policy approaches.

    The severe projected health workforce shortfall urgently necessitates that actors globally protect existing health workers, strategically invest in growing national workforces, and unite intersectorally behind robust health employment systems, especially in lower resourced contexts. As the authors emphasize, “there can be no health, health systems, or emergency response without the health and care workforce.”

    What about the role of education?

    This article does not provide much direct discussion of health education systems related to the global health workforce shortage. However, it makes the following relevant points:

    1. Chronic underinvestment in the health and care workforce, including in education and training, has contributed to long-standing shortages.
    2. There is a need for strategic investments in health and care worker education and lifelong learning, with a focus on primary health care, to help address shortages.
    3. Investments in standalone health infrastructure will have little effect unless matched by investments in developing the health workforce through education and training.
    4. Increasing, smarter and sustained long-term financing is crucial for health and care worker education and employment.
    5. Regional and subregional collaboration should be explored to bring together resources and capacities for health workforce education and training.
    6. Intersectoral collaboration between health, education, finance and other sectors is important for developing policies and making investments in health workforce education.

    Read more to understand what this means for health education: Protect, invest, together: strengthening health workforce through new learning models

    Reference: Agyeman-Manu et al. Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together. The Lancet Global Health (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00224-3

    Illustration: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    https://redasadki.me/2024/02/12/prioritizing-the-health-and-care-workforce-shortage-protect-invest-together/

    #globalShortage #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #workforce

    #workforce #humanresourcesforhealth #hrh #globalshortage
  44. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The severe global shortage of health and care workers poses a dangerous threat to health systems, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The authors of the article “Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together”, including six health ministers and the WHO Director-General, assert that this workforce crisis requires urgent action and propose “protect, invest, together” to tackle it.

    Deep protection of the existing workforce, they assert, is needed through improved working conditions, fair compensation, upholding rights, addressing discrimination and violence, closing gender inequities, and implementing the WHO Global Health and Care Worker Compact to ensure dignified working environments. All countries must prioritize retaining workers to build resilient health systems.

    Significantly increased and strategic long-term investments are imperative in both training new health workers through educational channels and sustaining their employment. Countries should designate workforce development, especially at the primary care level, as crucial human capital investments impacting population health outcomes. Intersectoral financing is key, bringing together domestic funds, grants, concessional sources, and private sector partners into coordinated national plans. Global solidarity is required to resource-constrained LMIC health workforces.

    Intersectoral collaboration between ministries of health, finance, economic development, education and employment can develop integrated health workforce strategies. South-South partnerships offer pathways for health worker training and mobility to address regional shortages. Small island nations confront severe but overlooked workforce obstacles requiring specially tailored policy approaches.

    The severe projected health workforce shortfall urgently necessitates that actors globally protect existing health workers, strategically invest in growing national workforces, and unite intersectorally behind robust health employment systems, especially in lower resourced contexts. As the authors emphasize, “there can be no health, health systems, or emergency response without the health and care workforce.”

    What about the role of education?

    This article does not provide much direct discussion of health education systems related to the global health workforce shortage. However, it makes the following relevant points:

    1. Chronic underinvestment in the health and care workforce, including in education and training, has contributed to long-standing shortages.
    2. There is a need for strategic investments in health and care worker education and lifelong learning, with a focus on primary health care, to help address shortages.
    3. Investments in standalone health infrastructure will have little effect unless matched by investments in developing the health workforce through education and training.
    4. Increasing, smarter and sustained long-term financing is crucial for health and care worker education and employment.
    5. Regional and subregional collaboration should be explored to bring together resources and capacities for health workforce education and training.
    6. Intersectoral collaboration between health, education, finance and other sectors is important for developing policies and making investments in health workforce education.

    Read more to understand what this means for health education: Protect, invest, together: strengthening health workforce through new learning models

    Reference: Agyeman-Manu et al. Prioritising the health and care workforce shortage: protect, invest, together. The Lancet Global Health (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00224-3

    Illustration: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2024

    Share this:

    https://redasadki.me/2024/02/12/prioritizing-the-health-and-care-workforce-shortage-protect-invest-together/

    #globalShortage #HRH #HumanResourcesForHealth #workforce

    #globalshortage #hrh #humanresourcesforhealth #workforce
  45. Whiskers 🇦🇺 @[email protected] ·

    Who'd want to be king Charles' surgeon or anaesthetist.
    #nopressure 😆
    #KingCharles #HRH

    #kingcharles #hrh #nopressure
  46. Whiskers 🇦🇺 @[email protected] ·

    Who'd want to be king Charles' surgeon or anaesthetist.
    #nopressure 😆
    #KingCharles #HRH

