Decolonisation initiatives at the Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium: ready for change?

In a global context, the pernicious effects of colonialism and coloniality are increasingly being recognised in many sectors. As a result, calls to reverse colonial aphasia and amnesia, and decolonise, are getting stronger. This raises a number of questions, particularly for entities that acted as agents of (previous) colonising countries and worked to further the progress of the colonial project: What does decolonisation mean for such historically colonial entities? How can they confront their (forgotten) arsonist past while addressing their current role in maintaining coloniality, at home and abroad? Given the embeddedness of many such entities in current global (power) structures of coloniality, do these entities really want change, and if so, how can such entities redefine their future to ensure that they are and remain 'decolonised'? We attempt to answer these questions, by reflecting on our efforts to think through and start the process of decolonisation at the Institute of Tropical Medicine (ITM) in Antwerp, Belgium. The overarching aim is to contribute to closing the gap in the literature when it comes to documenting practical efforts at decolonisation, particularly in contexts similar to ITM and to share our experience and engage with others who are undertaking or planning to undertake similar initiatives.

Descriptive assessment of COVID-19 responses and lessons learnt in Cambodia, January 2020 to June 2022.

As a member state of the International Health Regulations 2005, Cambodia is continuously strengthening its capacity to respond to health emergencies and prevent the international spread of diseases. Despite this, Cambodia's capacity to prevent, detect and rapidly respond to public health threats remained limited at the onset of the pandemic, as was the case in most countries. This paper describes epidemiological phases, response phases, strategy and lessons learnt in Cambodia between 27 January 2020 and 30 June 2022. We classified epidemiological phases in Cambodia into three phases, in which Cambodia responded using eight measures: (1) detect, isolate/quarantine; (2) face coverings, hand hygiene and physical distancing measures; (3) risk communication and community engagement; (4) school closures; (5) border closures; (6) public event and gathering cancellation; (7) vaccination; and (8) lockdown. The measures corresponded to six strategies: (1) setting up and managing a new response system, (2) containing the spread with early response, (3) strengthening the identification of cases and contacts, (4) strengthening care for patients with COVID-19, (5) boosting vaccination coverage and (6) supporting disadvantaged groups. Thirteen lessons were learnt for future health emergency responses. Findings suggest that Cambodia successfully contained the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the first year and quickly attained high vaccine coverage by the second year of the response. The core of this success was the strong political will and high level of cooperation from the public. However, Cambodia needs to further improve its infrastructure for quarantining and isolating cases and close contacts and laboratory capacity for future health emergencies.

How has Guinea learnt from the response to outbreaks? A learning health system analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Learning is a key attribute of a resilient health system and, therefore, is central to health system strengthening. The main objective of this study was to analyse how Guinea's health system has learnt from the response to outbreaks between 2014 and 2021. METHODS: We used a retrospective longitudinal single embedded case study design, applying the framework conceptualised by Sheikh and Abimbola for analysing learning health systems. Data were collected employing a mixed methods systematic review carried out in March 2022 and an online survey conducted in April 2022. RESULTS: The 70 reports included in the evidence synthesis were about the 2014-2016 Ebola virus disease (EVD), Measles, Lassa Fever, COVID-19, 2021 EVD and Marburg virus disease. The main lessons were from 2014 to 2016 EVD and included: early community engagement in the response, social mobilisation, prioritising investment in health personnel, early involvement of anthropologists, developing health infrastructure and equipment and ensuring crisis communication. They were learnt through information (research and experts' opinions), action/practice and double-loop and were progressively incorporated in the response to future outbreaks through deliberation, single-loop, double-loop and triple-loop learning. However, advanced learning aspects (learning through action, double-loop and triple-loop) were limited within the health system. Nevertheless, the health system successfully controlled COVID-19, the 2021 EVD and Marburg virus disease. Survey respondents' commonly reported that enablers were the creation of the national agency for health security and support from development partners. Barriers included cultural and political issues and lack of funding. Common recommendations included establishing a knowledge management unit within the Ministry of Health with representatives at regional and district levels, investing in human capacities and improving the governance and management system. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the importance of learning. The health system performed well and achieved encouraging and better outbreak response outcomes over time with learning that occurred.

'Never let a crisis go to waste': post-Ebola agenda-setting for health system strengthening in Guinea.

INTRODUCTION: Guinea is a country with a critical deficit and maldistribution of healthcare workers along with a high risk of epidemics' occurrence. However, actors in the health sector have missed opportunities for more than a decade to attract political attention. This article aims to explain why this situation exists and what were the roles of actors in the agenda-setting process of the post-Ebola health system strengthening programme. It also assesses threats and opportunities for this programme's sustainability. METHODS: We used Kingdon's agenda-setting methodological framework to explain why actors promptly focused on the health sector reform after the Ebola outbreak. We conducted a qualitative explanatory study using a literature review and key informant interviews. RESULTS: We found that, in the problem stream, the Ebola epidemic caused considerable fear among national as well as international actors, a social crisis and an economic system failure. This social crisis was entertained by communities' suspicion of an 'Ebola-business'. In response to these problems, policy actors identified three sets of solutions: the temporary external funds generated by the Ebola response; the availability of experienced health workers in the Ebola control team; and the overproduction of health graduates in the labour market. We also found that the politics agenda was dominated by two major factors: the global health security agenda and the political and financial interests of national policy actors. Although the opening of the policy window has improved human resources, finance and logistics, and infrastructures pillars of the health system, it, however, disproportionally focuses on epidemic preparedness and response. and neglects patients' financial affordability of essential health services. CONCLUSION: Domestic policy entrepreneurs must realise that agenda-setting of health issues in the Guinean context strongly depends on the construction of the problem definition and how this is influenced by international actors.