Performance of Thailand’s universal health coverage scheme: Evaluating the effectiveness of annual public hearings

Kantamaturapoj, Kanang; Marshall, Aniqa Islam; Chotchoungchatchai, Somtanuek; Kiewnin, Kamonwan; Patcharanarumol, Walaiporn; Tangcharoensathien, Viroj

doi:10.1111/hex.13142

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, the organizer should communicate with stakeholders about how their opinions influenced the final master plan. We agree with Rasoolimanesh et al (2016) and Kantamaturapoj et al (2020) that if the community members know that their opinions influence the decision-making, they would create a sense of belonging and support the implementation of the master plan.…”

Section: Lopburi Oldmentioning

confidence: 81%

Stakeholder participation in Lopburi Old Town conservation master plan

Sorat

Rawangkarn

Rawang

et al. 2021

JCHMSD

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study aims to evaluate the meaningful public participation in activities relating to the master plan development and, at the same time, propose some recommendations for improvement.Design/methodology/approachThe study was carried out with in-depth interviews of 35 key-informants selected from various stakeholder groups involving in public participation activities. The evaluation frameworks for meaningful participation were developed from various scholars.FindingsThe evaluation showed that the public hearings partially met the criteria of information provision and representativeness. However, there are rooms for improvement on participation in decision-making process, social learning and influence over policy decision-making. Therefore, this study proposes two recommendations. First, more flexible form of public participation is needed to enable discussions among various groups of stakeholders. Second, the organizer should communicate with stakeholders about how their opinions influence the final master plan in order to create sense of belonging among community members.Originality/valueThis research developed the evaluation framework for public participation in old town conservation master plan in developing country.

show abstract

Section: Lopburi Oldmentioning

confidence: 81%

Stakeholder participation in Lopburi Old Town conservation master plan

Sorat

Rawangkarn

Rawang

et al. 2021

JCHMSD

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…, 2014 ). Going beyond A4R, authors from Thailand have emphasized the reason-giving aspect of joint decision-making in the context of Thailand’s Annual Public Hearings, which is a mechanism for participatory health policymaking involving national and sub-national government representatives, producers of knowledge and the public ( Kantamaturapoj et al. , 2020b ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Criteria for the procedural fairness of health financing decisions: a scoping review

Dale,

Peacocke,

Movik

et al. 2023

Health Policy and Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to constraints on institutional capacity and financial resources, the road to universal health coverage (UHC) involves difficult policy choices. To assist with these choices, scholars and policy makers have done extensive work on criteria to assess the substantive fairness of health financing policies: their impact on the distribution of rights, duties, benefits and burdens on the path towards UHC. However, less attention has been paid to the procedural fairness of health financing decisions. The Accountability for Reasonableness Framework (A4R), which is widely applied to assess procedural fairness, has primarily been used in priority-setting for purchasing decisions, with revenue mobilization and pooling receiving limited attention. Furthermore, the sufficiency of the A4R framework’s four criteria (publicity, relevance, revisions and appeals, and enforcement) has been questioned. Moreover, research in political theory and public administration (including deliberative democracy), public finance, environmental management, psychology, and health financing has examined the key features of procedural fairness, but these insights have not been synthesized into a comprehensive set of criteria for fair decision-making processes in health financing. A systematic study of how these criteria have been applied in decision-making situations related to health financing and in other areas is also lacking. This paper addresses these gaps through a scoping review. It argues that the literature across many disciplines can be synthesized into 10 core criteria with common philosophical foundations. These go beyond A4R and encompass equality, impartiality, consistency over time, reason-giving, transparency, accuracy of information, participation, inclusiveness, revisability and enforcement. These criteria can be used to evaluate and guide decision-making processes for financing UHC across different country income levels and health financing arrangements. The review also presents examples of how these criteria have been applied to decisions in health financing and other sectors.

show abstract

“…An annual nationwide public hearing was organised by the NHSO to ensure inclusiveness; concerns and views of laypeople and patient groups who did not have an organised body on the new benefits package proposed at the annual public hearing were compiled and submitted ( Kantamaturapoj et al. , 2020b ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Procedural fairness in benefit package design: inclusion of pre-exposure prophylaxis of HIV in Universal Coverage Scheme in Thailand

Viriyathorn,

Sachdev,

Suwanwela

et al. 2023

Health Policy and Planning

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 2002, Thailand’s Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS) has adopted a comprehensive benefits package with few exclusions. A positive-list approach has gradually been applied, with pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) of HIV recently being included. Disagreements resulting from competing values and diverging interests necessitate an emphasis on procedural fairness when making any decisions. This qualitative study analyses agenda setting, policy formulation and early implementation of PrEP from a procedural fairness lens. Literature reviews and in-depth interviews with 13 key stakeholders involved in PrEP policy processes were conducted. Civil society organizations (CSOs) and academia piloted PrEP service models and co-produced evidence on programmatic feasibility and outcomes. Through a broad stakeholder representation process, the Department of Disease Control proposed PrEP for inclusion in UCS benefits package in 2017. PrEP was shown to be cost-effective and affordable through rigorous health technology assessment, peer review, use of up-to-date evidence and safe-guards against conflicts of interest. In 2021, Thailand’s National Health Security Board decided to include PrEP as a prevention and promotion package, free of charge, for the populations at risk. Favourable conditions for procedural fairness were created by Thailand’s legislative provisions that enable responsive governance, notably inclusiveness, transparency, safeguarding public interest and accountable budget allocations; longstanding institutional capacity to generate local evidence; and implementation capacity for realisation of procedural fairness criteria. Multiple stakeholders including CSOs, academia and the government deliberated in the policy process through working groups and sub-committees. However, a key lesson from Thailand’s deliberative process concerns a possible ‘over interpretation’ of conflicts of interest, intended to promote impartial decision-making, which inadvertently limited the voices of key populations represented in the decision processes. Finally, this case study underscores the value of examining the full policy cycle when assessing procedural fairness, since some stages of the process may be more amenable to certain procedural criteria than others.

show abstract

Performance of Thailand’s universal health coverage scheme: Evaluating the effectiveness of annual public hearings

Cited by 12 publications

References 38 publications

Stakeholder participation in Lopburi Old Town conservation master plan

Stakeholder participation in Lopburi Old Town conservation master plan

Criteria for the procedural fairness of health financing decisions: a scoping review

Procedural fairness in benefit package design: inclusion of pre-exposure prophylaxis of HIV in Universal Coverage Scheme in Thailand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About