The SAZA study: implementing health financing reform in South Africa and Zambia

Abstract

This paper explores the policy-making process in the 1990s in two countries, South Africa and Zambia, in relation to health care financing reforms. While much of the analysis of health reform programmes has looked at design issues, assuming that a technically sound design is the primary requirement of effective policy change, this paper explores the political and bureaucratic realities shaping the pattern of policy change and its impacts. Through a case study approach, it provides a picture of the policy environment and processes in the two countries, specifically considering the extent to which technical analysts and technical knowledge were able to shape policy change. The two countries' experiences indicate the strong influence of political factors and actors over which health care financing policies were implemented, and which not, as well as over the details of policy design. Moments of political transition in both countries provided political leaders, specifically Ministers of Health, with windows of opportunity in which to introduce new policies. However, these transitions, and the changes in administrative structures introduced with them, also created environments that constrained the processes of reform design and implementation and limited the equity and sustainability gains achieved by the policies. Technical analysts, working either inside or outside government, had varying and often limited influence. In part, this reflected the limits of their own capacity as well as weaknesses in the way they were used in policy development. In addition, the analysts were constrained by the fact that their preferred policies often received only weak political support. Focusing almost exclusively on designing policy reforms, these analysts gave little attention to generating adequate support for the policy options they proposed. Finally, the country experiences showed that front-line health workers, middle level managers and the public had important influences over policy implementation and its impacts. The limited attention given to communicating policy changes to, or consulting with, these actors only heightened the potential for reforms to result in unanticipated and unwanted impacts. The strength of the paper lies in its 'thick description' of the policy process in each country, an empirical case study approach to policy that is under-represented in the literature. While such an approach allows only a cautious drawing of general conclusions, it suggests a number of ways in which to strengthen the implementation of financing policies in each country.

The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment

“…It legitimises some policies and throws legitimate doubts on others. Analysis of policy-making, and of research utilisation, often identifies at least three broad areas of activity: policy agenda setting, policy formulation, and policy implementation [11,31]. Potentially, research could play a part in all three areas.…”

Removing user fees for primary care in Africa: the need for careful action

“…Experience across a range of health system reforms indicates that the process of policy change (representing the interaction between actors, processes, design features, and context) has a critical influence over the impact of such change (box 2) 13 14. Thus it is important to pay careful attention to the processes and strategies through which any policy change is implemented (box 3).…”

“…Monitoring systems (strategy 7) should generate relevant, routine information as well as providing opportunities to share health workers' and managers' experiences 14 15. Learning from such experience is vital in enabling the health system to strengthen the next steps of policy change.…”

Decentralizing EPI services and prospects for increasing coverage: the case of Tanzania

“…Several tools have been used to analyse stakeholders, one of which is force field analysis (Gilson et al, 2003). Policy Maker, a computer-based tool, was developed in Harvard in the early 1990s to facilitate stakeholder analysis (Reich and Cooper, 1995).…”