Conceptualizations of fairness and legitimacy in the context of Ethiopian health priority setting
Reflections on the applicability of accountability for reasonableness
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19516727 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kadia Petricca (0000-0003-0449-2527, corresponding author), Asfaw Bekele (0009-0005-6015-3249) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 357-364 |
| Publication date | 2018-12-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Developing World Bioethics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1471-8731 • E-ISSN: 1471-8847 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/dewb.12153 |
| PMID | 28544136 |
| OpenAlex | W2619834376 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 6 |
A critical element in building stronger health systems involves strengthening good governance to build capacity for transparent and fair health planning and priority setting. Over the past 20 years, the ethical framework Accountability for Reasonableness (A4R) has been a prominent conceptual guide in strengthening fair and legitimate processes of health decision‐making. While many of the principles embedded within the framework are congruent with Western conceptualizations of what constitutes procedural fairness, there is a paucity in the literature that captures the degree of resonance between these principles and the views of decision makers from non‐Western settings; particularly in Africa, where many countries have only recently, within the last 20‐30 years, become more democratic. This paper contributes to the ethics literature by examining how Ethiopian decision makers conceptualize fair and legitimate health decision‐making, and reflects on the degree of conceptual resonance between these views and the principles embedded in A4R. A qualitative case study approach from three districts in Ethiopia was undertaken. Fifty‐eight decision makers from district, regional, zonal, and national levels were interviewed to describe their conceptualization of fairness and legitimacy in the district health planning process. Findings revealed that Ethiopians have a broad conception of fairness and legitimacy that while congruent with procedural justice, also aligned with principles of distributive and organizational justice. Researchers and practitioners seeking to strengthen procedural fairness in health priority setting must therefore recognize the significance of other philosophical dimensions influencing how fairness and legitimacy of health decision‐making are constructed within the Ethiopian setting
Accountability · Business · Conceptualization · Corporate governance · Distributive justice · Economic Justice · Health care · Health care rationing · Legitimacy · Political science · Politics · Procedural justice · Public relations · Sociology · Global Maternal and Child Health · Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Law · Psychology · Public Administration · Health Policy
Advancing methods for health priority setting practice through the contribution of systems theory
Procedural fairness for radiotherapy priority setting in a low resource context
Legitimate distribution without legislation
Procedural fairness in health financing for universal health coverage
Criteria for the procedural fairness of health financing decisions
From political priority to service delivery
| Citations per year | 0.75 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2018 - 2025 (8) |
| Highly cited | No |