Background Implementation of health financing reforms for Universal Health Coverage (UHC) is inherently political. Despite the political determinants of UHC, health financing reform in Zimbabwe is often portrayed as a technical exercise with a familiar path of a thorough diagnosis of technical gaps followed by detailed prescriptions of reform priorities. In this study, we sought to understand the interaction between political and economic aspects of health financing reforms since the country got its independence in 1980. Methods We conducted a scoping review of health financing reforms in Zimbabwe and reviewed 84 relevant sources of information. We then conducted a thematic analysis using an adapted Fox and Reich’s framework of ideas and ideologies, interests and institutions. Results We found that ideas, institutions and interests significantly influence health financing reforms in Zimbabwe with implications on health system performance. Reform priorities of the 1980s were influenced by socialist ideologies with an interest to address pervasive health inequities inherited from the colonial racial system. The progress in equity realized in the 1980s was severely disrupted from the 1990s partly due to neo-liberal ideologies which steered interests towards market-oriented reforms. The period from the 2000s is characterized by increasing donor influence on health financing and a cumulative socio-economic collapse that resulted in a sharp and protracted decline in health spending and widening of health inequities. Conclusion Health financing reform process in Zimbabwe is heavily influenced by political economy characteristics which favor certain financing arrangements over others with profound implications on health system performance. We concluded that the political economy factors that slow down UHC reforms are not rooted in the ambiguities of ideas on what needs to be done. Instead, the missing link is how to move from intention to action by aligning espoused ideas with interests and institutions which is an inherently political and redistributive process. International and domestic actors involved in UHC in Zimbabwe need to explicitly consider the politics of health financing reforms to improve the implementation feasibility of desired reforms.
Background Lack of access to essential medicines presents a significant threat to achieving universal health coverage (UHC) in sub-Saharan Africa. Although it is acknowledged that essential medicines policies do not rise and stay on the policy agenda solely through rational deliberation and consideration of technical merits, policy theory is rarely used to direct and guide analysis to inform future policy implementation. We used Kingdon’s model to analyse agenda setting for essential medicines policy in sub-Saharan Africa during the formative phase of the primary healthcare (PHC) concept. Methods We retrospectively analysed 49 published articles and 11 policy documents. We used selected search terms in EMBASE and MEDLINE electronic databases to identify relevant published studies. Policy documents were obtained through hand searching of selected websites. We also reviewed the timeline of essential medicines policy milestones contained in the Flagship Report, Medicines in Health Systems: Advancing access, affordability and appropriate use, released by WHO in 2014. Kingdon’s model was used as a lens to interpret the findings. Results We found that unsustainable rise in drug expenditure, inequitable access to drugs and irrational use of drugs were considered as problems in the mid-1970s. As a policy response, the essential drugs concept was introduced. A window of opportunity presented when provision of essential drugs was identified as one of the eight components of PHC. During implementation, policy contradictions emerged as political and policy actors framed the problems and perceived the effectiveness of policy responses in a manner that was amenable to their own interests and objectives. Conclusion We found that effective implementation of an essential medicines policy under PHC was constrained by prioritization of trade over public health in the politics stream, inadequate systems thinking in the policy stream and promotion of economic-oriented reforms in both the politics and policy streams. These lessons from the PHC era could prove useful in improving the approach to contemporary UHC policies.
In 2004 the World Health Organization (WHO) launched the Good Governance for Medicines (GGM) initiative with the aim of fighting corruption in the pharmaceutical sector. In the case of Zimbabwe, implementation of the initiative slowed down after the development phase. Often, lack of funding and technical considerations are cited as major reasons for issue de-prioritization whilst ignoring the influence of politics in mediating policy diffusion. Between June and August 2021, we conducted an in-depth document review and interviewed individuals involved with GGM in Zimbabwe to understand the political determinants of GGM prioritization in Zimbabwe. To guide and direct our analysis, we used the Shiffman and Smith framework. We found that the inception of GGM was facilitated by capable leaders, effective guiding institutions and resonance of the idea with the political environment. Prioritization from inception to implementation was constrained by limited citizen engagement, restriction of the issue to the pharmaceutical domain and a political transition that re-oriented policy priorities and reconfigured individual actor power. The portrayal of corruption as a priority problem requiring policy action has been hampered by the political sensitivity of the issue, lack of credible indicators on the prevalence and severity of the problem and challenges to measure the effectiveness of interventions such as the GGM. Despite the slowdown, from 2018 GGM actors have taken advantage of momentous policy windows to reconstitute their power by opportunistically framing GGM within the broader framework of access to essential medicines leading to the creation of new policy alliances and establishment of strategic political structures. To sustain the political prioritization, actors need to lobby for the institutionalization of GGM within the Ministry of Health strategy, sensitize citizens on the initiative, involve multiple stakeholders and frame the issue as a strategic intervention that underpins pharmaceutical sector performance within the national developmental framework.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.