Exploring the typology of decision-makers, institutions, and incentives that shape health decisions in Pakistan and insulate decision makers from citizens feedback
IntroductionIn developing countries such as Pakistan, program and policies underperform in providing public good as weak institutions lead to decisions that are unresponsive to citizens and are driven by personal motivations of the incumbents. We describe the decision-making processes in the health...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023-12-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Public Health |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1253798/full |
| _version_ | 1827592649976053760 |
|---|---|
| author | Adnan A. Khan Adnan A. Khan Romesa Khan Zainab Khawaja Muhammad Ibrahim Zarnab Shaheen Ayesha Khan |
| author_facet | Adnan A. Khan Adnan A. Khan Romesa Khan Zainab Khawaja Muhammad Ibrahim Zarnab Shaheen Ayesha Khan |
| author_sort | Adnan A. Khan |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | IntroductionIn developing countries such as Pakistan, program and policies underperform in providing public good as weak institutions lead to decisions that are unresponsive to citizens and are driven by personal motivations of the incumbents. We describe the decision-making processes in the health sector through the framework of “Public Choice” theory which posits how individual motives shape institutional performance and direction.MethodsWe conducted 84 qualitative interviews with five types of stakeholders: politicians, senior and mid-level bureaucrats, donors, public health experts and media personnel spanning 2 periods over a decade. The initial interviews were conducted during 2013–2015 period and a case study on decision-making during the COVID-19 response was added in 2020–2022 period.FindingsMost new ideas originate from top political leadership, guided by personal agendas or political expediency. Senior bureaucrats implement politicians’ agenda and mid-level officials maintain the status quo and follow established “authority.” Since officials’ performance, promotions, transfers, and the rare dismissals are based on tenure deviations rather than work performance, individuals and institutions are reluctant to take initiative without “consensus” among their colleagues often leading to inaction or delays that obviate initiative and reform. The public sector lacks institutional memory, formal information gathering, and citizen engagement, impacting public goods, health services, and policies. Media and donor personnel are important influencers. However, media mostly report only “hot issues” in health, with short publication and reader attention cycles. Donor personnel are the most likely to follow evidence for decision making, albeit while following their institutional priorities determined centrally. The COVID-19 response is presented as a contrast from usual practices, where evidence was used to guide decisions, as the pandemic was perceived as a national threat by the highest leadership.ConclusionAbsence of citizen feedback and formal systems for evidence gathering and processing leads to decisions that neglect the needs of those they serve, prioritizing personal or political gains and perpetuating the status quo. However, the COVID-19 pandemic emphasized the importance of evidence-based decision-making and offers valuable lessons for reforming decision-making processes. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T01:58:27Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-2e93a97b5b444f23b9acee5ae64fe310 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2296-2565 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T01:58:27Z |
| publishDate | 2023-12-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Public Health |
| spelling | doaj.art-2e93a97b5b444f23b9acee5ae64fe3102023-12-08T11:02:15ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Public Health2296-25652023-12-011110.3389/fpubh.2023.12537981253798Exploring the typology of decision-makers, institutions, and incentives that shape health decisions in Pakistan and insulate decision makers from citizens feedbackAdnan A. Khan0Adnan A. Khan1Romesa Khan2Zainab Khawaja3Muhammad Ibrahim4Zarnab Shaheen5Ayesha Khan6Research and Development Solutions, Islamabad, PakistanMinistry of National Health Services, Regulation and Coordination, Islamabad, PakistanResearch and Development Solutions, Islamabad, PakistanResearch and Development Solutions, Islamabad, PakistanResearch and Development Solutions, Islamabad, PakistanResearch and Development Solutions, Islamabad, PakistanAkhter Hameed Khan Foundation, Islamabad, PakistanIntroductionIn developing countries such as Pakistan, program and policies underperform in providing public good as weak institutions lead to decisions that are unresponsive to citizens and are driven by personal motivations of the incumbents. We describe the decision-making processes in the health sector through the framework of “Public Choice” theory which posits how individual motives shape