Background: Decentralisation aims to bring services closer to the community and has been advocated in the health sector to improve quality, access and equity, and to empower local agencies, increase innovation and efficiency and bring healthcare and decision-making as close as possible to where people live and work. Fiji has attempted two approaches to decentralisation. The current approach reflects a model of deconcentration of outpatient services from the tertiary level hospital to the peripheral health centres in the Suva subdivision.Methods: Using a modified decision space approach developed by Bossert, this study measures decision space created in five broad categories (finance, service organisation, human resources, access rules, and governance rules) within the decentralised services.Results: Fiji’s centrally managed historical-based allocation of financial resources and management of human resources resulted in no decision space for decentralised agents. Narrow decision space was created in the service organisation category where, with limited decision space created over access rules, Fiji has seen greater usage of its decentralised health centres. There remains limited decision space in governance.Conclusion: The current wave of decentralisation reveals that, whilst the workload has shifted from the tertiary hospital to the peripheral health centres, it has been accompanied by limited transfer of administrative authority, suggesting that Fiji’s deconcentration reflects the transfer of workload only with decision-making in the five functional areas remaining largely centralised. As such, the benefits of decentralisation for users and providers are likely to be limited.

 Whilst decentralisation as an instrument of healthcare reform remains popular, commentaries1-5 to our paper titled "Decentralisation of health services in Fiji: A decision space analysis"6 highlight the complexity in understanding decentralisation, with the significant body of research on decentralisation lacking consensus on its definition, 7 differing on what constitutes decentralisation, 7-11 emphasising different theoretical underpinnings and frameworks, 7, 12-14 and reporting varying applications and outcomes of decentralisation.

Background Managing the transition of a health system (HS) from a centralised to a decentralised model has been touted as a panacea to the complex challenges in developing countries like Malawi. However, recent studies have demonstrated that decentralisation of the HS has had mixed effects in service provision with more dominant negative outcomes than positive results. The aim of this study was to develop a substantive grounded theory (GT) that elaborates on how activities of central decision-makers and local healthcare mangers shape the process of shifting the HS to a decentralised model in Machinga, Malawi.Methods The study was qualitative in nature and employed the Straussian version of GT. Some participants were interviewed twice, and a total of 36 semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 purposively selected participants using an interview guide. The interviews were conducted at the headquarters of the Ministry of Health (MoH) and other ministries and agencies, and in Machinga District. Data were analysed using open, axial, and selective coding processes of the GT methodology; and the conditional matrix and paradigm model were used as data analysis tools.Results The findings of this study revealed seven different activities, forming two opposing and interactional sub-processes of enabling and impeding patterns that derailed the decentralisation drive. The study generated a GT labelled “decentralisation of the HS derailed by organisational inertia,” which elaborates that decentralisation of the HS produced mixed results with more predominant negative outcomes than positive effects due to resistance at the upper organisational echelons and members of the District Health Management Team (DHMT).Conclusion This article concludes that organisational inertia at the personal and strategic levels of leadership entrusted with decentralising the HS in Malawi, contributed immensely to the derailment of shifting the HS from the centralised to the decentralised model of health service provision.

Decentralisation has always been a key element of health systems strengthening,even back to 1978, the World Health Organization (WHO) Alma Ata Declaration clearly stated that the provision of fair, equal, and accessible healthcare should be decentralised and rooted in community-based approaches. 1 However, decentralisation is not a uniform group of policies. On the contrary, it consists of a heterogeneous set of reforms aiming to the transfer of administrative, political and/or economic power from central governments to subnational authorities. 2 In this sense decentralisation is not a synonym to fiscal decentralisation, nor the former necessarily entails the latter. Fiscal decentralisation is a specific type of decentralisation that occurs when the responsibility to generate, distribute, and spend revenues shifts from the central government to local authorities. 2, 3 That is, when local authorities are financially free of any central regulatory constraint in the pooling and redistribution of resources. This can happen through the introduction of earmarked local taxation and user fees, or through hospital’s autonomization. 3 Under this type of decentralisation, providers and regional authorities can compete against each other, in an open market environment, on the offer of different bundles of public services for a certain taxation level. 4 In the academic and policy debate the terms “decentralisation” and “fiscal decentralisation” are often used interchangeably, 3 a fact that inhibits mutual understanding and adds further ambiguity in the relevant policy discussion. Fiscal decentralisation (that is, revenue and expenditure decentralisation, and not decentralisation in general) by definition requires the fragmentation of the national pooling system into multiple regional and municipal pools for the financing of health and other public services. 2, 3 This shift from national to local pools is expected to increase efficiency, under

