Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Public accountability needs to be enforced –a case study of the governance arrangements and accountability practices in a rural health district in Ghana

Authors: Sara Van Belle, Susannah H. Mayhew

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Improving public accountability is currently high on the global agenda. At the same time, the organisation of health services in low- and middle-income countries is taking place in fragmented institutional landscapes. State and non-state actors are involved in increasingly complex governance arrangements. This often leads to coordination problems, confusion of roles and responsibilities and possibly accountability gaps. This study aimed at assessing the governance arrangements and the accountability practices of key health actors at the level of a Ghanaian health district with the aim to understand how far public accountability is achieved.

Methods

We adopted the case study design as it allows for in-depth analysis of the governance arrangements and accountability relations between actors, their formal policies and actual accountability practices towards the public and towards stakeholders. Data were collected at a rural health district using in-depth interviews, observation and document review. In the analysis, we used a four-step sequence: identification of the key actors and their relationships, description of the multi-level governance arrangements, identification of the actual accountability relations and practices between all actors and finally appraisal of the public accountability practices, which we define as those practices that ensure direct accountability towards the public.

Results

In this rural health district with few (international) non-governmental organisations and private sector providers, accountability linkages towards management and partners in health programmes were found to be strong. Direct accountability towards the public, however, was woefully underdeveloped. This study shows that in settings where there is a small number of actors involved in organising health care, and where the state actors are underfunded, the intense interaction can lead to a web of relations that favours collaboration between partners in health service delivery, but fails public accountability.