institutional performance and direction.MethodsWe conducted 84 qualitative interviews with five types of stakeholders: politicians, senior and mid-level bureaucrats, donors, public health experts and media personnel spanning 2 periods over a decade. The initial interviews were conducted during 2013–2015 period and a case study on decision-making during the COVID-19 response was added in 2020–2022 period.FindingsMost new ideas originate from top political leadership, guided by personal agendas or political expediency. Senior bureaucrats implement politicians’ agenda and mid-level officials maintain the status quo and follow established “authority.” Since officials’ performance, promotions, transfers, and the rare dismissals are based on tenure deviations rather than work performance, individuals and institutions are reluctant to take initiative without “consensus” among their colleagues often leading to inaction or delays that obviate initiative and reform. The public sector lacks institutional memory, formal information gathering, and citizen engagement, impacting public goods, health services, and policies. Media and donor personnel are important influencers. However, media mostly report only “hot issues” in health, with short publication and reader attention cycles. Donor personnel are the most likely to follow evidence for decision making, albeit while following their institutional priorities determined centrally. The COVID-19 response is presented as a contrast from usual practices, where evidence was used to guide decisions, as the pandemic was perceived as a national threat by the highest leadership.ConclusionAbsence of citizen feedback and formal systems for evidence gathering and processing leads to decisions that neglect the needs of those they serve, prioritizing personal or political gains and perpetuating the status quo. However, the COVID-19 pandemic emphasized the importance of evidence-based decision-making and offers valuable lessons for reforming decision-making processes.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1253798/fullevidence-based policymakingdecision-makingpolitical economypolicy ambiguityPakistan governmentimplementation science |
| spellingShingle | Adnan A. Khan Adnan A. Khan Romesa Khan Zainab Khawaja Muhammad Ibrahim Zarnab Shaheen Ayesha Khan Exploring the typology of decision-makers, institutions, and incentives that shape health decisions in Pakistan and insulate decision makers from citizens feedback Frontiers in Public Health evidence-based policymaking decision-making political economy policy ambiguity Pakistan government implementation science |
| title | Exploring the typology of decision-makers, institutions, and incentives that shape health decisions in Pakistan and insulate decision makers from citizens feedback |
| title_full | Exploring the typology of decision-makers, institutions, and incentives that shape health decisions in Pakistan and insulate decision makers from citizens feedback |
| title_fullStr | Exploring the typology of decision-makers, institutions, and incentives that shape health decisions in Pakistan and insulate decision makers from citizens feedback |
| title_full_unstemmed | Exploring the typology of decision-makers, institutions, and incentives that shape health decisions in Pakistan and insulate decision makers from citizens feedback |
| title_short | Exploring the typology of decision-makers, institutions, and incentives that shape health decisions in Pakistan and insulate decision makers from citizens feedback |
| title_sort | exploring the typology of decision makers institutions and incentives that shape health decisions in pakistan and insulate decision makers from citizens feedback |
| topic | evidence-based policymaking decision-making political economy policy ambiguity Pakistan government implementation science |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1253798/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT adnanakhan exploringthetypologyofdecisionmakersinstitutionsandincentivesthatshapehealthdecisionsinpakistanandinsulatedecisionmakersfromcitizensfeedback AT adnanakhan exploringthetypologyofdecisionmakersinstitutionsandincentivesthatshapehealthdecisionsinpakistanandinsulatedecisionmakersfromcitizensfeedback AT romesakhan exploringthetypologyofdecisionmakersinstitutionsandincentivesthatshapehealthdecisionsinpakistanandinsulatedecisionmakersfromcitizensfeedback AT zainabkhawaja exploringthetypologyofdecisionmakersinstitutionsandincentivesthatshapehealthdecisionsinpakistanandinsulatedecisionmakersfromcitizensfeedback AT muhammadibrahim exploringthetypologyofdecisionmakersinstitutionsandincentivesthatshapehealthdecisionsinpakistanandinsulatedecisionmakersfromcitizensfeedback AT zarnabshaheen exploringthetypologyofdecisionmakersinstitutionsandincentivesthatshapehealthdecisionsinpakistanandinsulatedecisionmakersfromcitizensfeedback AT ayeshakhan exploringthetypologyofdecisionmakersinstitutionsandincentivesthatshapehealthdecisionsinpakistanandinsulatedecisionmakersfromcitizensfeedback |