See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277408124
The role of policy actors and contextual factors
in policy agenda setting and formulation:
Maternal fee exemption policies in...
Article in Health Research Policy and Systems · May 2015
DOI: 10.1186/s12961-015-0016-9 · Source: PubMed
CITATIONS
READS
6
54
3 authors, including:
Han van Dijk
Irene Agyepong
92 PUBLICATIONS 456 CITATIONS
94 PUBLICATIONS 1,776 CITATIONS
Wageningen University & Research
SEE PROFILE
Ghana Health Service
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Accelerating progress towards attainment of MDG 4 and 5 in Ghana through basic health systems
function strengthening View project
The Fulani in the Sahel: Caught between the Hammer of Muslim Extremism and the Anvil of the State
(Mali, Nigeria) View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Irene Agyepong on 02 June 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
DOI 10.1186/s12961-015-0016-9
RESEARCH
Open Access
The role of policy actors and contextual factors in
policy agenda setting and formulation: maternal
fee exemption policies in Ghana over four and a
half decades
Augustina Koduah1,2*, Han van Dijk2 and Irene Akua Agyepong3
Abstract
Background: Development of health policy is a complex process that does not necessarily follow a particular format
and a predictable trajectory. Therefore, agenda setting and selecting of alternatives are critical processes of policy
development and can give insights into how and why policies are made. Understanding why some policy issues
remain and are maintained whiles others drop off the agenda is an important enquiry. This paper aims to advance
understanding of health policy agenda setting and formulation in Ghana, a lower middle-income country, by exploring
how and why the maternal (antenatal, delivery and postnatal) fee exemption policy agenda in the health sector has
been maintained over the four and half decades since a ‘free antenatal care in government facilities’ policy was
first introduced in October 1963.
Methods: A mix of historical and contemporary qualitative case studies of nine policy agenda setting and formulation
processes was used. Data collection methods involved reviews of archival materials, contemporary records, media
content, in-depth interviews, and participant observation. Data was analysed drawing on a combination of policy
analysis theories and frameworks.
Results: Contextual factors, acting in an interrelating manner, shaped how policy actors acted in a timely manner
and closely linked policy content to the intended agenda. Contextual factors that served as bases for the policymaking
process were: political ideology, economic crisis, data about health outcomes, historical events, social unrest, change in
government, election year, austerity measures, and international agendas. Nkrumah’s socialist ideology first set the
agenda for free antenatal service in 1963. This policy trajectory taken in 1963 was not reversed by subsequent policy
actors because contextual factors and policy actors created a network of influence to maintain this issue on the
agenda. Politicians over the years participated in the process to direct and approve the agenda. Donors increasingly
gained agenda access within the Ghanaian health sector as they used financial support as leverage.
Conclusion: Influencers of policy agenda setting must recognise that the process is complex and intertwined with a
mix of political, evidence-based, finance-based, path-dependent, and donor-driven processes. Therefore, influencers
need to pay attention to context and policy actors in any strategy.
Keywords: Context, Fee exemption, Maternal health services, Policy actors, Policy agenda setting, Policy formulation
* Correspondence: augustina.koduah@wur.nl
1
Ministry of Health, Ministries, P.O. Box MB 44, Accra, Ghana
2
Wageningen UR (University & Research centre), Sociology of Development
and Change, Wageningen, Netherlands
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© 2015 Koduah et al.
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Background
The development path of health policy, whether as intent, a
practice, or a written document, can be difficult to predict
because it is a complex and intertwined process and does
not necessarily follow a particular format. Understanding
why some policy issues remain and are maintained while
others drop off the agenda (agenda setting and selection
of alternatives) is an important field of enquiry since it
can give insights into this complex process. This is because getting and maintaining policy issues on the agenda
is an essential part of decisions made during policy
development.
Green-Pedersen and Wilkerson [1] argue that the explanations proposed for why some issues make it onto the
agenda and others fail are wide ranging. Some are structural, emphasizing how institutions are organized to
advantage some alternatives or issues over others. Some
are cognitive, emphasizing how individuals or even institutions process information in ways that limit what will be
addressed at any given time. Others emphasize the role
of external events or public opinions, and how they can
combine with political incentives to quickly shift attention to a new direction [1].
Some issues, once on the agenda, are maintained over
time and periodically re-examined to maintain their recurrence [2]. Political attention of vote-seeking politicians,
for example, maintained health policy issues on the national agenda over time in Denmark and the United States
[1]. There is, however, very little research related to how
and why some policies have a long life and are maintained
over time despite periodic threats to their existence; while
others cease to exist.
The aim of this paper is to advance understanding of
health policy agenda setting and formulation in low- and
middle-income country (LMIC) settings by exploring how
and why maternal (antenatal, delivery and postnatal) fee
exemption policy agendas in the health sector in Ghana
have been maintained over the four and half decades since
a ‘free antenatal care in government facilities’ policy
was first introduced in October 1963. Specifically, we
ask: How have maternal user fee exemption policies
evolved in Ghana since independence? Which actors
have been involved in the policy agenda setting and
formulation and why? What contextual factors influenced
the process over time, how and why?
Advancing the understanding of policy agenda setting
and formulation process, especially how and why a policy
agenda item is maintained over time, is an essential area
of analysis to inform public social policy development
and implementation. Nevertheless, there is limited research
and publications on policy analysis in LMICs [3] and in
particular on processes of agenda setting and formulation
[4]. Our work firstly contributes to the general understanding of policy agenda setting and formulation processes in a
Page 2 of 20
LMIC setting. Secondly, it provides insights on how and
why maternal fee exemption policies in Ghana were maintained over four and half decades despite the existence
of at least eight distinct threats or opportunities for major
policy reforms.
Ghana health sector
The Ghanaian health sector has had a hierarchical, predominantly publically financed, publically administered and
delivered, services model since independence in 1957.
However, a strong private sector participation in service
delivery has always accompanied it. Out-of-pocket payments at point of service have also ensured continuing
‘private’ financing. The sector underwent two major reforms in the 1990s. These were the creation of the Ghana
Health Service (GHS) under the Ghana Health Service
and Teaching Hospitals Act; and the adoption of a sectorwide approach in 1997. Prior to passage of the Ghana
Health Service and Teaching Hospitals Act in 1995, the
Ministry of Health (MOH) was the regulator of public
and private sector, the body responsible for health sector
policy direction, coordination, monitoring and evaluation,
and the provider of public sector services. The Ghana
Health Service and Teaching Hospitals Act 525 created
an agency model in the health sector. The MOH became a civil service ministry responsible for overall sector
policy making, coordination, monitoring, and evaluation,
with the GHS providing public health and clinical services
[5, 6]. Under the sector-wide approach, dialogue between government and international donors shifted up
a level: from the planning and management of projects,
to the overall policy, institutional, and financial framework within which health care is provided at national
level [7]. The Government of Ghana, represented by the
MOH, and international donors jointly agreed to national
priorities expressed in the programme of work – which
states the policies, strategies, targets, and resource envelope and allocation for the sector [8, 9].
In the immediate post-colonial period (March 1957)
and several years afterwards, the majority of policy agenda
and formulation decisions were undertaken mainly by politicians and a small group of bureaucrats [10]. The sectorwide approach created a new avenue for policymaking
platforms between the MOH, international donors, and
other actors broadening the scope and range of policy
actors. As a result, expertise could be drawn from other
actors in or outside the health sector to form groupings
to guide the process. Yet, the ultimate policy choice still
rested with politicians and a few bureaucrats [11]. A
handful of policy elites taking the ultimate decision is
not peculiar to Ghana. In their work on developing countries, Grindle and Thomas [12] noted that small policy
elites – government officials and civil servants – strongly
influenced the agenda and the nature of adopted policies.
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Methods
A longitudinal mix of historical and contemporary case
studies of policy agenda setting and formulation for a
specific issue – fee exemptions for maternal health services – was conducted for the period 1957 to 2008. The
case study approach was ideal since it allowed collection
and analysis of comprehensive, systematic, and in-depth
information within a real life context [13, 14]. Nine specific fee exemption policy agendas for maternal health
have been set since independence in 1957 and each of
these was treated as a separate unit of analysis or case.
To systematically attempt to reconstruct the dynamics
surrounding the nine historical maternal fee exemption
policy agenda setting and formulation events, we relied
on mixed methods, and analysed data in the light of an
appropriate conceptual framework. Data was collected
between June 2012 and May 2014 using key informant
in-depth interviews, a desk review of documents and
archival materials including media content from independence (1957) through to 2008, and participant observation during a 20 month period of practical attachment
at the Policy Planning Monitoring and Evaluation (PPME)
directorate of the MOH by one of the authors (AK).
The PPME is responsible for the coordination of policy
formulation and strategic planning for the health sector. Participant observation there was therefore ideal
for observing and understanding aspects of the processes
involved in contemporary policy agenda setting and
formulation.
The focus of the in-depth interviews was to obtain
real-life experiences of policy agenda setting and formulation processes from respondents. In total, 27 national
level respondents were interviewed based on a semistructured interview guide. Fifteen of these respondents
were identified from health sector documents reviewed,
while the rest (12) were suggested by other respondents.
