Cargando…

Procedural fairness in decision-making for financing a National Health Insurance Scheme: a case study from The Gambia

Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) involves difficult policy choices, and fair processes are critical for building legitimacy and trust. In 2021, The Gambia passed its National Health Insurance (NHI) Act. We explored decision-making processes shaping the financing of the NHI scheme (NHIS) wit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Njie, Hassan, Dale, Elina, Gopinathan, Unni
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10645046/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37963076
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czad063
_version_ 1785147314645499904
author Njie, Hassan
Dale, Elina
Gopinathan, Unni
author_facet Njie, Hassan
Dale, Elina
Gopinathan, Unni
author_sort Njie, Hassan
collection PubMed
description Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) involves difficult policy choices, and fair processes are critical for building legitimacy and trust. In 2021, The Gambia passed its National Health Insurance (NHI) Act. We explored decision-making processes shaping the financing of the NHI scheme (NHIS) with respect to procedural fairness criteria. We reviewed policy and strategic documents on The Gambia’s UHC reforms to identify key policy choices and interviewed policymakers, technocrats, lawmakers, hospital chief executive officers, private sector representatives and civil society organizations (CSOs) including key CSOs left out of the NHIS discussions. Ministerial budget discussions and virtual proceedings of the National Assembly’s debate on the NHI Bill were observed. To enhance public scrutiny, Gambians were encouraged to submit views to the National Assembly’s committee; however, the procedures for doing so were unclear, and it was not possible to ascertain how these inputs were used. Despite available funds to undertake countrywide public engagement, the public consultations were mostly limited to government institutions, few trade unions and a handful of urban-based CSOs. While this represented an improved approach to public policy-making, several CSOs representing key constituents and advocating for the expansion of exemption criteria for insurance premiums to include more vulnerable groups felt excluded from the process. Overload of the National Assembly’s legislative schedule and lack of National Assembly committee quorum were cited as reasons for not engaging in countrywide consultations. In conclusion, although there was an intent from the Executive and National Assembly to ensure transparent, participatory and inclusive decision-making, the process fell short in these aspects. These observations should be seen in the context of The Gambia’s ongoing democratic transition where institutions for procedural fairness are expected to progressively improve. Learning from this experience to enhance the procedural fairness of decision-making can promote inclusiveness, ownership and sustainability of the NHIS in The Gambia.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10645046
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106450462023-11-15 Procedural fairness in decision-making for financing a National Health Insurance Scheme: a case study from The Gambia Njie, Hassan Dale, Elina Gopinathan, Unni Health Policy Plan Case Study Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) involves difficult policy choices, and fair processes are critical for building legitimacy and trust. In 2021, The Gambia passed its National Health Insurance (NHI) Act. We explored decision-making processes shaping the financing of the NHI scheme (NHIS) with respect to procedural fairness criteria. We reviewed policy and strategic documents on The Gambia’s UHC reforms to identify key policy choices and interviewed policymakers, technocrats, lawmakers, hospital chief executive officers, private sector representatives and civil society organizations (CSOs) including key CSOs left out of the NHIS discussions. Ministerial budget discussions and virtual proceedings of the National Assembly’s debate on the NHI Bill were observed. To enhance public scrutiny, Gambians were encouraged to submit views to the National Assembly’s committee; however, the procedures for doing so were unclear, and it was not possible to ascertain how these inputs were used. Despite available funds to undertake countrywide public engagement, the public consultations were mostly limited to government institutions, few trade unions and a handful of urban-based CSOs. While this represented an improved approach to public policy-making, several CSOs representing key constituents and advocating for the expansion of exemption criteria for insurance premiums to include more vulnerable groups felt excluded from the process. Overload of the National Assembly’s legislative schedule and lack of National Assembly committee quorum were cited as reasons for not engaging in countrywide consultations. In conclusion, although there was an intent from the Executive and National Assembly to ensure transparent, participatory and inclusive decision-making, the process fell short in these aspects. These observations should be seen in the context of The Gambia’s ongoing democratic transition where institutions for procedural fairness are expected to progressively improve. Learning from this experience to enhance the procedural fairness of decision-making can promote inclusiveness, ownership and sustainability of the NHIS in The Gambia. Oxford University Press 2023-11-14 /pmc/articles/PMC10645046/ /pubmed/37963076 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czad063 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Case Study
Njie, Hassan
Dale, Elina
Gopinathan, Unni
Procedural fairness in decision-making for financing a National Health Insurance Scheme: a case study from The Gambia
title Procedural fairness in decision-making for financing a National Health Insurance Scheme: a case study from The Gambia
title_full Procedural fairness in decision-making for financing a National Health Insurance Scheme: a case study from The Gambia
title_fullStr Procedural fairness in decision-making for financing a National Health Insurance Scheme: a case study from The Gambia
title_full_unstemmed Procedural fairness in decision-making for financing a National Health Insurance Scheme: a case study from The Gambia
title_short Procedural fairness in decision-making for financing a National Health Insurance Scheme: a case study from The Gambia
title_sort procedural fairness in decision-making for financing a national health insurance scheme: a case study from the gambia
topic Case Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10645046/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37963076
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czad063
work_keys_str_mv AT njiehassan proceduralfairnessindecisionmakingforfinancinganationalhealthinsuranceschemeacasestudyfromthegambia
AT daleelina proceduralfairnessindecisionmakingforfinancinganationalhealthinsuranceschemeacasestudyfromthegambia
AT gopinathanunni proceduralfairnessindecisionmakingforfinancinganationalhealthinsuranceschemeacasestudyfromthegambia