Literature DB >> 31180489

Who is in and who is out? A qualitative analysis of stakeholder participation in priority setting for health in three districts in Uganda.

S Donya Razavi1, Lydia Kapiriri2, Julia Abelson1, Michael Wilson3.   

Abstract

Stakeholder participation is relevant in strengthening priority setting processes for health worldwide, since it allows for inclusion of alternative perspectives and values that can enhance the fairness, legitimacy and acceptability of decisions. Low-income countries operating within decentralized systems recognize the role played by sub-national administrative levels (such as districts) in healthcare priority setting. In Uganda, decentralization is a vehicle for facilitating stakeholder participation. Our objective was to examine district-level decision-makers' perspectives on the participation of different stakeholders, including challenges related to their participation. We further sought to understand the leverages that allow these stakeholders to influence priority setting processes. We used an interpretive description methodology involving qualitative interviews. A total of 27 district-level decision-makers from three districts in Uganda were interviewed. Respondents identified the following stakeholder groups: politicians, technical experts, donors, non-governmental organizations (NGO)/civil society organizations (CSO), cultural and traditional leaders, and the public. Politicians, technical experts and donors are the principal contributors to district-level priority setting and the public is largely excluded. The main leverages for politicians were control over the district budget and support of their electorate. Expertise was a cross-cutting leverage for technical experts, donors and NGO/CSOs, while financial and technical resources were leverages for donors and NGO/CSOs. Cultural and traditional leaders' leverages were cultural knowledge and influence over their followers. The public's leverage was indirect and exerted through electoral power. Respondents made no mention of participation for vulnerable groups. The public, particularly vulnerable groups, are left out of the priority setting process for health at the district. Conflicting priorities, interests and values are the main challenges facing stakeholders engaged in district-level priority setting. Our findings have important implications for understanding how different stakeholder groups shape the prioritization process and whether representation can be an effective mechanism for participation in health-system priority setting.
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Keywords:  Stakeholder participation; Uganda; low-income countries (LICs); priority setting

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31180489      PMCID: PMC6736199          DOI: 10.1093/heapol/czz049

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Policy Plan        ISSN: 0268-1080            Impact factor:   3.344


  34 in total

1.  Vertical or holistic decentralization of the health sector? Experiences from Zambia and Uganda.

Authors:  A Jeppsson; S A Okuonzi
Journal:  Int J Health Plann Manage       Date:  2000 Oct-Dec

Review 2.  Choice and representation in health care.

Authors:  E J Emanuel
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 3.929

3.  A sociological perspective on public participation in health care.

Authors:  Damien Contandriopoulos
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.634

Review 4.  Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes.

Authors:  Julia Abelson; Pierre-Gerlier Forest; John Eyles; Patricia Smith; Elisabeth Martin; Francois-Pierre Gauvin
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  Interpreting public input into priority-setting: the role of mediating institutions.

Authors:  Tim Tenbensel
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 6.  Health sector reforms in sub-Saharan Africa: lessons of the last 10 years.

Authors:  L Gilson; A Mills
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1995 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.980

7.  Participation in health care priority-setting through the eyes of the participants.

Authors:  Douglas K Martin; Julia Abelson; Peter A Singer
Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy       Date:  2002-10

8.  Public participation in health planning and priority setting at the district level in Uganda.

Authors:  Lydia Kapiriri; Ole Frithjof Norheim; Kristian Heggenhougen
Journal:  Health Policy Plan       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.344

9.  Health care priority setting: principles, practice and challenges.

Authors:  Craig Mitton; Cam Donaldson
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2004-04-22

10.  Is cost-effectiveness analysis preferred to severity of disease as the main guiding principle in priority setting in resource poor settings? The case of Uganda.

Authors:  Lydia Kapiriri; Trude Arnesen; Ole Frithjof Norheim
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2004-01-08
View more
  3 in total

1.  The political economy of priority-setting for health in South Sudan: a case study of the health pooled fund.

Authors:  Heloise Widdig; Noor Tromp; George William Lutwama; Eelco Jacobs
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2022-05-16

2.  Estimating the cost of implementing a facility and community score card for maternal and newborn care service delivery in a rural district in Uganda.

Authors:  Anthony Ssebagereka; Rebecca Racheal Apolot; Evelyne Baelvina Nyachwo; Elizabeth Ekirapa-Kiracho
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2021-01-02

3.  Priority setting and equity in COVID-19 pandemic plans: a comparative analysis of 18 African countries.

Authors:  Lydia Kapiriri; Suzanne Kiwanuka; Godfrey Biemba; Claudia Velez; S Donya Razavi; Julia Abelson; Beverley M Essue; Marion Danis; Susan Goold; Mariam Noorulhuda; Elysee Nouvet; Lars Sandman; Iestyn Williams
Journal:  Health Policy Plan       Date:  2022-03-04       Impact factor: 3.344

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.