Reforms: a quest for efficiency or an opportunity for vested interests’? a case study of pharmaceutical policy reforms in Tanzania

BMC Public Health

Peter Risha²  Eliangiringa Amos Kaale²  Amani Thomas Mori¹ 

[1] Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, P.O. Box 7804, 5020, Bergen, Norway;School of Pharmacy, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, P.O. Box 65013, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

关键词: Tanzania Food and Drugs Authority;    Pharmacy Council;    Pharmacy Act;    Policy actors;    Policy reforms;    Politics;    Pharmaceutical policy;    Tanzania;   

Others  :  1162031
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-13-651

 received in 2013-01-15, accepted in 2013-07-10,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Regulation of the pharmaceutical sector is a challenging task for most governments in the developing countries. In Tanzania, this task falls under the Food and Drugs Authority and the Pharmacy Council. In 2010, the Pharmacy Council spearheaded policy reforms in the pharmaceutical sector aimed at taking over the control of the regulation of the business of pharmacy from the Tanzania Food and Drugs Authority. This study provides a critical analysis of these reforms.

Methods

The study employed a qualitative case-study design. Data was collected through in-depth interviews, focus group discussions and document reviews. Data was analyzed thematically using a policy triangle framework. The analysis was done manually.

Results

The reforms adopted an incremental model of public policy-making and the process was characterized by lobbying for political support, negotiations and bargaining between the interest groups. These negotiations were largely centred on vested interests and not on the impact of the reforms on the efficiency of pharmaceutical regulations in the country. Stakeholders from the micro and meso levels were minimally involved in the policy reforms.

Conclusion

Recent pharmaceutical regulation reforms in Tanzania were overshadowed by vested interests, displacing a critical analysis of optimal policy options that have the potential to increase efficiency in the regulation of the business of pharmacy. Politics influenced decision-making at different levels of the reform process.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Mori et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Reich M: The politics of health sector reform in developing countries: three cases of pharmaceutical policy. Health Policy Plan 1995, 32:47-77.
• [2]Walt G: Health Policy: An introduction to process and power. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press, PO Wits; 1994.
• [3]Varvasovszky Z, Brugha R: A stakeholders analysis. Policy and Planning 2000, 5(3):338-345.
• [4]Reich M: The politics of reforming health policies. Promot Educ 2002, 9(4):138-142.
• [5]Walt G, Gilson L: Reforming the health sector: the central role of policy analysis. Health Policy Plan 1994, 9(4):353-370.
• [6]Gilson L, Raphaely N: The terrain of health policy analysis in low and middle income countries: a review of published literature 1994–2007. Health Policy Plan 2008, 23(5):294-307.
• [7]The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania: The Pharmaceuticals and Poisons Act, No 9 of 1978. Dar es Salaam: The Government Press; 1978.
• [8]The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania: The Pharmacy Act (Act No. 7of 2002). Dar es Salaam: The Government Press; 2003.
• [9]The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania: The Tanzania Food, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 2003. Dar es Salaam: Government Press; 2003.
• [10]The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania: The Pharmacy Act, 2010. The Gazette of the United Republic of Tanzania 2010, 16:91.
• [11]The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania: Bill Supplement No. 7, the Pharmacy Act, 2010. Dar es Salaam: The Government Printer; 2012.
• [12]The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania: The Pharmacy Act No. 1 of 2011. Dar es Salaam: The Government Printer;
• [13]Yin RK: Case study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc; 1994.
• [14]Walsh J, Simonet M: Data analysis needs for health sector reform. Health Policy 1995, 32:295-306.
• [15]Clark JP: How to peer review a qualitative manuscript. In Peer Review in Health Sciences. 2nd edition. Edited by Godlee F, Jefferson T. London: BMJ Books; 2003:219-235.
• [16]The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania: The Tanzania, Food and Cosmetics (Delegation of Powers Order 2006 as amended by the Delegation of Powers (amendment) Order of 2007 (GN 162 of 2006 and 165 of 2007. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania;
• [17]Masato M: From the Parliament: MPs refuse to cede TFDA's role to Pharmacy Council. Daily News 11th April, 2011.
• [18]United Republic of Tanzania Office of the Parliament: Parliamentary Contribution to the Pharmacy Bill 2010. 2012. http://www.parliament.go.tz/index.php/sessions/contribution/1403/2010-2015/6 webcite, Accessed Thursday, 13th August 2012
• [19]Lindblom C: The science of muddling through. Public Adm Rev 1959, 39:517-526.
• [20]Howlett M, Ramesh M, Perl A: Studying Public Policy: policy cycles and policy subsystems. 3rd edition. Ontario: Oxford University Press; 2009.
• [21]Mori AT, Kaale EA: Priority setting for the implementation of artemisin in-based combination therapy policy in Tanzania: evaluation against the accountability for reasonableness framework. Implementation Science 2012., 7(18)