The in-depth interviews were conducted via face-to-face
meetings, e-mails, and phone. Respondents included actors within government settings such as past and current
officials of the MOH (10), the GHS headquarters (3),
the National Health Insurance Authority (4), and a
former Minister of Health (1). Respondents also included
actors outside government settings such as officials of the
Christian Health Association of Ghana (1), the Coalition
of Non-Governmental Organizations in Health (1),
international donors (4), and health professional bodies (3). Interviews were tape-recorded and later transcribed verbatim by a neutral person to maintain the
original messages of respondents. Where permission
was not granted to tape-record an interview, notes
were taken and verified later with the respondent. All
transcriptions were read and analysed repeatedly and
organized into retrievable sections based on the analytical framework.
Page 3 of 20
Document and archival review and analysis were used
to map the historical sequence of events, identify policy
actors, and further triangulate findings with respondent’s
information. The study greatly relied on varied documents
to trace historical happenings. Documents were assessed
based on four criteria developed by Scott [15]. Firstly, authenticity, which assesses that the evidence is genuine and
of unquestionable origin. Secondly, credibility, which assesses whether the evidence is free from error and distortion. Thirdly, representativeness, which assesses whether
the evidence is typical of its kind, and, if not, whether the
extent of its untypicality is known. Finally, meaning, which
assesses whether the evidence is clear and comprehensible
[15]. National archives, the National Parliament Library,
the George Padmore Research Library, and the Ghana
Publishing Corporation were the sources of data for health
legislative documents such as National Decrees, Acts of
Parliaments, and National Regulations; old health-related
reports and records of one national newspaper – the Daily
Graphic were also used. We obtained access through
the policy analysis unit of the MOH to archives of nonconfidential official documents including letters, meeting minutes, memoranda, health sector review reports,
health sector programme of work, national strategic plans,
and agreements related to decisions to provide maternal
user fee exemptions. Additionally, the web-based search
engine Google Scholar was used to obtain published literature related to maternal fee exemptions. Relevant
sections of all reviewed documents were highlighted and
coded based on the categories identified in the analytical
framework.
Analytical framework
To guide the analysis of the data we drew on several policy
analysis theories, frameworks, and concepts in the literature. Grindle and Thomas [12] conceptualize context
as including the structure of class and interest group
mobilization in the society, historical experiences and
conditions, international economic and political relationships, domestic economic conditions, the administrative
capacity of the state, and the impact of prior or conterminously pursued policies. They also include in context,
the individual characteristics of policy actors such as
their ideological predispositions, professional expertise
and training, memories of similar policy situations, position
and power resources, political and institutional commitments, loyalties, and personal attributes and goals. They
observe that policy actors are never fully autonomous.
Instead, they work within several interlocking contexts
that confront them with issues and problems they need
to address, set limits on what solutions are considered,
determine what options are feasible politically, economically and administratively, and respond to efforts to alter
existing policies and institutional practices.
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Kingdon’s [16] theory and framework of agenda setting
argues that active participants (policy actors) and the
processes by which agenda items and alternatives come
into prominence are key factors that affect policy agenda
setting and choice. Policy actors in his USA study included
the President, the Congress, bureaucrats in the executive
branch, and various forces outside of government including the media, interest groups, political parties, and the
general public. Policy agenda setting and choice processes
are embedded within their context and, as such, influence
how policy actors operate within these processes.
Power is a key factor in health policy processes [17].
Contextual factors may serve as a source of power to influence policy actors’ action, inaction, and choice. Policy
actors therefore can become influencers within a specific
context to affect policy agenda setting and formulation
processes. As noted by Mintzberg [18], to be an influencer, one requires some source of power – defined by control of a resource, a technical skill and body of knowledge,
or stemming from a legal prerogatives – or authority,
coupled with active involvement in ongoing processes in a
politically skilful way.
Drawing on these concepts of context, policy actors,
and power, we attempted to systematically reconstruct
nine historical agenda setting and policy formulation events.
Working iteratively on data gathered, patterns, themes and
categories that emerged were tabulated and further analysed.
The analysis process involved mapping to our analytical
framework – contextual situations, policy actors and their
role, linkage among policies, specific policy content, power
sources and how these influenced the agenda setting
processes and why. We acknowledge the problems involved in mapping the exact sequence of events. To
minimise this, varied sources of data were used to reconstruct, insofar as possible, the chronology and dynamics of
maternal fee exemption policies agenda setting and formulation processes.
Ethical considerations
This study forms part of a larger study – ‘Accelerating
progress towards attainment of Millennium Development
Goals 4 and 5 in Ghana through basic health systems
function strengthening’ – for which ethical approval was
granted by the GHS Ethical Review Committee and the
School of Social Science Research Assessment Committee
of Wageningen University and Research Centre. Informed
consent was obtained from all respondents, and respondent’s anonymity was maintained and protected using codes
as labels during the study.
Results
This section contains a historical reconstruction of the
dynamics related to the nine maternal fee exemption
policy agenda setting and formulation events insofar as
Page 4 of 20
possible. We acknowledge the difficulty in providing a
full explanation of events as they unfolded – reconstructing who said what, when, to whom and how it
was received. Where such data is available, it is duly noted;
otherwise, the gap is noted and possible inferences are
made from interpretation of data.
Policy actors and agenda setting
Maternal fee exemption policies studied included free
healthcare services related to one or more of antenatal,
delivery, and postnatal services, starting from the initial
introduction of free antenatal service in 1963. Policies
related to maternal fee exemption were maintained and
modified – including expansions and contractions; but
were never completely dropped over the period studied.
Nine specific maternal fee exemption policies were identified along the pathway, as the policies evolved from user
fee exemption to national health insurance premium exemption. Table 1 summarises the maternal fee exemption
policies historical timelines, policy instruments and policy
contents between 1963 and 2008.
Over the period studied, we classified actors involved in
maternal fee exemption policies based on their primary
role into four groups. The first group, ‘policy agenda directors’, includes high level politicians such as heads of state
who gave directives to either set the maternal fee exemption agenda or modify a previously existing policy. The
second group ‘policy agenda approvers’ includes high and
middle level politicians such as heads of state and ministers of health who gave approval for existing maternal fee
exemption policies to be maintained and/or modified. The
third group, ‘policy agenda advisers’, includes government
and non-government individuals and organizations who
advised agenda directors and approvers. Policy agenda advisers includes the Ministry of Health and its agencies
such as the GHS and National Health Insurance Authority
(NHIA), as well as those outside the health sector such as
the Attorney General Office and National Development
Planning Commission. Non-government policy agenda
advisers include international bilateral and multilateral
donors. Policy agenda advisers provided technical expertise in varying capacities to push/keep particular ideas on
or off the agenda. Some have, over the period studied,
provided financial resources to support their ideas and
in some cases, set the agenda. The fourth group, ‘policy
agenda advocates’, includes those who have supported
and campaigned directly or indirectly to maintain maternal fee exemption policies. Examples include the general
public, the Ghana Medical Association, and the Pharmaceutical Society of Ghana.
Contextual factors and agenda setting
Context and policy actors consistently influenced the
manner in which policy agenda setting and formulation
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Page 5 of 20
Table 1 Historical timelines and mapping of maternal fee exemption policies in Ghana
Year
Policy instrument
Policy content
1963
Letter
‘The Minister has directed that with immediate effect all antenatal services provided
at Government hospitals should be for free’
1969
Hospital Fees Decree. National Liberation
Council Decree, 360
‘Except in respect of accommodation and maintenance fees specified in the Second
Schedule to this Decree and subject to any other provision of this Decree, no fees
shall be paid in a hospital by
- (b) any persons in respect of antenatal care at a Clinic or Health Centre;
- (c) any multiparous patient with a history of five or more pregnancies, or any patient
referred to a maternity or other hospital from a clinic or health centre or any patient
referred to any such hospital by a registered midwife or registered medical practitioner’
1971
Hospital Fees Act, 387
‘No fees other than the fees prescribed for accommodation and maintenance shall be
paid in respect of services rendered in a hospital to
- (b) any person other than a non-resident alien in respect of antenatal care at a health
post, rural health centre or clinic, or any other hospital specified by the Director of
Medical Services by notice published in the Gazette;
- (c) any maternity patient who has had four or more child births;
- (d) any maternity patient referred to a hospital from a clinic or health centre;
- (e) any maternity patient referred to a hospital by a registered midwife or registered
medical practitioner’
1983
Hospital Fees Regulation. Legislative
Instrument 1277
‘No fees other than hospital accommodations and catering services shall be paid in
any Government hospital or clinic in respect of
1985
Hospital Fees Regulation. Legislative
Instrument 1313
‘No fees other than hospital accommodations and catering services shall be paid in
any Government hospital or clinic in respect of
1997
November 1997 Ministry of Health
Guidelines
‘Exemption for antenatal service (first 4 antenatal care visits) in government health facilities’
2003
Annual Programme of Work, 2004
‘User fee exemption for maternal service in Northern, Upper-West, Upper-East and Central
Regions in government, private and mission health facilities’
2005
Annual Programme of Work, 2005.