    #nopressure #kingcharles #hrh
  47. Whiskers 🇦🇺 @[email protected] ·

    Who'd want to be king Charles' surgeon or anaesthetist.
    #nopressure 😆
    #KingCharles #HRH

    #kingcharles #hrh #nopressure
  48. Whiskers 🇦🇺 @[email protected] ·

    Who'd want to be king Charles' surgeon or anaesthetist.
    #nopressure 😆
    #KingCharles #HRH

    #hrh #kingcharles #nopressure
  49. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The Geneva Learning Foundation’s Charlotte Mbuh spoke today at the COP28 Health Pavilion in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE). Learn more…

    Good afternoon. I am Charlotte Mbuh. I have worked for the health of children and families in Cameroon for over 15 years.

    I am one of more than 5,500 health workers from 68 countries who have connected to share our observations of how climate is affecting the health of those we serve. 

    “Going back home to the community where I grew up as a child, I was shocked to see that most of the rivers we used to swim and fish in have all dried up, and those that are still there have become very shallow so that you can easily walk through a river you required a boat to cross in years past.”

    These are the words of Samuel Chukwuemeka Obasi, a health worker from Nigeria.

    Dr Kumbha Gopi, a health worker from India said: “The use of motor vehicles has led to an increase in air pollution and we see respiratory problems and skin diseases”.

    Climate change is hurting the health of those we serve. And it is getting worse.

    Few here would deny that health workers are an essential voice to listen to in order to understand climate impacts on health.

    Yet, a man named Jacob on social media snapped: “Since when are health workers the authority on air pollution?”

    Here are the words of Bie Lilian Mbando, a health worker from my country: “Where I live in Buea, the flood from Mount Cameroon took away all belongings of people in my neighborhood and killed a secondary school student who was playing football with his friends.”

    Climate change is killing communities.

    Cecilia Nabwirwa, a nurse in Nairobi, Kenya: “I remember my grand-son getting sick after eating vegetables grown along areas flooded by sewage. Since then I resolved to growing my own vegetables to ensure healthy eating.”

    And yet, another man on social media, Robert, found this “ridiculous. As if my friend who sells fish at his fish stall comes as an expert on water quality.”

    I wondered: why such brutal responses?

    Well, unlike scientists or global agencies, we cannot be dismissed as “experts from on-high”.

    What we know, we know because we are here every day.

    We are part of the community.

    And we know that climate change is a threat to the health of the communities we serve.

    We are already having to manage the impacts of climate change on health.

    We are doing the best that we can.

    But we need your support.

    The global community is investing in building a new scientific field around climate and health.

    Massive investments are also being made in policy.

    Are we making a commensurate investment in people and communities?

    That should mean investing in health workers.

    What will happen if this investment is neglected?

    What if big global donors say: “it’s important, but it’s not part of our strategy?”

    Well, in 5, 10, or 15 years, we will certainly have much improved science and, hopefully, policy.

    Yet, some communities might reject better science and policy.

    Will the global community then wonder: “Why don’t they know what’s good for them?” 

    I am an immunization worker. For over 15 years, I have worked for my country’s ministry of health.

    Like my colleagues from all over the world, I know more than a little about what it takes to establish and maintain trust.

    Trust in vaccination, trust in public health.

    Trust that by standing together in the face of critical threats to our societies, we all stand to do better.

    Local communities in the poorest countries are already bearing the brunt of climate change effects on health.

    Local solutions are needed.

    Health workers are trusted advisors to the communities we serve.

    With every challenge, there is an opportunity.

    On 28 July 2023, 4,700 health workers began learning from each other through the Geneva Learning Foundation’s platform, community, and network.

    Thousands more are connecting with each other, because they choose to.

    And because they want to take action.

    It is our duty to support them.

    In March 2024, we will hold the tenth Teach to Reach conference.

    The last edition reached over 17,000 health workers from more than 80 countries.

    This time, our focus will be on climate and health.

    We invite global partners to join, to listen and to learn.

    We invite you to consider how you, your organization, your government might support action by health workers on the frontline.

    Because we will rise.

    As health workers, with or without your support, we will continue to stand up with courage, compassion and commitment, working to lift up our communities.

    Our perseverance calls us all to press forward towards climate justice and health equity.

    I wish to challenge us, as a global community, to rise together, so that  the voices of those on the frontline of climate change will be at the next Conference of Parties.

    By standing together, we all stand to do better.

