Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspective
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Publication Date: | 2023 |
Other Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | por eng |
Source: | Saude em Debate |
Download full: | https://www.saudeemdebate.org.br/sed/article/view/6697 |
Summary: | This paper presents a comparative analysis of ten selected countries regarding the established relationships of participative governance, socioeconomic profiles, and health care systems with health outcomes and Global Governance Indicators. Significant sources were databases produced or compiled by the World Bank. The analytical model adopts an institutionalist approach to address social protection and participative governance – the latter, as used, recovers notions of societal participation, government porosity, and responsive regulation. Outcomes show a solid convergence of more distributive socioeconomic profiles, more universalist health systems with higher government financing, and better governance indicators. This analysis supports the arguments that socially virtuous institutional paths subjected to positive feedback favor better social and political outcomes over time. Analysis is supported in data about health sector policies and World Governance Indicators. The results sustain arguments of more socially protective relations with quality of democratic institutions and participative governance, government porosity, greater public financing in health sector, delivery, and better health results. Institutional configurations stablished along time reveals convergence in terms of greater protection or greater vulnerability according to capacity and quality of public institutions considering government porosity, societal participation, and government capacity in health policies. |
id |
CBES-1_6eb159a1fb7f4b35992f9e3018235dcd |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.saudeemdebate.emnuvens.com.br:article/6697 |
network_acronym_str |
CBES-1 |
network_name_str |
Saude em Debate |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspectiveMecanismos de governança, sistemas de saúde e porosidade governamental em perspectiva comparadaSistemas de saúde, mecanismos de governança e porosidade governamental em perspectiva comparadaGovernança em saúde. Políticas de saúde. Participação social.Health governance. Health policies. Societal participation.This paper presents a comparative analysis of ten selected countries regarding the established relationships of participative governance, socioeconomic profiles, and health care systems with health outcomes and Global Governance Indicators. Significant sources were databases produced or compiled by the World Bank. The analytical model adopts an institutionalist approach to address social protection and participative governance – the latter, as used, recovers notions of societal participation, government porosity, and responsive regulation. Outcomes show a solid convergence of more distributive socioeconomic profiles, more universalist health systems with higher government financing, and better governance indicators. This analysis supports the arguments that socially virtuous institutional paths subjected to positive feedback favor better social and political outcomes over time. Analysis is supported in data about health sector policies and World Governance Indicators. The results sustain arguments of more socially protective relations with quality of democratic institutions and participative governance, government porosity, greater public financing in health sector, delivery, and better health results. Institutional configurations stablished along time reveals convergence in terms of greater protection or greater vulnerability according to capacity and quality of public institutions considering government porosity, societal participation, and government capacity in health policies.O artigo apresenta uma análise comparada de dez países selecionados sobre as relações entre governança participativa, perfis socioeconômicos e sistemas de saúde com resultados sanitários e de Indicadores de Governança Global. As fontes principais foram bases de dados produzidas e/ou compiladas pelo Banco Mundial. O modelo analítico se apoia em enfoque institucionalista para tratar de proteção social e governança participativa – esta, como utilizada, recobre as noções de participação social, porosidade governamental e regulação responsiva. Os resultados mostram uma sólida convergência entre perfis socioeconômicos mais distributivos, sistemas sanitários com maior financiamento público e universalismo e melhores indicadores de governança. Esta análise reforça os argumentos sobre trajetórias institucionais socialmente virtuosas e sujeitas a reforços positivos capazes de produzir melhores resultados sociais e políticos ao longo do tempo.Maria Lucia Frizon Rizzotto2023-06-21info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttps://www.saudeemdebate.org.br/sed/article/view/6697Saúde em Debate; Vol. 46 No. especial 4 nov (2022): Institutional accreditation in SUS ombudsmen and participation of society; 10-25Saúde em Debate; Vol. 46 Núm. especial 4 nov (2022): Acreditação institucional em ouvidorias do SUS e participação da sociedade; 10-25Saúde em Debate; v. 46 n. especial 4 nov (2022): Acreditação institucional em ouvidorias do SUS e participação da sociedade; 10-252358-28980103-1104reponame:Saude em