‘User fee exemption for maternal service in all ten regions in government, private and
mission health facilities’
2008
June 2008. Ministry of Health guidelines
‘National Health Insurance Scheme premium exemption for all pregnant women in Ghana’
– (i) antenatal and post-natal services
– (i) antenatal and post-natal services
related to maternal fee exemptions occurred over the
period of study (Table 2). Contextual factors that shaped
maternal fee exemption polices from 1963 to 2008 included political ideology, economic crises, historical events,
change in government, election years, austerity measures,
international agendas, and country-based health outcomes
in the form of health demographic indicators. These contextual factors also served as sources of power that policy
actors used to influence the agenda setting and formulation
processes, and justify their actions and inactions. They are
described below for each of the nine discrete policy change
periods we identified.
fees for services was at odds with the political ideology
of free health and education – the Nkrumahism social
philosophy [20] –promoted by the first head of state,
Dr Kwame Nkrumah [21]. Thus, the first financing policy related to maternal health services, the 21st October
1963 directive by the MOH that with immediate effect,
all antenatal services should be provided at government
hospitals free of charge [19], had as its main contextual
agenda driver, ideology.
‘From independence, it was the socialist leaning of the
Convention People’s Party that set the agenda’
[Former MOH staff, 22/8/2012].
1963 Free Antenatal Care in the Public Sector Directive
Prior to independence in March 1957, patients paid charges
for hospital services. The existing health law – Hospital
Fees Ordinance, Regulation Number 56 of 1942 – stipulated schedules of fees for hospital services [19]. In the
context of political emancipation and the euphoria that
marked independence, it was evident that charging of
Public reminders of this popular directive to provide
free health services for all were carried in national newspapers with headlines such as; ‘hospital fees, no charge’;
‘free health service’ and ‘free medical service soon’ [21–23].
However, the MOH used a piecemeal approach in making
free health for all a reality, although it was a political
Agenda Precipitating factors
setting
events
Actors, forces, context, evidence, narratives
and interest favouring exemptions
Actors, forces, context, evidence,
narratives, and interest opposing
exemptions
1963
Actors:
Actors:
President-Dr Kwame Nkrumah
Ministry of Health (MOH) bureaucrats
Forces:
Forces:
Political power of government
Health care service expertise and
administrative power of MOH
Political Socialist Ideology
Political ideology at odds with charging fees for social
services
Context:
Euphoria after independence
Outcome
Free antenatal service and minimal fees for
other health services
Context:
MOH adjusting to the ‘new’ health
sector administrative procedures
post-independence
Evidence:
Evidence:
Charging fees for health service was at odds with
socialist ideology
None
Narrative:
Piecemeal effort to make free health
for all practical
Government to provide free health care services for all
Interest:
Interest:
Provide health care services
Narrative:
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Table 2 Summary of policy actors, contextual situations, accompanying power sources, and policy outcomes
Political gains and command of public attention
1969
Change in government
Actors:
Actors:
1. MOH Bureaucrats
Head of State – Major General Joseph
Arthur Ankrah
2. General Public
Forces:
3. Head of State – Major General Joseph Arthur Ankrah
Political power of the government
Forces:
Government took the evidence of
health sector budget deficit
1. Health care service expertise and administrative
Context:
power of MOH
Deteriorating economy and growing
health expenditure
2. Power of voice and numbers of the general public
Evidence:
3. Political interest of military government to consolidate
power overtook evidence of health sector budget deficit
Narrative:
Health sector budget deficit
Interest
Context:
Generate health sector revenue to
correct budget deficit
Increased fees for other health services
stipulated in the Hospital Fees Decree, 360
Page 6 of 20
Reintroduce hospital fee to generate
health sector revenue
Maternal user fee exemption policy of free
antenatal services expanded to include free
delivery service for multiparous patient
Existing free antenatal policy and minimal fees for other
health services.
High maternal health related deaths
New military government
Evidence:
Popular hospital fees exemption policies and minimal
fees for other health services
Narrative:
Go on with maternal user fee exemption policy
Interest:
MOH – provide health care services
General public – go on with maternal user fee exemption
and minimal fees for other health services
1971
Change in government
Actors:
Actors:
1. Prime Minister – Dr Kofi Abrefa Busia
1. MOH Bureaucrats
2. General Public
2. Konotey-Ahulu committee
Forces:
Forces:
1. Political power of government
1. Health care service expertise and
administrative power of MOH
2. Power of voice and numbers of the general public
2. Technical expertise of the
Committee
Context:
Context:
Existing free antenatal policy and minimal fees for
other health services.
Deteriorating economy and growing
health expenditure
Existing maternal user fee exemption policy
maintained. The intent to increase minimal
fees for other health services stipulated in
the Hospital Fees Act, 387
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Table 2 Summary of policy actors, contextual situations, accompanying power sources, and policy outcomes (Continued)
Evidence:
Health sector budget deficit
New democratic government
Narrative:
Evidence:
MOH – Free health service is not
the way to go
Popular maternal user fee exemption policy.
Konotey-Ahulu committee – There
could be no health service without
fees
Narrative:
Interest
Prime Minister – Go on with exemptions and minimal
hospital fees awaiting Konotey-Ahulu’s recommendations
Generate health sector revenue to
correct budget deficit
General Public – No increase in hospital fees for health
services and maintain ongoing maternal user fee exemption
Page 7 of 20
Public outcry about hospital fees
Interest:
Prime Minister – Consolidate political power and
maintain the status quo
General Public – Go on with maternal user fee exemption
and minimal fees for other health services
1983
Under resourced public
health services
Actors:
Actors:
1. Military leader – Flight Lieutenant Jerry John Rawlings
1. MOH Bureaucrats
2. Multilateral agency: United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
2. Health professional bodies – Ghana
Medical Association, Pharmaceutical
Society of Ghana
Forces:
Forces:
1. Political power of government
1. Health care service expertise and
administrative power of MOH
2. Medical expertise and financial power of UNICEF
2. Expertise of professional bodies
Context:
3. Evidence of shortage of medicines
and consumables overtook political
interest to keep the status quo
Existing maternal user fee exemptions policy
narrowed to antenatal and postnatal services
Fees for other health services stipulated in
the Hospital fees Regulation, 1277
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Table 2 Summary of policy actors, contextual situations, accompanying power sources, and policy outcomes (Continued)
Context:
Existing free antenatal policy and minimal fees for other
health services
Economic crisis and severe health
sector budget deficit
Evidence:
Evidence:
Strong political interest and support of government to keep
the status quo
Narrative:
Narrative:
Go on with maternal user fee exemptions and minimal
hospital fee for other health services
Charge hospital fees to generate
health sector revenue
Interest:
Interest:
Military leader – Not to distress the general populace with
hospital fees during economic crisis
Reintroduce hospital fee for all health
services to correct health budget
deficit
UNICEF – Advocate for free maternal health services
1985
Under resourced public
health services
Shortage of medicines and
consumables
Actors:
1. Military leader – Flight Lieutenant Jerry John Rawlings
None opposing
Maternal (antenatal and postnatal) user
fee exemption policy maintained
2. MOH Bureaucrats
1. Political power of government
2. Health care service expertise and administrative power of MOH
Page 8 of 20
Forces:
Existing maternal user fee exemption
policy narrowed to four antenatal visits
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Maternal user fee exemption policy linked
to poverty reduction strategy priorities
Page 9 of 20
Table 2 Summary of policy actors, contextual situations, accompanying power sources, and policy outcomes (Continued)
Context:
Increased fees for other health services
stipulated in the Hospital fees Regulation,
1313
Economic crisis
Structural Adjustment Programme
Existing free antenatal and postnatal services
Evidence:
Charged hospital fees could not recover full cost
Some health facilities already increased hospital fees to recover cost
Narrative:
Increase hospital fees to recover cost and maintain maternal
user fee exemption
Interest:
Generate health sector revenue and go on with maternal user fee
exemptions policy
1997
Worsening national maternal Actors:
health indicators
President – Flight Lieutenant Jerry John Rawlings
Actors:
MOH Bureaucrats
Forces:
Forces:
Political power of government
Health care service expertise and
administrative power of MOH
Context:
Evidence of health sector budget
deficit overtook government intent
Health sector full cost recovery under structural adjustment
programme
Declining maternal health outcomes
Context:
Low health sector budget allocation
Evidence:
Evidence:
Low maternal supervised delivery in health facilities of 44 % as
stated in the Ghana Demographic Health Survey [49]
Health sector budget deficit
High maternal mortality rate estimate of 214 per 100,000a live
births as stated in the Ghana Maternal Health Survey [73]
Narrative:
Narrative:
MOH cannot implement fully maternal
user fee exemption policy as per the
directive
Interest
Pregnant women are not accessing supervised delivery services
in health facilities because of inability to pay
Ensure health service delivery
Interest:
Government intends to mitigate social consequence of the
structural adjustment programme
2003
Ghana poverty reduction
strategy and Heavily
Actors:
None opposing
Indebted Poor Countries
grant
1. President: John Agyekum Kufuor
2. Multilateral agency: World Bank group and International
Monetary Fund
3. MOH Bureaucrats
Forces:
Maternal user fee exemption policy expanded
to include delivery and postnatal services and
narrowed to four deprived regions
1. Political power of government
2. Financial power of World Bank and International Monetary Bank
3. Health care service expertise and administrative power of MOH
Context:
Stagnant economic growth
Inequitable national poverty levels
New democratic government
Evidence:
Worsening poverty indicators such as maternal mortality rate
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Table 2 Summary of policy actors, contextual situations, accompanying power sources, and policy outcomes (Continued)
Narrative:
There exist a positive correlation between poverty and health
outcomes
Interest:
Improve poverty related health indicators
2005
Worsening national maternal Actors:
health indicators
1. Minister of Health: Major Courage Quashigah
2. Multilateral and bilateral agencies – health sector signatories to
2005 Aide Memoire (European Commission, Royal Danish Embassy,
Royal Netherlands Embassy/Department for International
Development*, United Nations Population Fund, UNICEF, USAID,
Japan International Cooperation Agency, WHO and World Bank)
None opposing
Maternal user fee exemption policy linked
to poverty reduction strategy priorities
Maternal (antenatal, delivery and postnatal)
user fee exemption policy expanded to
all regions
3. MOH Bureaucrats
Forces:
1. Political and administrative power of the Minister
2. Technical expertise and financial power of the Donors
3. Health care service expertise, administrative power of MOH
Context:
Election year
High poverty in non-deprived regions
Page 10 of 20
National poverty reduction strategy
Evidence:
High national maternal mortality rate of 503 per 100,000b live
birth as stated in the Ghana Millennium Development Goal
Acceleration Framework and Country Action Plan [58]
Narrative:
Poverty and poor maternal health outcome exist in non-deprived
regions
Interest:
Improve national maternal health indicators
2008
Maternal health declared
a national emergency
Actors:
1. President – John Agyekum Kufuor
None opposing
Free maternal (antenatal, delivery and
postnatal) care directive
2. Minister of Health – Major Courage Quashigah
3. MOH Bureaucrats
Forces:
1. Political power of the government
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Table 2 Summary of policy actors, contextual situations, accompanying power sources, and policy outcomes (Continued)
2. Political and administrative power of the Minister
3. Health care service expertise and administrative power of MOH
Context:
Election year
Suspended maternal user fee exemption policy
Evidence:
Routine health management information system data from the
independent review of the 2007 Programme of Work shows:
(a) Increased institutional maternal mortality ratio of 187/100,000
live births in 2006 to 224/100,000 live births in 2007
(b) Decreased proportion of maternal supervised deliveries in
healthcare facilities from 44.5 % in 2006 to 35.1 % in 2007
Narrative:
Suspended maternal user fee exemption policy contributed
greatly to poor maternal health outcomes
Interest:
Improve maternal health indicators and consolidate political gains
Page 11 of 20
*The Royal Netherlands Embassy was in charge of Department for International Development health projects in Ghana, in line with the cost containment entered into between the two countries.