    Thank you.

    https://redasadki.me/2023/12/11/climate-and-health-health-workers-trust/

    #CharlotteMbuh #climate #climateCrisis #COP28 #Dubai #health #healthWorkforce #HRH

    #charlottembuh #climate #climatecrisis #cop28 #dubai #health
  50. Reda Sadki @[email protected] ·

    The Geneva Learning Foundation’s Charlotte Mbuh spoke today at the COP28 Health Pavilion in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE). Learn more…

    Good afternoon. I am Charlotte Mbuh. I have worked for the health of children and families in Cameroon for over 15 years.

    I am one of more than 5,500 health workers from 68 countries who have connected to share our observations of how climate is affecting the health of those we serve. 

    “Going back home to the community where I grew up as a child, I was shocked to see that most of the rivers we used to swim and fish in have all dried up, and those that are still there have become very shallow so that you can easily walk through a river you required a boat to cross in years past.”

    These are the words of Samuel Chukwuemeka Obasi, a health worker from Nigeria.

    Dr Kumbha Gopi, a health worker from India said: “The use of motor vehicles has led to an increase in air pollution and we see respiratory problems and skin diseases”.

    Climate change is hurting the health of those we serve. And it is getting worse.

    Few here would deny that health workers are an essential voice to listen to in order to understand climate impacts on health.

    Yet, a man named Jacob on social media snapped: “Since when are health workers the authority on air pollution?”

    Here are the words of Bie Lilian Mbando, a health worker from my country: “Where I live in Buea, the flood from Mount Cameroon took away all belongings of people in my neighborhood and killed a secondary school student who was playing football with his friends.”

    Climate change is killing communities.

    Cecilia Nabwirwa, a nurse in Nairobi, Kenya: “I remember my grand-son getting sick after eating vegetables grown along areas flooded by sewage. Since then I resolved to growing my own vegetables to ensure healthy eating.”

    And yet, another man on social media, Robert, found this “ridiculous. As if my friend who sells fish at his fish stall comes as an expert on water quality.”

    I wondered: why such brutal responses?

    Well, unlike scientists or global agencies, we cannot be dismissed as “experts from on-high”.

    What we know, we know because we are here every day.

    We are part of the community.

    And we know that climate change is a threat to the health of the communities we serve.

    We are already having to manage the impacts of climate change on health.

    We are doing the best that we can.

    But we need your support.

    The global community is investing in building a new scientific field around climate and health.

    Massive investments are also being made in policy.

    Are we making a commensurate investment in people and communities?

    That should mean investing in health workers.

    What will happen if this investment is neglected?

    What if big global donors say: “it’s important, but it’s not part of our strategy?”

    Well, in 5, 10, or 15 years, we will certainly have much improved science and, hopefully, policy.

    Yet, some communities might reject better science and policy.

    Will the global community then wonder: “Why don’t they know what’s good for them?” 

    I am an immunization worker. For over 15 years, I have worked for my country’s ministry of health.

    Like my colleagues from all over the world, I know more than a little about what it takes to establish and maintain trust.

    Trust in vaccination, trust in public health.

    Trust that by standing together in the face of critical threats to our societies, we all stand to do better.

    Local communities in the poorest countries are already bearing the brunt of climate change effects on health.

    Local solutions are needed.

    Health workers are trusted advisors to the communities we serve.

    With every challenge, there is an opportunity.

    On 28 July 2023, 4,700 health workers began learning from each other through the Geneva Learning Foundation’s platform, community, and network.

    Thousands more are connecting with each other, because they choose to.

    And because they want to take action.

    It is our duty to support them.

    In March 2024, we will hold the tenth Teach to Reach conference.

    The last edition reached over 17,000 health workers from more than 80 countries.

    This time, our focus will be on climate and health.

    We invite global partners to join, to listen and to learn.

    We invite you to consider how you, your organization, your government might support action by health workers on the frontline.

    Because we will rise.

    As health workers, with or without your support, we will continue to stand up with courage, compassion and commitment, working to lift up our communities.

    Our perseverance calls us all to press forward towards climate justice and health equity.

    I wish to challenge us, as a global community, to rise together, so that  the voices of those on the frontline of climate change will be at the next Conference of Parties.

    By standing together, we all stand to do better.

    Thank you.

    https://redasadki.me/2023/12/11/climate-and-health-health-workers-trust/

    #CharlotteMbuh #climate #climateCrisis #COP28 #Dubai #health #healthWorkforce #HRH

    #charlottembuh #climate #climatecrisis #cop28 #dubai #health