Political economy analysis of health financing reforms in times of crisis: findings from three case studies in south-east Asia.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH International Journal for Equity in Health Pub Date : 2025-02-03 DOI:10.1186/s12939-025-02395-5
Sophie Witter, Maria Paola Bertone, Sushil Baral, Ghanshyam Gautam, Saugat K C Pratap, Aungsumalee Pholpark, Nurmala Selly Saputri, Arif Budi Darmawan, Nina Toyamah, Rizki Fillaili, Valeria de Oliveira Cruz, Susan Sparkes
{"title":"Political economy analysis of health financing reforms in times of crisis: findings from three case studies in south-east Asia.","authors":"Sophie Witter, Maria Paola Bertone, Sushil Baral, Ghanshyam Gautam, Saugat K C Pratap, Aungsumalee Pholpark, Nurmala Selly Saputri, Arif Budi Darmawan, Nina Toyamah, Rizki Fillaili, Valeria de Oliveira Cruz, Susan Sparkes","doi":"10.1186/s12939-025-02395-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Over the last decades, universal health coverage (UHC) has been promoted in south-east Asia (SEA), where many countries still need to ensure adequate financial protection to their populations. However, successful health financing reforms involve complex interactions among a range of stakeholders, as well as with context factors, including shocks and crises of different nature. In this article, we examine recent health financing reforms in Nepal, Thailand and Indonesia, using a political economy lens. The objective is to understand whether and how crises can be utilised to progress UHC and to analyse the strategies used by reformers to benefit from potential windows of opportunity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study adopted a retrospective, comparative case study design, using a shared framework and tools. The case studies mapped the contexts, including economic, political, social trends and any shocks which had recently occurred. A focal health financing reform was chosen in each setting to examine, probing the role of crisis in relation to it, through the key elements of the reform process, content and actors. Data sources were largely qualitative and included literature and document review (144 documents included across the three cases) and key informant interviews (26 in total).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings, which bring out similarities and differences in the roles played by change teams across the settings, highlight the importance of working closely with political leaders and using a wide range of strategies to build coalitions and engage or block opponents. Changing decision rules to block veto points was significant in one case, and all three cases used participation and dialogue strategically to further reforms. More broadly, the links with context emerged as important, with prior conflicts and economic crises creating a sense of urgency about addressing health inequities, while in all countries appeal was made to underlying values to enhance the legitimacy of the reforms.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The lessons from these case studies include that technical teams can and should engage in Political Economy Analysis (PEA) thinking and strategizing, including being aware of and adaptable to the changing PEA landscape and prepared to take advantage of windows of opportunity, including, but not limited to, those emerging from crisis. There is a need for more empirical studies in this area and sharing of lessons to support future reforms to increase health coverage and financial protection, including in the face of likely shocks.</p>","PeriodicalId":13745,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Equity in Health","volume":"24 1","pages":"34"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11792183/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Equity in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-025-02395-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Over the last decades, universal health coverage (UHC) has been promoted in south-east Asia (SEA), where many countries still need to ensure adequate financial protection to their populations. However, successful health financing reforms involve complex interactions among a range of stakeholders, as well as with context factors, including shocks and crises of different nature. In this article, we examine recent health financing reforms in Nepal, Thailand and Indonesia, using a political economy lens. The objective is to understand whether and how crises can be utilised to progress UHC and to analyse the strategies used by reformers to benefit from potential windows of opportunity.

Methods: The study adopted a retrospective, comparative case study design, using a shared framework and tools. The case studies mapped the contexts, including economic, political, social trends and any shocks which had recently occurred. A focal health financing reform was chosen in each setting to examine, probing the role of crisis in relation to it, through the key elements of the reform process, content and actors. Data sources were largely qualitative and included literature and document review (144 documents included across the three cases) and key informant interviews (26 in total).

Results: The findings, which bring out similarities and differences in the roles played by change teams across the settings, highlight the importance of working closely with political leaders and using a wide range of strategies to build coalitions and engage or block opponents. Changing decision rules to block veto points was significant in one case, and all three cases used participation and dialogue strategically to further reforms. More broadly, the links with context emerged as important, with prior conflicts and economic crises creating a sense of urgency about addressing health inequities, while in all countries appeal was made to underlying values to enhance the legitimacy of the reforms.

Conclusion: The lessons from these case studies include that technical teams can and should engage in Political Economy Analysis (PEA) thinking and strategizing, including being aware of and adaptable to the changing PEA landscape and prepared to take advantage of windows of opportunity, including, but not limited to, those emerging from crisis. There is a need for more empirical studies in this area and sharing of lessons to support future reforms to increase health coverage and financial protection, including in the face of likely shocks.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
危机时期卫生筹资改革的政治经济分析:来自东南亚三个案例研究的结果。
背景:在过去几十年中,全民健康覆盖(UHC)在东南亚得到了促进,但许多国家仍需要确保其人口获得充分的财务保护。然而,成功的卫生筹资改革涉及一系列利益攸关方之间复杂的相互作用,也涉及各种背景因素,包括不同性质的冲击和危机。在本文中,我们从政治经济学的角度考察了尼泊尔、泰国和印度尼西亚最近的卫生筹资改革。目标是了解是否以及如何利用危机来推进全民健康覆盖,并分析改革者为从潜在机会之窗中获益所使用的战略。方法:采用回顾性、比较性案例研究设计,使用共享的框架和工具。案例研究描绘了各种背景,包括经济、政治、社会趋势和最近发生的任何冲击。在每种情况下都选择了一项重点卫生筹资改革,通过改革进程、内容和行动者的关键要素,审查和探讨危机在其中的作用。数据来源主要是定性的,包括文献和文件审查(在三个病例中包括144份文件)和关键举报人访谈(总共26份)。结果:研究结果揭示了变革团队在不同情境下所扮演角色的异同,强调了与政治领导人密切合作的重要性,以及使用广泛的策略来建立联盟、吸引或阻止对手。在一个案例中,改变决策规则以阻止否决点具有重要意义,而这三个案例都战略性地利用了参与和对话来进一步推进改革。更广泛地说,与背景的联系显得很重要,先前的冲突和经济危机造成了解决卫生不平等问题的紧迫感,而所有国家都呼吁基本价值观加强改革的合法性。结论:从这些案例研究中得到的教训包括,技术团队可以而且应该参与政治经济分析(PEA)的思考和战略制定,包括意识到并适应不断变化的PEA景观,并准备利用机会之窗,包括但不限于那些从危机中出现的机会。有必要在这一领域进行更多的实证研究,并分享经验教训,以支持未来的改革,以扩大医疗覆盖面和金融保护,包括面对可能的冲击。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
162
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal for Equity in Health is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal presenting evidence relevant to the search for, and attainment of, equity in health across and within countries. International Journal for Equity in Health aims to improve the understanding of issues that influence the health of populations. This includes the discussion of political, policy-related, economic, social and health services-related influences, particularly with regard to systematic differences in distributions of one or more aspects of health in population groups defined demographically, geographically, or socially.
期刊最新文献
Understanding equity-oriented maternity care for women of refugee background in high-income countries: a qualitative systematic review. "A single viral video can undo months of health education": social media, trust, and vaccine hesitancy in wartime Ukraine. The structural roots of multimorbidity: social inequalities, health disparities, and systemic challenges in Southern Spain. The epidemic and socioeconomic factors shock: a long-term dynamic analysis of equity in infectious disease healthcare in China. Trends and inequities in primary and emergency care use among older adults in British Columbia: an analysis across age, sex, income, and rurality (2018-2023).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1