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
directive. In addition to the free antenatal service, the
MOH also made adjustments to reduce existing hospital fees and provided free care for other services. For
example, by 9th October 1961, private (professional) fees
previously borne by patients were abolished and doctors,
dentists, and specialists were paid an annual allowance in
lieu by government. By November 1961, confinement fees
for midwifery services was reduced to about half of the
charge stated in the General Orders of 1942. Further
adjustments were made at a principal medical officers’
conference in May 1962, to treat children of 16 years
and under free of charge in government clinics and health
centres. In the post-independence context, the MOH may
have used this piecemeal approach as it adjusted to the
‘new’ post-independence administrative procedures.
1969 Hospital Fees Decree 360
Full free health care as envisioned by Kwame Nkrumah’s
ideology was not realised because he was ousted in 1966
by a military coup. After the coup and during the 1967/
1968 budget hearing, the military head of state decided
to reintroduce full hospital fees [19]. This decision was
partly because the military leaders of the National Liberation
Council (NLC) blacklisted anything associated with Kwame
Nkrumah and his socialist ideology:
‘In order to justify the change, they [NLC government]
had to discard all that the previous government did; so
many programs were neglected’ [Former MOH staff,
15/7/2013].
In addition to blacklisting all existing policies for political reasons, an important contextual factor motivating
removal of fee exemptions was the worsening economic
situation. The government of Ghana was faced with declining economic indicators and increasing health expenditure. By the mid-1960s, the economy was stagnant. Gross
national income per capita was US$ 200 in 1963 and only
slightly increased to US$ 220 in 1969 [24, 25], resulting in
a health sector budget deficit in the face of increasing
expenditure due to hospital fee exemptions, minimal fees
for other health services, and an increasing population.
Despite these motivations to reintroduce hospital fees, free
antenatal service was captured as a user fee exemption
policy within the Hospital Fees Decree. Additionally, delivery service for multiparous patients and patients referred
to a hospital or clinic by a registered midwife or medical
practitioner was made free. How and why did maternal
fee exemptions remain on the agenda?
In designing the hospital fees policy content, the MOH
bureaucrats collated proposed reasonable fees from all
government hospitals. These proposed fees were agreed
on in a consultative meeting with regional heads of government health services and submitted to the NLC military
Page 12 of 20
government for approval [26]. Pending approval by the
NLC, the MOH sent a circular, dated 6th February 1968,
to all government health facilities in an attempt to regularise the varying charges that the government’s decision to
reintroduce hospital fees had caused. The implementation
of these new charges brought an uproar from the general
public [19]. Patients had to pay both dispensary fees and
the cost of medicines and some facilities were charging
more than stipulated [19, 27]. The social uproar caused
the MOH to issue a press release on 6th July 1968 to
suspend the operation of the proposed charges [19]. The suspension only delayed rather than altered the government’s
intention to reintroduce hospital fees. Subsequently, the
approved fees were introduced with the Hospital Fees
Decree of 18th June 1969, to be implemented from the
1st October 1969 [19, 27, 28].
During this period, however, MOH bureaucrats as policy agenda advisers, advocated for maternal fee exemption
in the Hospital Fees Decree, and this was approved by the
NLC government. According to the MOH, this was done
to pacify the general public and minimise the financial
burden of care. Another critical contextual factor that influenced the MOH decision was evidence from the health
management information system about the high number
of maternal deaths. A former MOH staff stated: ‘In 1969,
we [MOH] realised that maternal mortality was high and
that we had to do something about it…’ [Interview, 15/7/
2013]. Furthermore, the NLC military government –
policy agenda approver – did not fully ignore the social
unrest against the reintroduction of government hospital
fees and the need to consolidate political power and gain
acceptance among the general public in approving the
maternal fee exemptions.
The NLC military government handed over to a democratically elected government led by Prime Minister Dr
KA Busia on 1st October 1969, the same day the implementation of the Hospital Fees Decree was to start. Although,
the Decree was softened to pacify the agitated public, its implementation was still vehemently opposed causing another
social unrest. As a result, the Busia-led administration
suspended implementation of the Decree and set up a
five-member committee, known as the Konotey-Ahulu
committee, comprising a medicine and therapeutics lecturer, an industrialist, a health worker unionist, an Arts
Council national organiser, and a general medical practitioner. The committee was tasked to investigate hospital
fees and recommend appropriate charges for health care
services in government facilities [19].
1971 Hospital Fees Act 387
With the suspended Hospital Fees Decree, Ghana was back
to charging minimal hospital fees much lower than the
actual cost of service delivery; although, it was experiencing increasing health care expenditure and a declining
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
economy [29]. Thus, in 1970, the MOH advised Busia’s
government: ‘free health service is not the way to go, with
increasing health bill and reduced revenue’ [Former MOH
staff, 15/7/2013].
As in the previous reform, an important contextual
driver was empirical evidence on the performance of the
economy. Following the MOH’s advice, Busia’s government
decided to reintroduce hospital fees [30]. The new Hospital
Fees Act 387 was passed into law by the National Assembly. The Act 387 reflected the repealed Hospital Fees
Decree. Existing fee exemptions for maternal health care
under the Hospital Fees Decree were maintained by the
national assembly and government [31]. However, before
the Busia government could develop a Legislative Instrument (LI) to interpret the Act 387 with specific fees, it was
ousted on 13th January 1972 in a military coup.
‘The LI was to be based on the committee’s report;
however, Busia was overthrown before his government
could implement any of the 65 recommendations of
the Konotey Ahulu committee report’ [Former MOH
staff, 15/07/2013].
The Military Government that replaced the Busia government was known as the National Redemption Council
(NRC). The NRC was in a dilemma as to whether to
charge hospital fees or abolish them. As a result, the
NRC commissioner for health invited views from the public on the recommendations of the Konotey-Ahulu Committee [32]. The Konotey-Ahulu Committee in 1970 had
recommended that there could be no health service without fees. For maternal services, it recommended that antenatal care should no longer be free, and that fees be paid
towards the cost of medicines dispensed in government
health facilities for maternal services. Also, multiparous
patients with a history of five or more pregnancies should
bear some cost for their health care services; not everybody agreed with this view. For example, a Daily Graphic
newspaper correspondent was of the opinion that charging fees would scare away people and an ignorant expectant mother would totally refuse to attend hospital
knowing that she would be charged [33].