Conclusions

It is clear that new formal channels need to be created by all actors involved in health service delivery to address the demand of the public for accountability. If the public does not find an adequate response to its genuine concerns, distrust between communities and service users on one hand, and providers, international non-governmental organisations and District Health Management Teams on the other is likely to increase to the detriment of all parties’ interests.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
Rondinelli DA, McCullough, J.S., Johnson, R.W., : Analysing Decentralization Policies in Developing Countries: A Political-Economy Framework. Development and Change 1989, 20(1):57–87. distinguishes between four types of decentralisation arrangements. ‘Privatisation’ entails the transfer of responsibility for the delivery of public goods and services to the private or private-not-for-profit sector; ‘delegation’ means the shifting of responsibility to parastatal organisations or semi-autonomous agencies; with ‘devolution, the responsibility goes to local government or to the local administration; and in a setting marked by ‘deconcentration’, public goods are to be delivered by a central government agent operating at the local level.
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bloom G, Edström J, Leach M, Lucas H, MacGregor H, Standing H, Waldman L. Health in a dynamic world. STEPS working paper 5. Brighton: STEPS Centre; 2007. Bloom G, Edström J, Leach M, Lucas H, MacGregor H, Standing H, Waldman L. Health in a dynamic world. STEPS working paper 5. Brighton: STEPS Centre; 2007.
2.
go back to reference Bloom G, Standing H. Future health systems: Why future? Why now? Soc Sci Med. 2008;66(10):2067–75.CrossRefPubMed Bloom G, Standing H. Future health systems: Why future? Why now? Soc Sci Med. 2008;66(10):2067–75.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Newell P, Bellour S. Mapping accountability: origins, contexts and implications for development. In: IDS Working Paper 168. Brighton: Institute for Development Studies; 2002. p. 24. Newell P, Bellour S. Mapping accountability: origins, contexts and implications for development. In: IDS Working Paper 168. Brighton: Institute for Development Studies; 2002. p. 24.
4.
go back to reference Stoker G. Governance as theory: five propositions. Int Soc Sci J. 1998;50:17–28.CrossRef Stoker G. Governance as theory: five propositions. Int Soc Sci J. 1998;50:17–28.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Edwards M, Hulme D. Non-governmental organisations. Performance and accountability. Beyond the magic bullet. London: Earthscan; 1995. Edwards M, Hulme D. Non-governmental organisations. Performance and accountability. Beyond the magic bullet. London: Earthscan; 1995.
6.
go back to reference Edwards M. NGO rights and responsibilities. A new deal for global governance. London: The Foreign Policy Centre; 2000. Edwards M. NGO rights and responsibilities. A new deal for global governance. London: The Foreign Policy Centre; 2000.
7.
go back to reference Groves L, Hinton R. Inclusive Aid. Changing power and relationships in international development. London: Earthscan; 2004. Groves L, Hinton R. Inclusive Aid. Changing power and relationships in international development. London: Earthscan; 2004.
8.
go back to reference Bartsch S. Accountability of global public-private partnerships in health. Hamburg: German Institute of Global and Area Studies; 2007. p. 28. Bartsch S. Accountability of global public-private partnerships in health. Hamburg: German Institute of Global and Area Studies; 2007. p. 28.
9.
go back to reference Brinkerhoff DW. Accountability and health systems. Overview, framework and strategies. Bethesda: Partners for Health Reform Plus; 2003. p. 45. Brinkerhoff DW. Accountability and health systems. Overview, framework and strategies. Bethesda: Partners for Health Reform Plus; 2003. p. 45.
10.
go back to reference Najam A. NGO accounability: a conceptual framework. Dev Policy Rev. 1996;14:339–53.CrossRef Najam A. NGO accounability: a conceptual framework. Dev Policy Rev. 1996;14:339–53.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research. Neglected health systems research: governance and accountability. In: Research issues. Geneva: Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research; 2008. Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research. Neglected health systems research: governance and accountability. In: Research issues. Geneva: Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research; 2008.
12.
go back to reference Makinen M, Sealy S, Bitran RA, Adjei S, Munoz R. Private health sector assessment in Ghana. In: World Bank working paper, vol. 210. Washington DC: World Bank/IFC; 2011. p. 126. Makinen M, Sealy S, Bitran RA, Adjei S, Munoz R. Private health sector assessment in Ghana. In: World Bank working paper, vol. 210. Washington DC: World Bank/IFC; 2011. p. 126.
13.
go back to reference The Parliament of the Republic of Ghana. Ghana health service and teaching hospitals Act 525. In: Republic of Ghana. 1996. The Parliament of the Republic of Ghana. Ghana health service and teaching hospitals Act 525. In: Republic of Ghana. 1996.
14.
go back to reference Rondinelli DA, McCullough JS, Johnson RW. Analysing decentralization policies in developing countries: a political-economy framework. Dev Change. 1989;20(1):57–87.CrossRef Rondinelli DA, McCullough JS, Johnson RW. Analysing decentralization policies in developing countries: a political-economy framework. Dev Change. 1989;20(1):57–87.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Couttolenc B. Decentralization and governance in the Ghana health sector. A World Bank study. Washington DC: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development; 2012. p. 102. Couttolenc B. Decentralization and governance in the Ghana health sector. A World Bank study. Washington DC: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development; 2012. p. 102.
