Health reform in Nigeria: the politics of primary health care and universal health coverage

Abstract

Abstract Over the past decade, Nigeria has seen major attempts to strengthen primary health care, through the Saving One Million Lives (SOML) initiative, and to move towards universal health care, through the National Health Act. Both initiatives were successfully adopted, but faced political and institutional challenges in implementation and sustainability. We analyse these programmes from a political economy perspective, examining barriers to and facilitators of adoption and implementation throughout the policy cycle, and drawing on political settlement analysis (PSA) to identify structural challenges which both programmes faced. The SOML began in 2012 and was expanded in 2015. However, the programme’s champion left government in 2013, a key funding source was eliminated in 2015, and the programme did not continue after external funding elapsed in 2021. The National Health Act passed in 2014 after over a decade of advocacy by proponents. However, the Act’s governance reforms led to conflict between health sector agencies, about both reform content and process. Nine years after the Act’s passage, disbursements have been sporadic, and implementation remains incomplete. Both programmes show the promise of major health reforms in Nigeria, but also the political and institutional challenges they face. In both cases, health leaders crafted evidence-based policies and managed stakeholders to achieve policy adoption. Yet political and institutional challenges hindered implementation. Institutionally, horizontal and vertical fragmentation of authority within the sector impeded coordination. Politically, electoral cycles led to frequent turnover of sectoral leadership, while senior politicians did not intervene to support fundamental institutional reforms. Using PSA, we identify these as features of a ‘competitive clientelist’ political settlement, in which attempts to shift from clientelist to programmatic policies generate powerful opposition. Nonetheless, we highlight that some policymakers sought to use health reforms to change institutions at the margin, suggesting future avenues for governance-oriented health reforms.