There were over 4 months of public debate on whether
to charge hospital fees or not [33–36]. A review of Daily
Graphic newspapers from 1973 to 1974 revealed that the
majority of correspondents recommended the government
to charge hospital fees and exempt the poor and unemployed. Despite these recommendations, the NRC
government did not implement the Hospital Fees Act
387 and the Konotey-Ahulu Committee’s recommendations. Charging hospital user fee was still unpopular with
the general public, although their disapproving voices
were not expressed greatly by the Daily Graphic correspondents. The NRC military government, in order to
Page 13 of 20
consolidate political power and gain acceptance, did not
implement the Hospital Fees Act 387 and the KonoteyAhulu Committee recommendations.
1983 Hospital Fees Regulation (LI 1277)
Between 1975 and 1981, Ghana experienced a turbulent
series of political changes in government structure. The
NRC regime changed its name to the Supreme Military
Council (SMC) and General Acheampong, who was the
head of the SMC, was replaced by General Fred Akuffo
in a palace coup in July 1978. On 4th June 1979, Flight
Lieutenant Rawlings led the Armed Forces Revolutionary
Council to overthrow the SMC. The Armed Forces Revolutionary Council allowed planned multiparty democratic
election to proceed and Dr Hilla Limann’s People’s
National Party came to power on the 24th September
1979. Democratic rule was short lived when Limann was
overthrown by Rawlings’s second coup on 31st December
1981, and the Provisional National Defence Council
(PNDC) was established.
The frequent change in government during this turbulent period was accompanied by the country moving from
economic decline to disaster as gross domestic product
per capita fell from US$ 281 in 1970 to US$ 180 in 1983.
State institutions and public services were gravely damaged and under-resourced [37]. The decline in the health
budget led to a reduced capacity to procure medicines
and consumables. By the early 1980s, deteriorating health
care services deterred the general public from using
government facilities and some patients only used these
facilities when their health conditions were critical. Medical and pharmaceutical professional bodies advocated for
the introduction of hospital fees to revive falling standards
of health care and threatened to strike [38–40]. Health
workers unilaterally introduced de facto hospital fees as a
result of the economic crisis and declining availability
of health service inputs [40]. All these contextual factors
combined to put hospital fees back on the agenda by
the early 1980s. However, once again, fee exemption for
maternal health service was maintained on the agenda.
How did maternal user fee exemption policy survive the
urgent need to reintroduce hospital charges for all services
in the face of economic crisis?
To regularise the fees already charged by government
health facilities, the MOH conducted a study to propose
hospital fees to the PNDC military government. The PNDC
government was initially not fully supportive of hospital
fees. They reduced the amounts proposed, and later approved
them. The reason for the initial reduction was political:
‘The PNDC representative for finance said it will be ill
politics to introduce user fees when the country had the
economic crunch at the time. The proposed fees were
reduced by about 90 %’ [Former MOH staff, 22/8/2012].
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
The reason for the later approval was the further decline in health budget as a result of economic crisis.
To legitimise the approved fees, the MOH drafted the
Hospital Fees Regulation with the assistance of the legal
department of the Attorney General’s office. The initial
draft made no exemption for maternal health service. This
was contested by the United Nations International
Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF):
‘The first time we introduced the regulations, UNICEF
was against our fees because for them the policy is that
maternal care should be free. We argued that free
maternal services would defeat family planning
purposes’ [Former MOH staff, 22/8/2012].
The MOH, therefore later incorporated fee exemptions
for antenatal care, postnatal care and treatment at child
health welfare into the new Hospital Fees Regulation, in
part, because UNICEF advised against maternal hospital
fee charges and demonstrated further interest in free maternal care by providing financial support to procure folic
acid for antenatal care. Also, international maternal and
child health discourse influenced the decision, in the sense
that, in the early 1980s, maternal and child health attention had shifted with more focus on child health and family planning [41]. Some family planning activities were
incorporated into postnatal care services [42, 43], making
free postnatal care a viable policy. The resulting Hospital
Fees Regulation (LI 1277), came into force on 21st April
1983, approved by the PNDC military government [44].
Up until this point, development partners (donors) had
not played visible and significant roles in shaping policy
agendas related to user fee exemptions in Ghana. The appearance on the scene of UNICEF in a strong role as
an agenda influencer was a reflection of the increasing
amounts of development partner project aid flowing
into Ghana as into many other LMICs because of the
economic crisis and international development policies
of the seventies and eighties.
1985 Hospital Fees Regulation (LI 1313)
Evidence of Ghana’s continuing economic decline drove,
in part, the next agenda. Economic decline still posed a
major challenge to Ghana and the PNDC government
turned to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and
World Bank. By April 1983, government had introduced
a Structural Adjustment Programme under the auspices
of the IMF and the World Bank. This economic recovery
policy implemented over 3 years, from 1983 to 1986, was
intended to halt the downward economic spiral and stabilize
the economy on a reasonable track [29, 45].
Hospital fees were substantially increased in July 1985,
partly on the recommendation of the IMF and World
Bank under the Structural Adjustment Programme [40]
Page 14 of 20
and partly because the existing fees could not recover
costs and health facilities had already increased their fees
to halt further decline of health care services [46, 47].
Although, hospital fees were increased with the aim of
full cost recovery, antenatal and postnatal user fee exemptions were maintained and mentioned in the Hospital Fees
Regulation (LI 1313). A key informant explained that with
time, user fee exemption policies became a safety net for
the poor and so the MOH maintained these.
‘Based on experiences within the health service, fee
exemptions had become a safe net for the poor so we
(MOH) maintained it’ [MOH staff, 27/9/2012].
1997 Presidential Directive to expand free antenatal and
postnatal care to include deliveries
In 1992, the PNDC allowed multiparty democratic election
to be held. The PNDC re-organized itself into a political
party, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and won
the December 1992 election as well as the December 1996
multiparty election 4 years later with Flight Lieutenant
Rawlings as its flag bearer. In January 1997, at the beginning of his second term, the President gave a directive to
include delivery service in the existing maternal (antenatal
and postnatal) user fee exemption policy [48].
The President acted to mitigate the social consequences
of the structural adjustment programme as evident by
decreasing utilization of maternal health services and
worsening health outcomes. Ghana Demographic Health
Survey 1993 empirical evidence revealed that national utilisation of free antenatal service was high at 86 %. The
picture was, however, different for supervised delivery,
as national level supervised delivery in health facilities
was only 44 %. About half of the women who received
free antenatal care did not return to deliver in those
health facilities [49] partly because of their inability to
pay at the point of use. Additionally, the MOH 5-year
programme of work, attributed a high national maternal
mortality rate estimate of 214 per 100,000a live births to
the harsh economic recovery policy of the structural adjustment programme [50]. These were major drivers of
the agenda to provide free maternal (antenatal, delivery
and postnatal) services. Nevertheless, the maternal user
fee exemption guideline developed by the MOH to implement the directive in November of the same year provided
fee exemption for only four antenatal visits; further visits
had to be paid for as well as deliveries and postnatal care.
Why did decision makers water down the intent and miss
this opportunity to more radically reform existing maternal user fee exemptions?
Interviews with a key informant explained that policy
agenda advisers and formulators in the MOH limited the
scope of the policy based on their experience, analysis and
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
judgement of what was contextually feasible and practical
to implement at that time.
‘Based on our [MOH] experience of reimbursing bills
for exemptions, the annual budget allocated was not
sufficient to foot the bill; as such we could not have
added delivery services’ [MOH staff, 27/9/2012].
There was insufficient government financial support
to fully implement the directive [51]. This is because by
the mid to late 1990s, Ghana’s structural adjustment
programme efforts had faded with slowed economic growth
[24] contributing to a reduction in the allocation of government budget to the health sector and hence the subsequent
inability to fully implement the directive.
2003 Maternal delivery exemptions in four selected regions
The NDC lost the December 2000 election to the New
Patriotic Party led by Mr John Kufuor, the new face of
the Danquah-Busia tradition, which was the party in opposition at independence in 1957 and had briefly ruled
the country from 1970 to 1972 before it was ousted in a
military coup [11]. The Kufuor government came to power
in a context of stagnant economic and even regressive
growth [24, 52]. For example, gross national income per
capita for 2002 was US$ 270; the same as in 1971 [25].
To address economic stagnation, in 2001, the government opted for debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor
Countries (HIPC) initiative on the advice of the World
Bank and IMF. This initiative was launched by the World
Bank and IMF in 1996 [52]. One of the HIPC austerity
measure conditionalities was for Ghana to develop a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy directed towards attainment of anti-poverty objectives consistent with the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). As a result, relatively poorer regions (Northern, Upper West, Upper East
and Central) were set to benefit most from the initiative
[53, 54]. As per the poverty reduction strategy, health related targets to reduce maternal mortality and under five
mortality proposed by the policy agenda advisers – the National Development and Planning Commission – with the
assistance of the World Bank and IMF, favoured these regions. In this regard, the existing maternal fee exemption
policy was extended to include delivery and postnatal services and geographically limited to the four deprived regions [55]. In 2004, 27 billion cedis (US$ 3.1 million) from
the HIPC grant were budgeted for this purpose [56].
