Scholarlink

Background <p>Women’s health joint advocacy platforms are often constrained by elite dominance, donor dependency, and weak integration with formal governance systems, thereby limiting inclusive participation and sustained policy influence. Despite growing recognition of joint advocacy as a mechanism for improving health outcomes, there remains a limited systematic understanding of how political interests, power relations, and institutional dynamics shape the design and effectiveness of these platforms. This study examines the political, institutional, and social factors influencing joint advocacy for women’s health in Nigeria.</p> Methods <p>This qualitative study used an integrated Political Economy Analysis (PEA) and Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF). It examined how structural conditions and coalition dynamics shape advocacy processes and outcomes. Data were collected through 52 key informant interviews and multi-stakeholder dialogues in Lagos, Kano, Kaduna, and at national-level institutions. Analysis was conducted using a hybrid deductive–inductive thematic approach.</p> Results <p>Findings show that joint advocacy platforms work within complex political and institutional environments. These environments shape participation, agenda-setting, and policy influence. Resource dependence and donor-driven priorities lead to uneven participation and concentrated influence among well-resourced actors. Weak institutional embedding limits integration into formal decision-making. This reduces the translation of advocacy into policy and budget outcomes. Coalition dynamics (like leadership structures, belief alignment, and trust) also affect coordination and effectiveness. While joint advocacy can support collective action, its outcomes often depend on how macro-level political-economic conditions interact with coalition-level processes.</p> Conclusions <p>This study demonstrates that the effectiveness of joint advocacy depends on the interaction between structural conditions and coalition dynamics, rather than on coalition presence alone. By integrating PEA and ACF, the study provides a nuanced understanding of how power, resources, and institutional arrangements shape advocacy processes and outcomes in Nigeria, with implications for strengthening inclusive and contextually grounded advocacy models.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Politics of joint advocacy for women’s health in Nigeria: political economy and advocacy coalition framework analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年8月5日

查看全文
  • Emmanuel Nwala,
  • Michael Kunnuji,
  • Somawina Nwegbu,
  • Akinwumi Akinola,
  • Jane Ohioghame,
  • Osasuyi Dirisu

摘要

Background

Women’s health joint advocacy platforms are often constrained by elite dominance, donor dependency, and weak integration with formal governance systems, thereby limiting inclusive participation and sustained policy influence. Despite growing recognition of joint advocacy as a mechanism for improving health outcomes, there remains a limited systematic understanding of how political interests, power relations, and institutional dynamics shape the design and effectiveness of these platforms. This study examines the political, institutional, and social factors influencing joint advocacy for women’s health in Nigeria.

Methods

This qualitative study used an integrated Political Economy Analysis (PEA) and Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF). It examined how structural conditions and coalition dynamics shape advocacy processes and outcomes. Data were collected through 52 key informant interviews and multi-stakeholder dialogues in Lagos, Kano, Kaduna, and at national-level institutions. Analysis was conducted using a hybrid deductive–inductive thematic approach.

Results

Findings show that joint advocacy platforms work within complex political and institutional environments. These environments shape participation, agenda-setting, and policy influence. Resource dependence and donor-driven priorities lead to uneven participation and concentrated influence among well-resourced actors. Weak institutional embedding limits integration into formal decision-making. This reduces the translation of advocacy into policy and budget outcomes. Coalition dynamics (like leadership structures, belief alignment, and trust) also affect coordination and effectiveness. While joint advocacy can support collective action, its outcomes often depend on how macro-level political-economic conditions interact with coalition-level processes.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that the effectiveness of joint advocacy depends on the interaction between structural conditions and coalition dynamics, rather than on coalition presence alone. By integrating PEA and ACF, the study provides a nuanced understanding of how power, resources, and institutional arrangements shape advocacy processes and outcomes in Nigeria, with implications for strengthening inclusive and contextually grounded advocacy models.