IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v99y2013icp135-142.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

India's “tryst” with universal health coverage: Reflections on ethnography in Indian health policymaking

Author

Listed:
  • Nambiar, Devaki

Abstract

In 2011, India stood at the crossroads of potentially major health reform. A High Level Expert Group (HLEG) on universal health coverage (UHC), convened by the Indian Planning Commission, proposed major changes in the structure and functioning of the country's health system. This paper presents reflections on the role of ethnography in policy-based social change for health in India, drawing from year-long participation in the aforementioned policy development process. It theorizes that international discourses have been (re)appropriated in the Indian case by recourse to both experience and evidence, resulting in a plurality of concepts that could be prioritized for Indian health reform. This articulation involved HLEG members exerting para-ethnographic labour and paying close attention to context, suggesting that ethnographic sensibilities can reside within the interactive and knowledge production practices among experts oriented toward policy change.

Suggested Citation

  • Nambiar, Devaki, 2013. "India's “tryst” with universal health coverage: Reflections on ethnography in Indian health policymaking," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 135-142.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:99:y:2013:i:c:p:135-142
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.08.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953613004747
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.08.022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hal Colebatch, 2006. "What work makes policy?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 39(4), pages 309-321, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Deveci, Muhammet & Pamucar, Dragan & Gokasar, Ilgin & Isik, Mehtap & Coffman, D'Maris, 2022. "Fuzzy Einstein WASPAS approach for the economic and societal dynamics of the climate change mitigation strategies in urban mobility planning," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-17.
    2. Anna Wesselink & Hal Colebatch & Warren Pearce, 2014. "Evidence and policy: discourses, meanings and practices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(4), pages 339-344, December.
    3. Sedlačko Michal & Staroňová Katarína, 2015. "An Overview of Discourses on Knowledge in Policy: Thinking Knowledge, Policy and Conflict Together," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 9(2), pages 10-31, December.
    4. Michael Howlett & M. Ramesh, 2016. "Achilles' heels of governance: Critical capacity deficits and their role in governance failures," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 301-313, December.
    5. Ann-Charlotte Nedlund & Peter Garpenby, 2014. "Puzzling about problems: the ambiguous search for an evidence-based strategy for handling influx of health technology," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(4), pages 367-386, December.
    6. Farhad Mukhtarov & Andrea Gerlak, 2014. "Epistemic forms of integrated water resources management: towards knowledge versatility," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(2), pages 101-120, June.
    7. Jonathan Craft, 2015. "Conceptualizing the policy work of partisan advisers," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(2), pages 135-158, June.
    8. Marlee Tichenor & Sally E Merry & Sotiria Grek & Justyna Bandola-Gill, 2022. "Global public policy in a quantified world: Sustainable Development Goals as epistemic infrastructures [The ethics of a formula: Calculating a financial-humanitarian price for water]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(4), pages 431-444.
    9. Joshua Newman & Emi Patmisari & Ida Widianingsih, 2022. "Policy analytical capacity and "Eastern" styles of policy analysis: evidence from West Java Province, Indonesia," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(3), pages 469-485, September.
    10. Koen Bartels, 2013. "Research as Usual: How Researching Public Problems Affects Problem Solving," Working Papers 13002, Bangor Business School, Prifysgol Bangor University (Cymru / Wales).
    11. Agus Heruanto Hadna, 2021. "Policy Formulation During Pandemic COVID-19: A New Evidence of Multiple Streams Theory from Yogyakarta, Indonesia," Journal of Public Administration and Governance, Macrothink Institute, vol. 11(3), pages 3655-3655, December.
    12. Pierre-Olivier Bédard, 2015. "The Mobilization of Scientific Evidence by Public Policy Analysts," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(3), pages 21582440156, September.
    13. Novotný Vilém, 2015. "Czech Study of Public Policy in the Perspective of Three Dominant Approaches," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 9(1), pages 8-29, May.
    14. Caspar F. Berg, 2017. "Dynamics in the Dutch policy advisory system: externalization, politicization and the legacy of pillarization," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 63-84, March.
    15. Giulia Molinengo & Dorota Stasiak & Rebecca Freeth, 2021. "Process expertise in policy advice: Designing collaboration in collaboration," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Anna Wesselink & Andy Gouldson, 2014. "Pathways to impact in local government: the mini-Stern review as evidence in policy making in the Leeds City Region," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(4), pages 403-424, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:99:y:2013:i:c:p:135-142. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.