2005 Expansion of maternal delivery exemptions to the
whole country
The December 2004 presidential election presented an
opportunity for policy actors to modify existing policies
putting maternal fee exemption back on the agenda. At
the December 2004 health summit meetings, the MOH
Page 15 of 20
and stakeholders argued that a national maternal mortality rate of 503 per 100,000b live births was high, and
there were pockets of extreme poverty across the country and not only in the regions labelled as deprived.
‘The exemption policy and additional resources
allocation contributed to the improvement in coverage
of health services in the deprived regions. However,
concerns emerged about the relatively poor performance
of non-deprived regions in 2004 and the apparent
worsening of health in urban areas’ [MOH staff,
10/7/2012].
A national user fee exemption for antenatal, delivery and
postnatal services was therefore proposed by the MOH
and stakeholders to help reduce maternal mortality
[57, 58]. Politically, this idea was approved by the government and, in 2005, 30 billion cedis (3.4 million US$)
from the HIPC grant was budgeted and allocated to implement the policy nationwide [59]. Empirical evidence of
high maternal mortality was thus a major agenda driver.
2008 Integration of maternal fee exemptions into the
National Health Insurance Scheme
The New Patriotic Party government won a second term
in the December 2004 election. By this time, implementation of their popular promise to replace the health sector
‘cash and carry’ system with a national health insurance
scheme and assure access to basic clinical service for all
Ghanaian regardless of ability to pay had started [11].
After 2005, maternal fee exemption policy implementation suffered a major setback. Empirical evidence from
evaluation of the maternal user fee exemption policy in
2006 revealed that the policy contributed to a major increase in supervised deliveries, but was significantly underfunded [60]. Issues of inadequate funds, sustainability and
inability to predict when reimbursement would be paid
by government were well-known and discussed within the
health sector [61–64]. Not only was there a problem of inadequate funds, but also health facilities exemption bills
over time exceeded the budget allocated to implement the
policy. By 2007, health facilities had to stop providing free
maternal health services as unpaid reimbursement bills
piled. As a key informant stated:
‘Maternal fee exemption became unsustainable because
every month the bill was going up and going up, and it
got to a point, the facilities were bringing the bill and we
[MOH] did not have money to pay, so the exemption
policy fizzled out’ [MOH staff, 31/8/2012].
Empirical evidence presented at the health sector performance review in 2008 revealed that the suspended maternal user fee exemption policy contributed to worsening
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
maternal health indicators. Specifically, with a decrease in
the proportion of supervised deliveries from 44.5 % in
2006 to 35.1 % in 2007 and an increase in the institutional
maternal mortality ratio from 187/100,000 live births in
2006 to 224/100,000 live births in 2007 [65]. To this end,
the MOH, at the April 2008 Health Summit, declared maternal health a national emergency [66].
Immediate decisions and actions followed the declaration. A ministerial task force was formed to formulate a
timed framework aimed at reducing maternal mortality
and the MOH was tasked to estimate the impact and financial implications of subsidising the enrolment of pregnant women onto the National Health Insurance Schemes
(NHIS) [66]. Additionally, the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) submitted a
brief to the Presidency through the MOH suggesting that
all pregnant women be given functional NHIS membership cards to assure access to maternal health care and
improve the performance towards attainment of MDGs 4
and 5. This, they argued, would be an effective, affordable
and extremely popular policy with the Ghanaian electorate. The Minister’s declaration created a charged atmosphere putting maternal health on the front burner with
intense attention from all stakeholders.
The MOH drafted a memo to the Presidency on the
current status of maternal health and possible interventions. The import of the MOH memo was to inform and
prepare the President for his participation in the ‘Business Call to Action’ meeting hosted by the United Kingdom government and the United Nations Development
Programme in London, May 2008.
‘We [PPME-MOH] already knew what the British
government was supporting; so we only aligned the
President’s statements to that of the British
Government and the British Government said yes’
[MOH staff, 31/8/2012].
Page 16 of 20
However, based on historical experiences and evidence of
inadequate financial resources to implement previous maternal fee exemption policies [60], availability of funds was
the foremost concern of the MOH. According to a former
MOH senior official, no specific budget was allocated
by the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning for
this policy before it was announced outside Ghana. In
an interview with a senior politician for clarification, he
said: ‘sometimes you need to make the policy and later look
for funds to implement it’ [Former Minister of Health,
21/12/2012].
With no central government-allocated budget to implement the maternal fee exemption directive, the MOH relied on donor health sector budget support for financial
commitment.
‘DFID’s contribution was the obvious choice since
maternal health care was tagged as DFID-supported.
Although DFID emphasised that their contribution
was not for free maternal delivery but to support the
whole health sector programme of work, the MOH
went ahead and earmarked the funds to implement
the directive’ [Former MOH staff, 5/11/2012].
With secured funding from DFID through the health
sector budget support and the preceding suggestion by
the DFID to give pregnant women NHIA cards to assure
access to maternal health care, the NHIA lobbied to implement free maternal health care arguing that it was
competent in fund management and best positioned to
implement the policy. Additionally, it already provided
antenatal, delivery and postnatal services under its benefit package and as such, unregistered pregnant women
could be issued with cards to enable them access health
care without any waiting period. The MOH accepted the
arguments.
President Kufuor and Prime Minister Brown met on the
side-lines of the Business Call to Action meeting. Their
discussions centred on funding for Ghana’s ‘school feeding’ programme and health care delivery.
‘The need to incorporate it into the NHIS was realized
later, because, when you make the national estimate
for the number of expected pregnancies in a year and
you look at the premium level, it would be cheaper to
pay the premium for pregnant women than to pay for
the services’ [Former MOH staff, 5/11/2012].
‘The DFID brief submitted to the Ghanaian MOH was
also followed up through the British system and given
to the British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown. During
their meeting, the Prime Minister told President
Kufuor that he had heard of the challenges of
institutional maternal mortalities. My understanding
is that Gordon Brown said it was a good idea to
provide free maternal services’ [Donor, 27/5/2014].
By 27th June 2008, a guideline accompanying the directive to provide free maternal health care for all pregnant
women was designed by the MOH, officials of the GHS,
Ghana Registered Midwives Association, and the NHIA.
The policy implemented through the NHIA started 1st
July 2008.
In London, President Kufuor announced to exempt all
pregnant women from paying for maternal health services.
Discussion and conclusions
Over the four and a half decades since some form of exemption from payment for maternal health services was
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
introduced in 1963, fee exemptions for health service use
by pregnant women has managed to remain on the policy
agenda. However, it has remained on the agenda in a fluid
process of ebbs and flows rather than in a static fixed
form. Context and policy actors were the major influencers of the ebbs and flows.
Contextual factors that influenced the ebbs and flows
were: political, such as Nkrumah’s ideology, change in
government, and election year; economic crises and austerity measures; health and demographic indicators; historical events; social unrest; and international agendas
such as the MDGs. These contextual factors served as a
source of power for policy actors to influence maternal
fee exemption as a policy agenda item. We therefore
reason with Erasmus and Gilson [17] that power is the
heart of health policy process, as these case studies illustrate how policy actors used contextual factors as power
leverage to justify their actions, inactions and choices.
Policy agenda setters (directors, approvers, advisers and
advocates) acted within interrelated contextual factors,
which sometimes worked as constraints and sometimes
opened opportunities. We observed that interrelating context, whether a constraint or an opportunity, is used by
specific policy agenda setters to influence the timeous
manner in which policy content is made and how closely
it is linked to the intended agenda. Our observations
are in keeping with similar observations by Grindle and
Thomas [12], that contextual factors working in interrelating manner can serve as a constraint and an opportunity
within which policy actors manoeuvre to accomplish their
goals.
Contextual factors working in an interrelating manner
as a constraint, present policy agenda setters with conflicting options shaping the policy content to be made in a less
timely manner and less closely linked to the intended
agenda. For instance, within the context of high maternal
mortality, economic decline, limited government budget
allocation, and political authority and will, MOH bureaucrats had to assess options to make practical and feasible
choices. Evidence of a health sector budget deficit at times
overtook government’s intent. This was the case in 1997;
there were worsening indicators for supervised delivery as
about half of the women who hitherto attended government health facilities for free antenatal services did not
return to deliver in those facilities. To solve this issue,
in January 1997, the President within his constitutional
power, gave a political directive to provide free healthcare for pregnant women. The directive presented an
opportunity to reform existing free antenatal and postnatal policy. However, the government did not allocate
adequate resources due to economic decline. To this
end, the policy content developed by the MOH bureaucrats in November the same year only partially reflected
the intended agenda.
Page 17 of 20
Contextual factors working in an interrelating manner
as an opportunity, present policy agenda setters with
complementary options in shaping the policy content to
be made in a more timely manner and more closely linked
to the intended agenda. For instance, within the context
of economic decline, inequitable poverty indicators,
high maternal mortality, donor financial support, election
years, and international agendas, policy agenda setters defined the maternal health problem in relation to a clearly
defined solution. This was the case for maternal fee exemption policies in the 2000s. In the early 2000s, the
HIPC grant support proposed by international policy
agenda advisers – the World Bank and IMF – to mitigate
the effect of economic stagnation provided an opportunity
to improve poverty and maternal health outcomes in deprived regions. Policy formulators and international and
national policy agenda advisers ensured that the policy
content was closely linked to the intended agenda, and
as a requirement to obtain the HIPC grant, the policy was
made in a timely manner. Again, in May 2008, President
Kufuor announced a ‘free maternal health care’ policy
based on a proposed solution from international and
national policy agenda advisers. In the light of secured
funding from health sector budget support, the policy content was made and disseminated before the end of June
2008, for implementation on July 1st.