16.
go back to reference Center for Health and Social Services, Seddoh A, Adjei S, Nazzar A. Ghana’s national health insurance scheme. Views on progress, observations and commentary. Accra: Rockefeller Foundation; 2011. p. 96. Center for Health and Social Services, Seddoh A, Adjei S, Nazzar A. Ghana’s national health insurance scheme. Views on progress, observations and commentary. Accra: Rockefeller Foundation; 2011. p. 96.
17.
go back to reference Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development -Development Co-operation Directorate (DAC). The DAC list of ODA recipients. 2012. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development -Development Co-operation Directorate (DAC). The DAC list of ODA recipients. 2012.
19.
go back to reference Van Belle S, Mayhew SH. What can we learn on public accountability from non-health disciplines – a meta-narrative review. BMJ Open. 2016;6(7):e010425.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Van Belle S, Mayhew SH. What can we learn on public accountability from non-health disciplines – a meta-narrative review. BMJ Open. 2016;6(7):e010425.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage; 1997. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage; 1997.
21.
go back to reference Robson C. Real world research. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell; 2002. Robson C. Real world research. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell; 2002.
22.
go back to reference Yin RK. Case study research design and methods. 3rd ed. London: Sage; 2003. Yin RK. Case study research design and methods. 3rd ed. London: Sage; 2003.
23.
go back to reference Flyvbjerg B. Five misunderstandings about case study research. Qual Inq. 2006;12(2):219–45.CrossRef Flyvbjerg B. Five misunderstandings about case study research. Qual Inq. 2006;12(2):219–45.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Hartley J. Case study research. In: Cassel C, Symon S, editors. Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research. London: Sage; 1994. p. 323–47. Hartley J. Case study research. In: Cassel C, Symon S, editors. Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research. London: Sage; 1994. p. 323–47.
25.
go back to reference Zürn M, Wälti S, Enderlein H. Introduction. In: Handbook on multi-level governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 2010. p. 1–16. Zürn M, Wälti S, Enderlein H. Introduction. In: Handbook on multi-level governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 2010. p. 1–16.
26.
go back to reference Heywood A. Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan; 2007. Heywood A. Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan; 2007.
27.
go back to reference Mulgan R. Holding power to account: accountability in modern democracies. London: Palgrave MacMillan; 2003.CrossRef Mulgan R. Holding power to account: accountability in modern democracies. London: Palgrave MacMillan; 2003.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Kilby P. Accountability for empowerment: dilemmas facing non-governmental organizations. World Dev. 2006;34(9):951–63.CrossRef Kilby P. Accountability for empowerment: dilemmas facing non-governmental organizations. World Dev. 2006;34(9):951–63.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Bell S, Hindmoor A. Rethinking governance. The centrality of the state in modern society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.CrossRef Bell S, Hindmoor A. Rethinking governance. The centrality of the state in modern society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Sorensen E, Torfing J. Governance network research: towards a second generation. In: Sorensen E, Torfing J, editors. Theories of democratic network governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008. p. 1–24. Sorensen E, Torfing J. Governance network research: towards a second generation. In: Sorensen E, Torfing J, editors. Theories of democratic network governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008. p. 1–24.
31.
go back to reference Sorensen E. Governance and innovation in the public sector. In: Faur DL, editor. Oxford handbook of governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 215–27. Sorensen E. Governance and innovation in the public sector. In: Faur DL, editor. Oxford handbook of governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 215–27.
32.
go back to reference Torfing J. A comparative and multi-level analysis of governance networks: a pilot study of employment policy. In: Bogason P, Zolner M, editors. Methods in democratic network governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2007. p. 21–38.CrossRef Torfing J. A comparative and multi-level analysis of governance networks: a pilot study of employment policy. In: Bogason P, Zolner M, editors. Methods in democratic network governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2007. p. 21–38.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Marchal B, Dedzo M, Kegels G. Turning around an ailing district hospital: a realist evaluation of strategic changes at Ho Municipal Hospital (Ghana). BMC Public Health. 2010;10(1):787.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Marchal B, Dedzo M, Kegels G. Turning around an ailing district hospital: a realist evaluation of strategic changes at Ho Municipal Hospital (Ghana). BMC Public Health. 2010;10(1):787.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
go back to reference District Social Welfare Office. List of NGOs. 2012. District Social Welfare Office. List of NGOs. 2012.
35.
go back to reference Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis. An expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1994. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis. An expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1994.
36.
