Health systems, mechanisms of governance, and governmental porosity in a comparative perspective

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Ribeiro, Jose Mendes
Publication Date: 2023
Other Authors: Vaitsman, Jeni, Motta, José Inácio Jardim
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