In addition to context serving as a source of power to
shape policy actors actions, inactions and choices, policy
actors also wield power by virtue of their political and
administrative position, knowledge, experience, and financial
commitment. Policy agenda setters (directors, approvers,
advisers, and advocates) acted in varied influencer roles
between 1963 and 2008. Politicians (policy agenda directors and approvers) and policy agenda advisers played an
active role in maintaining maternal fee exemption policies
over a long period. Maternal fee exemption policies therefore survived both military and civilian governments and
have become sort of a national legacy. Politician’s interest
in maintaining the agenda may have varied; however,
whether it was out of genuine concern to improve maternal health or to gain political capital and favour, their
political support to decisions of maternal fee exemption
was critical.
Both national and international policy agenda advisers
played an active role in maintaining the policy. Though international policy agenda advisers did not have official government positions to make and implement public policies, over
time, they became active agenda setters within the Ghanaian
health sector. After the 1990s, international policy agenda
advisers – international multilateral and bilateral organisations and officials – have increasingly gained agenda access,
and sometimes even set the agenda. Donors gained agenda
access because they used financial support as leverage of
what gets on the agenda and in the policy content.
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Policy agenda setters, in varied ways and capacities,
strived to maintain maternal health issues on the agenda.
At critical moments of agenda re-set, re-examination,
and modification of existing maternal fee exemption
policies, policy agenda advisers – acting as policy champions – took decisions within boundaries of previous policy content, implementation challenges, such as inadequate
funds, as well as current demands and expectations. Our
finding agrees with the position of Shiffman and Smith
[67], that strong champions are required to shape political
priority for a particular policy initiative.
Policy agenda advisers as policy champions mobilised
strategies and tactics in the form of commitment and
consensus to maintain the maternal fee exemption policy
on the agenda over the years. For example, the World
Bank and IMF committed to reduce poverty and improve
MDG-related targets, pushed for fee exemptions for
maternal health services. They collaborated with the Government of Ghana and other state agencies such as the
National Development and Planning Commission for a
consensus on the practical details of the Ghana Poverty
Reduction Strategy. Also, the MOH, over the years, built
relationships with other policy actors such as donors at
institutional level through interactions, consensus building, and collaboration towards policy development. These
strategies are described as strategy capacity [68] and include the human and institutional capacity to build
commitment and consensus toward a long-term strategy,
respond to recurring challenges and opportunities, build
relationships among policy actors, and undertake strategic
communications with varied audiences. Strategic capacity
is therefore critical for maintaining policy issues on the
agenda over time.
The fee exemption policy for maternal health was maintained over the years in a path-dependent manner. The
free antenatal service trajectory taken in 1963 was not reversed, despite varied policy agenda setters and contextual
factors. Policy actors relied on context and on each other
for financial support, expertise, experience, and political
resources creating a network of influence to maintain a
maternal fee exemption agenda over time. Some scholars
argued that a process is path dependent if initial moves in
one direction elicit further moves in that same direction
[69, 70]. Once maternal fee exemption was there, it was
difficult to abolish because of wide popular support and
later outcry over maternal mortality and international
agenda such as the MDGs.
Policy agenda setters also relied on empirical evidence
to inform their decisions, however, systematic reviews
presumed as a ‘gold standard’ of evidence-based policymaking [71] were not used. Rather, country based empirical
evidence from economic assessments, surveys, research reports, and health sector performance reviews were used.
Policy agenda setters paid attention to this kind of evidence
Page 18 of 20
as one of several important contextual factors rather
than the only or even the main one, and made use of this
evidence to maintain maternal fee exemption policy on
the agenda.
Finally, as noted by Shiffman and Smith [67], the power
of actors, the power of ideas, political context, and characteristics of the issue are key for setting the global health
agenda; these observations are also relevant at national
level and evident in these case studies. In addition, a
broader contextual environment such as financial allocation arrangements, international agenda and development partner’s relationships, data about health outcomes,
national administrative capacity to develop and implement
policies, historical experience, and path dependency are
also critical as shown in this paper.
Ghanaian health sector policy agenda setting and formulation is complex and intertwined with a mix of political,
evidence-based, finance-based, path-dependent, and donordriven processes. The papers by Agyepong and Adjei [11]
and Seddoh and Akor [72] note this complexity. Actors
and stakeholders who want to influence agendas need to
pay attention to context and policy actors in any strategy.
Efforts to influence policy agenda setting must recognize
that empirical evidence is only part of a complexity of
factors of which context, path dependency, and politics
are also very important. Moreover, the influence of evidence is dependent on awareness of its availability as
well as it use for advocacy in policy agenda setting and
formulation in the right window of opportunity.
As policymaking processes are relevant across other
LMICs, and national policy actors are likely to confront
similar scenarios, we hope this paper contributes to learning beyond Ghana in which this work was conducted to
other LMIC in sub-Saharan Africa and beyond.
Endnotes
a
Maternal mortality rate estimated at 214 per 100,000
live births was based on Ghana Demographic and Health
Survey (1993) data [73].
b
Maternal mortality rate estimated at 503 per 100,000
live births was based on Ghana Demographic and Health
Survey (2003) and institutional maternal mortality data [58].
Abbreviations
DFID: United Kingdom Department for International Development;
GHS: Ghana Health Service; HIPC: Heavily indebted poor countries;
IMF: International Monetary Fund; LI: Legislative instrument; LMIC: Low- and
middle-income countries; MDG: Millennium development goal;
MOH: Ministry of Health; NDC: National Democratic Congress; NHIA: National
Health Insurance Authority; NHIS: National Health Insurance Scheme;
NLC: National Liberation Council; NRC: National Redemption Council;
PNDC: Provisional National Defence Council; PPME: Policy planning
monitoring and evaluation; SMC: Supreme Military Council; UNICEF: United
Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Authors’ contributions
AK, HvD, and IAA conceived and designed the study. AK and IAA developed
instruments and collected data. AK, HvD, and IAA analysed data and wrote
and reviewed manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by NWO/WOTRO Global Health Policy and Health
Systems program grant to the project ‘Accelerating progress towards
attainment of MDG 4 and 5 in Ghana through basic health systems function
strengthening’ (file number W 07.45.102.00) and by Rockefeller Grant #2011
THS 332 to support Policy Development and Analysis capacity in and
strengthen the Policy Analysis Unit of MOH Ghana. We thankfully acknowledge
Mr Owusu-Ansah of the Policy Analysis Unit of MOH and colleagues of the
MOH Ghana, for their support; and several key informants for their participations
and insights. We thank our reviewers for their exceptionally useful suggestions.
Author details
1
Ministry of Health, Ministries, P.O. Box MB 44, Accra, Ghana. 2Wageningen
UR (University & Research centre), Sociology of Development and Change,
Wageningen, Netherlands. 3Department of Health Policy Planning and
Management, University of Ghana, School of Public Health, Accra, Ghana.
Received: 28 November 2014 Accepted: 15 May 2015
References
1. Green-Pedersen C, Wilkerson J. How agenda-setting attributes shape politics:
Basic dilemmas, problem attention and health politics developments in
Denmark and the US. J Eur Publ Pol. 2006;13:1039–52.
2. Nelson BJ. Making an issue of child abuse: political agenda setting for social
problems. University of Chicago Press; 1986
3. Gilson L, Raphaely N. The terrain of health policy analysis in low and middle
income countries: a review of published literature 1994–2007. Health Pol
Plann. 2008;23:294–307.
4. Shiffman J, Okonofua FE. The state of political priority for safe motherhood
in Nigeria. BJOG. 2007;114:127–33.
5. Agyepong IA, Kodua A, Adjei S, Adam T. When ‘solutions of yesterday
become problems of today’: crisis-ridden decision making in a complex
adaptive system (CAS)—the Additional Duty Hours Allowance in Ghana.
Health Pol Plann. 2012;27:iv20–31.
6. Mayhew SH. The impact of decentralisation on sexual and reproductive
health services in Ghana. Reprod Health Matters. 2003;11:74–87.
7. Cassels A, Janovsky K. Better health in developing countries: are sector-wide
approaches the way of the future? Lancet. 1998;352:1777–9.
8. Birungi H, Addai E, Addico G, Jehu-Appiah C, Nyarko P, Askew I, et al. Health
Sector Reforms in Ghana and Implication for Reproductive Health Priority
Setting. FRONTIERS Final Report. Washington DC: Population Council; 2006.
9. Mayhew SH, Adjei S. Sexual and reproductive health: challenges for prioritysetting in Ghana’s health reforms. Health Pol Plann. 2004;19:i50–61.
10. Kpessa MW. The politics of public policy in Ghana: from closed circuit
bureaucrats to citizenry engagement. J Dev Soc. 2011;27:29–56.
11. Agyepong I, Adjei S. Public social policy development and implementation:
a case study of the Ghana National Health Insurance scheme. Health Pol
Plann. 2008;23:150–60.
