Agency, Structure and the Power of Global Health Networks

Document Type: Editorial

Author

1 Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

2 Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Washington, DC, USA

Abstract

Global health networks—webs of individuals and organizations linked by a shared concern for a particular condition—have proliferated over the past quarter century. In a recent editorial in this journal, I presented evidence that their effectiveness in addressing four challenges—problem definition, positioning, coalitionbuilding and governance—shapes their ability to influence policy. The editorial prompted five thoughtful commentaries that reflected on these and other challenges.
 
In this follow-up editorial, I build on the commentaries to suggest ways of advancing research on global health networks. I argue that investigators would do well to consider three social theory-influenced global governance debates pertaining to agency—the capacity of individuals and organizations to act autonomously amidst structural constraints. The three debates concern the relationship between agency and structure, the power of ideas vis-à-vis interests and material capabilities, and the level of influence of non-state actors in a global governance system that most scholars identify as state-dominated. Drawing on these debates, I argue that rather than presume global health network influence, we need to find more robust ways to investigate their effects. I argue also that rather than juxtapose agency and structure, ideas and interests and non-state and state power, it would be more productive to consider the ways in which these elements are intertwined.

Keywords

Main Subjects


  1. Shiffman J. Four challenges that global health networks face. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;6(4):183-189. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2017.14
  2. Dain K. Challenges facing global health networks: the NCD Alliance experience: Comment on "Four challenges that global health networks face." Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;7(3):282-285. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2017.93
  3. Marten R, Smith RD. State support: a prerequisite for global health network effectiveness: Comment on "Four challenges that global health networks face." Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;7(3):275-277. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2017.86
  4. Quissell K. Additional insights into problem definition and positioning from social science: Comment on "Four challenges that global health networks face." Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;7(4):362-364. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2017.108
  5. Tosun J. Polycentrism in global health governance scholarship: Comment on "Four challenges that global health networks face." Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;7(1):78-80. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2017.64
  6. White J. The Magic pudding: Comment on "Four challenges that global health networks face." Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;7(2):192-194. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2017.76
  7. Wendt A. The agent-structure problem in international relations theory. Int Organ. 1987;41(3):335-370. doi:10.1017/S002081830002751X
  8. Wendt A. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1999.
  9. Meyer JW, Boli J, Thomas GM, Ramirez FO. World Society and the Nation‐State. Am J Sociol. 1997;103(1):144-181. doi:10.1086/231174
  10. Finnemore M, Sikkink K. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. Int Organ. 1998;52(4):887-917. doi:10.1162/002081898550789
  11. Sikkink K. “Beyond the Justice Cascade: How Agentic Constructivism could help explain change in international politics.” Keynote address at Millennium Annual Conference, October 22, 2011, “Out of the Ivory Tower: Weaving the Theories and Practice of International Relations,” London, United Kingdom. https://www.princeton.edu/politics/about/file-repository/public/Agentic-Constructivism-paper-sent-to-the-Princeton-IR-Colloquium.pdf.
  12. Giddens A. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley, CA and Los Angeles, CA, USA: University of California Press; 1984
  13. Foucault M. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972-1977.  Colin Gordon, ed. New York: Pantheon Books; 1980.
  14. Bourdieu P. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1984.
  15. Sewell WH Jr. A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation. Am J Sociol. 1992;98(1):1-29. doi:10.1086/229967
  16. Kim HJ, Sharman JC. Accounts and Accountability: Corruption, Human Rights, and Individual Accountability Norms. Int Organ. 2014;68(2):417-448. doi:10.1017/S0020818313000428
  17. Schmitz HP. The global health network on alcohol control: successes and limits of evidence-based advocacy. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31 Suppl 1:i87-97. doi:10.1093/heapol/czu064
  18. Gneiting U. From global agenda-setting to domestic implementation: successes and challenges of the global health network on tobacco control. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31 Suppl 1:i74-86. doi:10.1093/heapol/czv001
  19. Quissell K, Walt G. The challenge of sustaining effectiveness over time: the case of the global network to stop tuberculosis. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31 Suppl 1:i17-32. doi:10.1093/heapol/czv035
  20. Berlan D. Pneumonia's second wind? A case study of the global health network for childhood pneumonia. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31 Suppl 1:i33-47. doi:10.1093/heapol/czv070
  21. Smith SL, Rodriguez MA. Agenda setting for maternal survival: the power of global health networks and norms. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31 Suppl 1:i48-59. doi:10.1093/heapol/czu114
  22. Shiffman J. Network advocacy and the emergence of global attention to newborn survival. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31 Suppl 1:i60-73. doi:10.1093/heapol/czv092
  23. Shawar YR, Shiffman J, Spiegel DA. Generation of political priority for global surgery: a qualitative policy analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2015;3(8):e487-e495. doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(15)00098-4
  24. Shawar YR, Shiffman J. Generation of global political priority for early childhood development: the challenges of framing and governance. Lancet. 2017;389(10064):119-124. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)31574-4
  25. Shiffman J, Schmitz HP, Berlan D, et al. The emergence and effectiveness of global health networks: findings and future research. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31 Suppl 1:i110-123. doi:10.1093/heapol/czw012
  26. Beach D, Pedersen RB. Process-tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 2013.
  27. Bourdieu P. The forms of capital. In: Richardson J, ed. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood; 1986:241-258.
  28. Fligstein N, McAdam D. A Theory of Fields. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press; 2012.
  29. Mearsheimer JJ. The false promise of international institutions.  Int Secur. 1994;19(3):5-49. doi:10.2307/2539078
  30. Keohane RO. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2005.
  31. Cox RW, Sinclair TJ. Approaches to World Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996.
  32. Katzenstein PJ. The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press; 1996.
  33. Haas PM. Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination. Int Organ. 1992;46(1):1-35. doi:10.1017/S0020818300001442
  34. March JG, Olsen JP. The Logic of Appropriateness.  In: Gorden RE, ed.  Handbook of Political Science.  Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2011.
  35. Sil R, Katzenstein PJ. Beyond Paradigms: Analytic Eclecticism in the Study of World Politics. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2010.
  36. Sell SK, Prakash A. Using Ideas Strategically: The Contest Between Business and NGO Networks in Intellectual Property Rights. Int Stud Q. 2004;48(1):143-175. doi:10.1111/j.0020-8833.2004.00295.x
  37. Mitchell GE, Schmitz HP. Principled instrumentalism: A theory of transnational NGO behaviour. Rev Int Stud. 2014;40(3):487-504. doi:10.1017/S0260210513000387
  38. Robinson RS. Population Policy in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Case of Both Normative and Coercive Ties to the World Polity. Popul Res Policy Rev. 2015;34(2):201-221. doi:10.1007/s11113-014-9338-5
  39. Keck ME, Sikkink K. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; 1998.
  40. Stop TB Partnership.  http://www.stoptb.org/about/.  Accessed April 24, 2018
  41. Shiffman J, Quissell K, Schmitz HP, et al. A framework on the emergence and effectiveness of global health networks. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31 Suppl 1:i3-16. doi:10.1093/heapol/czu046
  42. Ostrom E. Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Glob Environ Change. 2010;20(4):550-557. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.004
  43. Shiffman J, Kunnuji M, Shawar YR, Robinson RS. International norms and the politics of sexuality education in Nigeria. Global Health. 2018;14(63). doi:10.1186/s12992-018-0377-2