ArticleBMC health services research2024
Collaborative governance of an integrated system for collecting contributions for social health insurance, pension, and taxes from the informal sector: a synthesis of stakeholder perspectives.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany low-and middle-income countries have adopted social health insurance schemes. However, the collection of contributions from the large informal sector of these economies poses a significant challenge. Employing an integrated system of contribution collection from all relevant institutions may be cost-effective. We used the integrative framework for collaborative governance, to explore and explain factors that may shape the governance of an integrated system for collecting contributions for social health insurance, pension, and taxes from the informal sector in Zambia.
methodsWe undertook a qualitative case study involving 25 key informants drawn from government ministries and institutions, cooperating partners, non-governmental organizations, and association representatives in the informal sector. Data were analyzed thematically using Emerson's integrative framework for collaborative governance.
resultsThe main drivers of collaboration included a need for comprehensive policies and legislation to oversee the integrated system for contribution collection, prevent redundancy, reduce costs, and enhance organizational effectiveness. However, challenges such as leadership issues and coordination complexities were noted. Factors affecting principled engagement within the collaborative regime consisted of communication gaps, organizational structure disparities, and the adoption of appropriate strategies to engage the informal sector. Additionally, factors influencing shared motivation involved concerns about power dynamics, self-interests, trust issues, corruption, and a lack of common understanding of the informal sector.
conclusionThis study sheds light on a multitude of factors that may shape collaborative governance of an integrated system for contribution collection for social health insurance, pension, and taxes from the informal sector, providing valuable insights for policymakers and implementers alike. Expanding social health insurance coverage to the large but often excluded informal sector will require leveraging factors identified in this study to enhance collaboration with pension and tax subsystems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.