12. Grindle MS, Thomas JW. Public choices and policy change: the political
economy of reform in developing countries. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins
University Press; 1991.
13. Patton MQ. Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage; 2002.
14. Yin RK. Case study research: design and methods. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publication; 2009.
15. Scott J. A matter of record: documentary sources in social research.
Cambridge: Polity Press; 1990.
16. Kingdon J. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Longman classics in
political science. London: Longman; 2002.
17. Erasmus E, Gilson L. How to start thinking about investigating power in the
organizational settings of policy implementation. Health Pol Plann.
2008;23:361–8.
18. Mintzberg H. Power in and around organizations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall;
1983.
Page 19 of 20
19. Konotey-Ahulu FID, Ocloo E, Addy PM, Bamford AM, Ennin C. Report of the
committee appointed to investigate hospital fees. Accra: Government of
Ghana; 1970.
20. Rimmer D. Ghana's political economy, 1950–1990. Oxford: Pergamon; 1992.
21. Graphic Reporter. Hospital fees: no charge. In: Daily Graphic. Accra: Graphic
Communications Group Limited; 1957. p. 1.
22. Graphic Reporter: Free health service. In: Daily Graphic. Accra: Graphic
Communications Group Limited; 1958. p. 1.
23. Graphic Reporter. Free medical service soon. In: Daily Graphic. Accra:
Graphic Communications Group Limited; 1962. p. 13.
24. Sowa NK. Adjustment in Africa: lessons from Ghana. London: Overseas
Development Institute (ODI); 1996.
25. Index Mundi. http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/ghana/gni-per-capita.
26. Graphic Reporter. Hospital fees-new rate out next year. In: Daily Graphic.
Accra: Graphic Communication Group Limited; 1967. p. 15.
27. Therson-Cofie L. New hospital charges plan. In: Daily Graphic. Accra: Graphic
Communication Group Limited; 1969. p. 5.
28. Government of Ghana. Hospital Fees Decree 360. Accra: Ghana Publishing
Corporation; 1969.
29. Fosu AK. Emerging Africa: the case of Ghana. Africa Economic Research
Consortium: Nairobi; 2001.
30. Graphic Reporter. New Hospital Fees. In: Daily Graphic. Accra: Graphic
Communication Group Limited; 1970. p. 3.
31. Government of Ghana. Hospital Fees Act 387. Accra: Ghana Publishing
Corporation; 1971.
32. Graphic Reporter. Hospital fees – Views invited. In: Daily Graphic. Accra:
Graphic Communication Group Limited; 1973. p. 16.
33. A Correspondent. Review of the report of the hospital fees committee.
In: Daily Graphic. Accra: Graphic Communication Group Limited;
1974. p. 10.
34. Owusu-Ansah MM. Let’s have free medical care. In Daily Graphic. Accra:
Graphic Communication Group Limited; 1973. p. 1.
35. Graphic Reporter. Let’s pay hospital fees – Nyante. Accra: Graphic
Communication Group Limited; 1973. p. 3
36. Nyakey MMY. Hospital Fees. In: Daily Graphic. Accra: Graphic
Communication Group Limited; 1974. p. 7.
37. Carbone G. Democratic demands and social policies: the politics of health
reform in Ghana. J Mod Afr Stud. 2011;49:381–408.
38. Graphic Reporter. Health service may collapse. In: Daily Graphic. Accra:
Graphic Communication Group Limited; 1981. p. 8.
39. Debrah F. Let health service dept be autonomous. In: Daily Graphic. Accra:
Graphic Communication Group Limited; 1981. p. 8.
40. Waddington C, Enyimayew KA. A price to pay, part 2: The impact of user
charges in the Volta region of Ghana. Int J Health Plann Manage.
1990;5:287–312.
41. Rosenfield A, Maine D. Maternal mortality – a neglected tragedy: where is
the M in MCH? Lancet. 1985;326:83–5.
42. Campbell OMR. What are maternal health policies in developing countries
and who drives them? A review of the last half-century, vol. 17. Antwerp,
Belgium: ITG Press; 2001. p. 412–45.
43. Odoi-Agyarko Henrietta. Profile of reproductive health situation in Ghana.
2003. http://www.afro.who.int/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_
download&gid=1805.
44. Government of Ghana. Hospital Fees Regulations L.I. 1277. Accra: Ghana
Publishing Corporation; 1983.
45. Loxley J. Structural adjustment in Africa: reflections on Ghana and Zambia.
Rev Afr Polit Econ. 1990;47:8–27.
46. Graphic Reporter. New hospital fees meant to stop further decline. In:
Daily Graphic. Accra: Graphic Communication Group Limited; 1985.
p. 1–5
47. Government of Ghana. Hospital Fees Regulation, 1985, L.I. 1313. Accra:
Ghana Publishing Corporation; 1985
48. Graphic Reporter. President’s Sessional Address. In: Daily Graphic. Accra:
Graphic Communication Group Limited; 1997. p. 7–13
49. Ghana Statistical Service (GSS). Ghana Demographic and Health Survey.
Calverton, MA: Macro International Inc.; 1994.
50. Ministry of Health. Health Sector 5-Year Programme of Work. Accra: Ministry
of Health; 1996.
51. Ministry of Health. Aligning exemption policy and practice with poverty
reduction goals: A report of the annual health sector review 2002. Accra:
Ministry of Health; 2003.
Koduah et al. Health Research Policy and Systems (2015) 13:27
Page 20 of 20
52. Bank of Ghana. The HIPC Initiative and Ghana’s External Debt http://
www.bog.gov.gh/privatecontent/Research/Sector%20Studies/
HIPC%20Paper2005%20final-main.pdf.
53. Ghana Statistical Service (GSS). Ghana Demographic and Health Survey
1998. Calverton, MA: Macro International Inc.; 1999
54. Ministry of Health. The health of the nation: reflection on the first five year
health sector programme of work (1997–2001). Accra: Ministry of Health;
2001.
55. National Development Planning Commission. Growth and Poverty
Reduction Strategy (GPRS 1). Accra: National Development Planning
Commission; 2003
56. Ministry of Health. Ghana Health Sector Annual Programme of Work, 2004.
Accra: Ministry of Health; 2004.
57. Ministry of Health. Aide Memoire; Joint Ministry of Health – Health Partners
Summit. Accra: Ministry of Health; 2004.
58. Ministry of Health GoG, United Nations Country Team Ghana. Ghana MDG
acceleration framework and country action plan. Accra: Maternal Health; 2011.
59. Ministry of Health. Ghana Health Sector 2005 Programme of Work: Bridging
the inequality gap, addressing emerging challenges with child survival. Accra:
Ministry of Health; 2005.
60. Witter S, Arhinful DK, Kusi A, Zakariah-Akoto S. The experience of Ghana in
implementing a user fee exemption policy to provide free delivery care.
Reprod Health Matters. 2007;15:61–71.
61. Garshong B, Ansah E, Dakpallah G, Huijts I, Adjei S. A study on factors
affecting the implementation of the exemption policy in Ghana. Bulletin
Health Inform. 2002;1:22–31.
62. Ministry of Health. A review of the Ghana Health Sector's pro-poor agenda.
Accra: Ministry of Health; 2004.
63. Nyonator F, Kutzin J. Health for some? The effects of user fees in the Volta
Region of Ghana. Health Pol Plann. 1999;14:329–41.
64. Witter S, Adjei S. Start-stop funding, its causes and consequences: a case
study of the delivery exemptions policy in Ghana. Int J Health Plann Manage.
2007;22:133–43.
65. Ministry of Health. Independent review: Health Sector Programme of Work
2007. Accra: Ministry of Health; 2008.
66. Ministry of Health. Aide Memoire; Joint Ministry of Health and Development
Partners Summit 21-23rd April. Accra: Ministry of Health; 2008.
67. Shiffman J, Smith S. Generation of political priority for global health initiatives:
a framework and case study of maternal mortality. Lancet. 2007;370:1370–9.
68. Pelletier DL, Menon P, Ngo T, Frongillo EA, Frongillo D. The nutrition policy
process: The role of strategic capacity in advancing national nutrition
agendas. Food Nutr Bull. 2011;32:59S–69S.
69. Kay A. A critique of the use of path dependency in policy studies. Publ
Admin. 2005;83:553–71.
70. Pierson P. Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics.
Am Polit Sci Rev. 2000;94:251–67.
71. Young K, Ashby D, Boaz A, Grayson L. Social science and the evidencebased policy movement. Soc Policy Soc. 2002;1:215–24.
72. Seddoh A, Akor S. Policy initiation and political levers in health policy:
lessons from Ghana’s health insurance. BMC Publ Health. 2012;12:S10.
73. Ghana Statistical Service (GSS). Ghana Maternal Health Survey 2007.
Calverton, MA: GSS, Ghana Health Service, and Macro International; 2009.
Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central
and take full advantage of:
• Convenient online submission
• Thorough peer review
• No space constraints or color figure charges
• Immediate publication on acceptance
• Inclusion in PubMed, CAS, Scopus and Google Scholar
• Research which is freely available for redistribution
Submit your manuscript at
www.biomedcentral.com/submit