Literature DB >> 27694684

U-Form vs. M-Form: How to Understand Decision Autonomy Under Healthcare Decentralization? Comment on "Decentralisation of Health Services in Fiji: A Decision Space Analysis".

Arturo Vargas Bustamante1.   

Abstract

For more than three decades healthcare decentralization has been promoted in developing countries as a way of improving the financing and delivery of public healthcare. Decision autonomy under healthcare decentralization would determine the role and scope of responsibility of local authorities. Jalal Mohammed, Nicola North, and Toni Ashton analyze decision autonomy within decentralized services in Fiji. They conclude that the narrow decision space allowed to local entities might have limited the benefits of decentralization on users and providers. To discuss the costs and benefits of healthcare decentralization this paper uses the U-form and M-form typology to further illustrate the role of decision autonomy under healthcare decentralization. This paper argues that when evaluating healthcare decentralization, it is important to determine whether the benefits from decentralization are greater than its costs. The U-form and M-form framework is proposed as a useful typology to evaluate different types of institutional arrangements under healthcare decentralization. Under this model, the more decentralized organizational form (M-form) is superior if the benefits from flexibility exceed the costs of duplication and the more centralized organizational form (U-form) is superior if the savings from economies of scale outweigh the costly decision-making process from the center to the regions. Budgetary and financial autonomy and effective mechanisms to maintain local governments accountable for their spending behavior are key decision autonomy variables that could sway the cost-benefit analysis of healthcare decentralization.
© 2016 by Kerman University of Medical Sciences.

Keywords:  Decision Autonomy; Health Decentralization; Health Reform; Organizational Form

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27694684      PMCID: PMC5010660          DOI: 10.15171/ijhpm.2016.73

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag        ISSN: 2322-5939


  6 in total

1.  Federalist flirtations: the politics and execution of health services decentralization for the uninsured population in Mexico, 1985-1995.

Authors:  A E Birn
Journal:  J Public Health Policy       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 2.222

2.  The tradeoff between centralized and decentralized health services: evidence from rural areas in Mexico.

Authors:  Arturo Vargas Bustamante
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  Why neoliberal health reforms have failed in Latin America.

Authors:  Núria Homedes; Antonio Ugalde
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.980

4.  Analyzing the decentralization of health systems in developing countries: decision space, innovation and performance.

Authors:  T Bossert
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  Comparing federal and state healthcare provider performance in villages targeted by the conditional cash transfer programme of Mexico.

Authors:  Arturo Vargas Bustamante
Journal:  Trop Med Int Health       Date:  2011-07-14       Impact factor: 2.622

6.  Decentralisation of Health Services in Fiji: A Decision Space Analysis.

Authors:  Jalal Mohammed; Nicola North; Toni Ashton
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2015-11-15
  6 in total
  1 in total

1.  Decentralisation; The Question of Management Capacity: A Response to Recent Commentaries.

Authors:  Jalal Mohammed; Nicola North; Toni Ashton
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2017-01-01
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.