Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puad019
DC FieldValue
dc.titleKnowledge–practice gap in healthcare payments: the role of policy capacity
dc.contributor.authorAzad Singh Bali
dc.contributor.authorM Ramesh
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-02T06:24:42Z
dc.date.available2024-01-02T06:24:42Z
dc.date.issued2023-09-01
dc.identifier.citationAzad Singh Bali, M Ramesh (2023-09-01). Knowledge–practice gap in healthcare payments: the role of policy capacity. Policy and Society 42 (3) : 406–418. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puad019
dc.identifier.issn1839-3373
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/246617
dc.description.abstractFee-for-service remains a popular mode of paying for healthcare despite widespread knowledge of its ill effects. This has resulted in a gap between policy knowledge (understood as consensus among experts) and policy practice (actual policy measures to implement the consensus) in healthcare. The existing literature attributes such gaps to a range of factors, including the stakeholders’ different interests, incentives, ideas, and values. Our focus on this debate is through the lens of policy capacity, specifically the ability of public actors to utilize policy knowledge and inform policy practice. We show that the observed knowledge–practice gap is rooted in the complexity of healthcare payment reforms. While actors agree on the problematic condition, there is a deep disagreement on what to do about it. Agreeing on and adopting alternate payment arrangements are challenging because reformers need to anticipate and respond to the future while accommodating the interests of the current providers who benefit from the status quo. In such instances, the capacity of public actors to devise reforms and overcome resistance to them is critical. We argue that the knowledge–practice gap in healthcare payments exists because of deficiencies in the analytical abilities of governments to devise workable alternate arrangements and shortcomings in their political capacity to overcome the resistance to proposed reforms. Put differently, we argue that no amount of evidence or consensus among stakeholders is sufficient when the analytical and political capacities to act on the evidence are lacking. The arguments are illustrated with reference to payment reforms in South Korea and Thailand.
dc.publisherOxford University Press
dc.subjectpolicy expertise
dc.subjectpolicy knowledge
dc.subjectknowlegde-practice gap
dc.subjecthealthcare payments
dc.subjectpolicy capacity
dc.subjecthealthcare reforms
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentLEE KUAN YEW SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
dc.description.doi10.1093/polsoc/puad019
dc.description.sourcetitlePolicy and Society
dc.description.volume42
dc.description.issue3
dc.description.page406–418
dc.published.stateUnpublished
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
M Ramesh - Knowledge-practice gap in healthcare payments.pdf383.22 kBAdobe PDF

OPEN

PublishedView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.