<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>Kerman University of Medical Sciences</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>International Journal of Health Policy and Management</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2322-5939</Issn>
				<Volume>12</Volume>
				<Issue>Issue 1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2023</Year>
					<Month>12</Month>
					<Day>01</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>The Dynamics of Power Flow From the Global Health Financing; Comment on “Power Dynamics Among Health Professionals in Nigeria: A Case Study of the Global Fund Policy Process”</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle></VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>1</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>4</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">4434</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.34172/ijhpm.2023.7806</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>EN</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Garrett Wallace</FirstName>
					<LastName>Brown</LastName>
<Affiliation>University of Leeds, Leeds, UK</Affiliation>
<Identifier Source="ORCID">0000-0002-6557-5353</Identifier>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Natalie</FirstName>
					<LastName>Rhodes</LastName>
<Affiliation>School of Politics and International Studies
(POLIS), University of Leeds, Leeds, UK</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2022</Year>
					<Month>11</Month>
					<Day>08</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle0&quot;&gt;This article agrees with Lassa et al that biomedical paradigms and medical professionals are a dominating force within the policy dynamics of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM) and that there needs to be greater community involvement in how global health initiatives (GHIs) are adopted, designed, implemented and evaluated. However, we argue that many of the conditions identified are entrenched and perpetuated by how GHIs are financed and the financing modalities employed in Development Aid for Health (DAH), particularly in low resource settings. As a result, the dynamics of power not only flow from traditionally entrenched epistemic authorities but are disproportionally sustained by global health financing modalities that favour particular GHIs over others. As we argue, these DAH modalities can exert forms of power with problematic effects on policy-making.&lt;/span&gt;</Abstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Power</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Global Health Financing</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Development Aid</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Finance Colonialization</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Epistemic Power </Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://www.ijhpm.com/article_4434_3c8a49145944fed2bbcaade178a426c4.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