Debateinstname:Centro Brasileiro de Estudos de Saudeinstacron:CBESporenghttps://www.saudeemdebate.org.br/sed/article/view/6697/1622https://www.saudeemdebate.org.br/sed/article/view/6697/1623Copyright (c) 2023 Saúde em Debatehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessRibeiro, Jose MendesVaitsman, JeniMotta, José Inácio Jardim 2023-06-24T23:38:56Zoai:ojs.saudeemdebate.emnuvens.com.br:article/6697Revistahttps://www.saudeemdebate.org.br/sed/ONGhttps://www.saudeemdebate.org.br/sed/oairevista@saudeemdebate.org.br2358-28980103-1104opendoar:2025-02-17T13:19:58.913581Saude em Debate - Centro Brasileiro de Estudos de Saudefalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspective Mecanismos de governança, sistemas de saúde e porosidade governamental em perspectiva comparada Sistemas de saúde, mecanismos de governança e porosidade governamental em perspectiva comparada |
title |
Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspective |
spellingShingle |
Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspective Ribeiro, Jose Mendes Governança em saúde. Políticas de saúde. Participação social. Health governance. Health policies. Societal participation. |
title_short |
Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspective |
title_full |
Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspective |
title_fullStr |
Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspective |
title_full_unstemmed |
Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspective |
title_sort |
Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspective |
author |
Ribeiro, Jose Mendes |
author_facet |
Ribeiro, Jose Mendes Vaitsman, Jeni Motta, José Inácio Jardim |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Vaitsman, Jeni Motta, José Inácio Jardim |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Ribeiro, Jose Mendes Vaitsman, Jeni Motta, José Inácio Jardim |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Governança em saúde. Políticas de saúde. Participação social. Health governance. Health policies. Societal participation. |
topic |
Governança em saúde. Políticas de saúde. Participação social. Health governance. Health policies. Societal participation. |
description |
This paper presents a comparative analysis of ten selected countries regarding the established relationships of participative governance, socioeconomic profiles, and health care systems with health outcomes and Global Governance Indicators. Significant sources were databases produced or compiled by the World Bank. The analytical model adopts an institutionalist approach to address social protection and participative governance – the latter, as used, recovers notions of societal participation, government porosity, and responsive regulation. Outcomes show a solid convergence of more distributive socioeconomic profiles, more universalist health systems with higher government financing, and better governance indicators. This analysis supports the arguments that socially virtuous institutional paths subjected to positive feedback favor better social and political outcomes over time. Analysis is supported in data about health sector policies and World Governance Indicators. The results sustain arguments of more socially protective relations with quality of democratic institutions and participative governance, government porosity, greater public financing in health sector, delivery, and better health results. Institutional configurations stablished along time reveals convergence in terms of greater protection or greater vulnerability according to capacity and quality of public institutions considering government porosity, societal participation, and government capacity in health policies. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-06-21 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.saudeemdebate.org.br/sed/article/view/6697 |
url |
https://www.saudeemdebate.org.br/sed/article/view/6697 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por eng |
language |
por eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.saudeemdebate.org.br/sed/article/view/6697/1622 https://www.saudeemdebate.org.br/sed/article/view/6697/1623 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2023 Saúde em Debate http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2023 Saúde em Debate http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Maria Lucia Frizon Rizzotto |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Maria Lucia Frizon Rizzotto |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Saúde em Debate; Vol. 46 No. especial 4 nov (2022): Institutional accreditation in SUS ombudsmen and participation of society; 10-25 Saúde em Debate; Vol. 46 Núm. especial 4 nov (2022): Acreditação institucional em ouvidorias do SUS e participação da sociedade; 10-25 Saúde em Debate; v. 46 n. especial 4 nov (2022): Acreditação institucional em ouvidorias do SUS e participação da sociedade; 10-25 2358-2898 0103-1104 reponame:Saude em Debate instname:Centro Brasileiro de Estudos de Saude instacron:CBES |
instname_str |
Centro Brasileiro de Estudos de Saude |
instacron_str |
CBES |
institution |
CBES |
reponame_str |
Saude em Debate |
collection |
Saude em Debate |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Saude em Debate - Centro Brasileiro de Estudos de Saude |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revista@saudeemdebate.org.br |
_version_ |
1824322522510786560 |