Background: Decentralisation in the health sector has been promoted in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) for many years. Inherently, decentralisation grants decision-making space to local level authorities over different functions such as: finance, human resources, service organization, and governance. However, there is paucity of studies which have assessed the actual use of decision-making space by local government officials within the decentralised health system. The objective of this study was to analyse the exercise of decision space across 4 districts in Tanzania and explore why variations exist amongst them. Methods: The study was guided by the decision space framework and relied on interviews and documentary reviews. Interviews were conducted with the national, regional and district level officials; and data were analysed using thematic approach. Results: Decentralisation has provided moderate decision space on the Community Health Fund (CHF), accounting for supplies of medicine, motivation of health workers, additional management techniques and rewarding the formally established health committees as a more effective means of community participation and management. While some districts innovated within a moderate range of choice, others were unaware of the range of choices they could utilise. Leadership skills of key district health managers and local government officials as well as horizontal relationships at the district and local levels were the key factors that accounted for the variations in the use of the decision space across districts. Conclusion: This study concludes that more horizontal sharing of innovations among districts may contribute to more effective service delivery in the districts that did not have active leadership. Additionally, the innovations applied by the best performing districts should be incorporated in the national guidelines. Furthermore, targeted capacity building activities for the district health managers may improve decision-making abilities and in turn improve health system performance.

Background: The implications of decentralisation on human resource for health management has not received adequate research attention despite the presupposition that the concept of decentralisation leads to the transfer of management authority and discretion for human resource management from national levels to subnational levels. This study aims at investigating the extent to which decentralisation practice transfers management autonomy and discretion to subnational units, and the effect of the level of decision space on human resource management in the health sector. Methods: A mixed methods study design was adopted employing a cross-sectional survey and a document analysis. The respondents included health managers from the regional, district and hospital administrations as well as facility managers from the community-based health planning and services zones. A decision space framework was employed to measure management autonomy and discretion at various management levels of the study region. For the quantitative data, descriptive statistical analysis was used to analyse and report the data whilst the qualitative data was content-analysed. Results: The study reported that in practice, management authority for core human resource functions such as recruitment, remuneration, personnel training and development are centralised rather than transferred to the subnational units. It further reveals that authority diminishes along the management continuum from the national to the community level. Decentralisation was however found to have led to greater autonomy in technical supervision and performance appraisal. The study also reported the existence of discrepancy between the wide decision space for performance assessment through technical supervision and performance appraisal exercised by managers at the subnational level and a rather limited discretion for providing incentives or rewards to staff. Conclusion: The practice of decentralisation in the Ghanaian health sector is more apparent than real. The limited autonomy and discretion in the management of human resource at the subnational units have potential adverse implications on effective recruitment, retention, development and distribution of health personnel. Therefore, further decision space is required at the subnational level to enhance effective and efficient management of human resource to attain the health sector objectives.

Background: Fiscal decentralisation (FD) is a widely implemented decentralisation policy consisting of the allocation of pooling and spending responsibilities from the central government to lower levels of governance within a country. In 2001, The Italian National Health System (Servizio Sanitario Nazionale, SSN) has introduced a strong element of FD, making regions responsible for their own pooling of resources and for their budgets. Despite the relevance, only few studies exist on health sector-FD in Italy, mostly looking at the effects of FD on infant mortality. Methods: This study performs a fixed-effects panel data analysis of Italian Regions and Autonomous provinces between the years 2001 and 2017, to investigate the effects of health sector-FD on availability, accessibility, and utilisation of healthcare services in Italy. Results: FD decreases availability of staff and hospital beds, decreases utilisation of care, measured by hospitalisation rates, and increases interregional patients’,mobility for healthcare purposes, a finding suggesting increased disparities in access to healthcare. These effects seem to be stronger for public –,rather than private –,services, and are more prominent in poorer areas. Conclusion: This evidence suggest that FD has created a fragmented and unequal healthcare system, in which levels of availability, utilisation of, and accessibility to resources –,as well as the extent of public sector’, s retrenchment –,coincide with the wealth of the area.