go back to reference Ahwoi K. Local government & decentralisation in Ghana. Accra: Unimax Macmillan; 2010. Ahwoi K. Local government & decentralisation in Ghana. Accra: Unimax Macmillan; 2010.
37.
go back to reference District Health Directorate case 1. Annual report. 2012. District Health Directorate case 1. Annual report. 2012.
38.
go back to reference INGO 2 Project description. Project description. 2011. INGO 2 Project description. Project description. 2011.
39.
go back to reference Ministry of Health. Common management arrangements for implementation of the sector medium-term development plan. Revised draft. 2012. p. 29. Ministry of Health. Common management arrangements for implementation of the sector medium-term development plan. Revised draft. 2012. p. 29.
40.
go back to reference Ghana Health Service. Organisational structure. 2013. Ghana Health Service. Organisational structure. 2013.
41.
go back to reference Edwards M, Hulme M. NGO performance and accountability: introduction and overview. In: Edwards M, Hulme M, editors. Non-governmental organisations - performance and accountability beyond the magic bullet. London: Earthscan; 1995. p. 3–16. Edwards M, Hulme M. NGO performance and accountability: introduction and overview. In: Edwards M, Hulme M, editors. Non-governmental organisations - performance and accountability beyond the magic bullet. London: Earthscan; 1995. p. 3–16.
42.
go back to reference Esmark A. Democratic accountability and network governance-problems and pitfalls. In: Sorensen E, Torfing J, editors. Theories of democratic network governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008. p. 274–96. Esmark A. Democratic accountability and network governance-problems and pitfalls. In: Sorensen E, Torfing J, editors. Theories of democratic network governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008. p. 274–96.
43.
go back to reference Ghana Health Service. Manual for training. CHPS zone. Community Health Committees. In: USAID Ghana/JSI/World Education/RICA/JICA. 2012. p. 87. Ghana Health Service. Manual for training. CHPS zone. Community Health Committees. In: USAID Ghana/JSI/World Education/RICA/JICA. 2012. p. 87.
44.
go back to reference Bell S, Hindmoor A, Mols F. Persuasion as governance: a state-centric relational perspective. Public Adm. 2010;88(3):851–70.CrossRef Bell S, Hindmoor A, Mols F. Persuasion as governance: a state-centric relational perspective. Public Adm. 2010;88(3):851–70.CrossRef
45.
go back to reference De Wit J, Akinyoade A. Accountability in formal and informal institutions: a cross country analysis. Working paper no.464. In: Institute of Social Studies. 2008. p. 33. De Wit J, Akinyoade A. Accountability in formal and informal institutions: a cross country analysis. Working paper no.464. In: Institute of Social Studies. 2008. p. 33.
46.
go back to reference Scott C. Spontaneous accountability. In: Dowdle MW, editor. Public accountability: designs, dimemmas and experiences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 174–91. Scott C. Spontaneous accountability. In: Dowdle MW, editor. Public accountability: designs, dimemmas and experiences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 174–91.
47.
go back to reference Romzek BS, LeRoux K, Blackmar JM. A preliminary theory of informal accountability among network organizational actors. Public Adm Rev. 2012;72(3):442–53.CrossRef Romzek BS, LeRoux K, Blackmar JM. A preliminary theory of informal accountability among network organizational actors. Public Adm Rev. 2012;72(3):442–53.CrossRef
48.
go back to reference Roberts N. Keeping public officials accountable through dialogue: resolving the accountability paradox. Public Adm Rev. 2002;62(6):658–68.CrossRef Roberts N. Keeping public officials accountable through dialogue: resolving the accountability paradox. Public Adm Rev. 2002;62(6):658–68.CrossRef
49.
go back to reference Yang K. Emergent accountability and structuration theory. In: Dubnick MJ, Frederickson HG, editors. Accountable governance problems and promises. New York: M.E. Sharpe; 2011. p. 269–81. Yang K. Emergent accountability and structuration theory. In: Dubnick MJ, Frederickson HG, editors. Accountable governance problems and promises. New York: M.E. Sharpe; 2011. p. 269–81.
50.
go back to reference Davies ACL. Accountability. A public law analysis of government by contract. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007. p. 224. Davies ACL. Accountability. A public law analysis of government by contract. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007. p. 224.
51.
go back to reference Klijn HE, Van Buuren A, Edelenbos J. The impact of governance: a normative and empirial discussion. In: Faur DW, editor. Oxford handbook of governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 294–308. Klijn HE, Van Buuren A, Edelenbos J. The impact of governance: a normative and empirial discussion. In: Faur DW, editor. Oxford handbook of governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 294–308.
52.
go back to reference Burnham P. Research methods in politics. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008. Burnham P. Research methods in politics. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008.
53.
go back to reference Fontana A, Frey JH. The interview. From structured questions to negotiated text. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. Handbook of qualitative research. 2nd ed. London: Sage; 2000. p. 645–72. Fontana A, Frey JH. The interview. From structured questions to negotiated text. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. Handbook of qualitative research. 2nd ed. London: Sage; 2000. p. 645–72.
Metadata
Title
Public accountability needs to be enforced –a case study of the governance arrangements and accountability practices in a rural health district in Ghana
Authors
Sara Van Belle
Susannah H. Mayhew
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1836-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Health Services Research 1/2016 Go to the issue