Key Factors Influencing Health System Governance in Iran: A Scoping Review

The implementation of the primary health care (PHC) approach requires essential health system inputs, including structures, policies, programs, organization, and governance. Effective health system governance (HSG) is crucial in PHC systems and services, as it can significantly influence health service delivery. Therefore, understanding HSG in the context of PHC is vital for designing and implementing health programs that contribute to universal health coverage (UHC). This scoping review explores how health system governance contributes to delivering PHC services aimed at achieving UHC. We conducted a scoping review of published evidence on HSG in the delivery of PHC services toward UHC. Our search strategy focused on three key concepts: health system governance, PHC, and UHC. We followed Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework and adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist to guide our methodology. We used the World Health Organization's framework on HSG to organize the data and present the findings. Seventy-four studies were included in the final review. Various functions of HSG influenced PHC systems and services, including:1) formulating health policies and strategic plans (e.g., addressing epidemiological and demographic shifts and strategic financial planning), 2) implementing policy levers and tools (such as decentralization, regulation, workforce capacity, and supply chain management), 3) generating intelligence and evidence (including priority setting, monitoring, benchmarking, and evidence-informed decision-making), 4) ensuring accountability (through commitments to transparency), and 5) fostering coordination and collaboration (via subnational coordination, civil society engagement, and multisectoral partnerships). The complex interplay of these HSG interventions operates through intricate mechanisms, and has synergistic effects on PHC service delivery. PHC service delivery is closely linked to HSG functions, which include formulating strategic policies and plans responsive to evolving epidemiological and demographic needs, utilizing digital tools, decentralizing resources, and fostering multisectoral actions. Effective policy implementation requires robust regulation, evidence-based decision-making, and continuous monitoring. Accountability within health systems, alongside community engagement and civil society collaboration, is vital for realizing PHC principles. Local health institutions should collaborate with communities-end users of these systems-to implement formal rules and ensure PHC service delivery progresses toward UHC. Sociocultural contexts and community values should inform decision-making aligning health needs and services to achieve universal access to PHC services.

BackgroundPrevious studies show that health systems governance influences health system performance and health outcomes. However, there are few examples of how to implement and monitor good governing practices in fragile and conflict affected environments. Good governance has the potential to make the health system people-centered. More research is needed on implementing a people-centered governance approach in these environments.Case descriptionWe piloted an intervention that placed a people-centred health systems governance approach in the hands of multi-stakeholder committees that govern provincial and district health systems. We report the results of this intervention from three provinces and eleven districts in Afghanistan over a six month period. This mixed-methods exploratory case study uses analysis of governance self-assessment scores, health management information system data on health system performance, and focus group discussions. The outcomes of interest are governance scores and health system performance indicators.We document the application of a people-centred health systems governance conceptual model based on applying four effective governing practices: cultivating accountability, engaging with stakeholders, setting a shared strategic direction, and stewarding resources responsibly. We present a participatory approach where health system leaders identify and act on opportunities for making themselves and their health systems more accountable and responsive to the needs of the communities they serve.Discussion and evaluationWe found that health systems governance can be improved in fragile and conflict affected environments, and that consistent application of the effective governing practices is key to improving governance. Intervention was associated with a 20% increase in antenatal care visit rate in pilot provinces. Focus group discussions showed improvements across the four governing practices, including: establishment of new sub-committees that oversee financial transparency and governance, collaboration with diverse stakeholders, sharper focus on community health needs, more frequent presentation of service delivery data, and increased use of data for decision making.ConclusionsOur findings have implications for policy and practice within and beyond Afghanistan. Governance is central to making health systems responsive to the needs of people who access and provide services. We provide a practical approach to improving health systems governance in fragile and conflict affected environments.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1752-1505-9-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Health systems in an emerging economy, specifically Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are characterized as fragile with low implementation of Universal Health Coverage. While acknowledging that the cause of the inadequacy in emerging economies is multi-factorial, other arguments are that the root cause is inadequate political and technical leadership. Evidence reveals that visionary, imaginative, decisive, responsible, and responsive leadership is insufficient to persuade all stakeholders in low-income nations in Sub-Saharan Africa to work together to attain the constructive goal of universal coverage. On the contrary, other academics suggest that successful leadership would establish a clear national vision for universal coverage and a commitment to achieving that objective over time. These contrasting observations motivated an interrogation of the link between health system governance and Universal Health Coverage in an emerging economy taking evidence from the PHSSA programme. Through a meta-analysis of the existing literature as well as analysis of the findings from the programme, the paper explores experiences, critical success factors and recommendations for improvement of UHC through institutionalizing health system governance in an emerging economy. The research provides evidence that the governance linkages in health systems and the outcomes they produce are contingent rather than assured, due to the variety and complexity inherent in the health system governance paradigm. The situation-specific setting of a country's health system determines what can be accomplished through health governance strategy design and implementation efforts. The paper recommends a need to create a conducive environment for adoption of health systems programmes by contextualizing health governance with regard to the larger set of governance institutions that surround it. A competency framework should also be adopted in recruitment of competent health managers. The study also recommends a need for the countries in seeking to institutionalize health system governance to develop and support an organizational structure and context that sustains leadership practices through advocacy, create an enabling environment for health systems leadership, management and governance through the development of ethics and other competences specific to universal health care situations as well as provide proper financial support system so that institutionalization of leadership, management and governance can have maximum impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of health systems. There is also a need to institutionalize short courses, seminars and conferences in health leadership, management, and governance so as to entrench participatory leadership in health systems.

Governance is one of the critical functions of the health system. Good governance of the health system leads to better performance and outcomes. Evaluation is the first step to improving health system governance. Therefore, this research aimed to identify evaluation tools for health system governance. In the current scoping review, we searched all documents related to health system governance evaluation indexed in Medline, EMBASE, ProQuest, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Science Direct databases, and Google Scholar search engines to 2022, extracted, and assessed. Finally, documents were selected and analyzed by thematic analysis. Thirty tools were found to evaluate health system governance. Among the proposed tools, 11 specific tools have been designed just for health system governance evaluation, while others have governance as a component of health system evaluation. Health system governance's significant components are health policy-making, strategic planning, organizing, stewardship, and control. Indicators such as accountability, participation, transparency, equity, efficiency, accountability, corruption control, effectiveness, ethic, the rule of law, and sustainability could be used to evaluate the health system governance. Different tools have been used to evaluate governance worldwide, and each governance evaluation tool has different components suitable for governance evaluation. However, these tools cannot fully evaluate governance and have shortcomings. A comprehensive evaluation of governance and sharing lessons denrael will affect the health system's capacity and ability to provide quality, safe and effective health services. It will lead to the stability of the health system.

Background: Governance in the health system is not just a vision, or a model for delivering services, but a key element in planning, implementing and evaluating activities to improve health. The main purpose of this study was to design a pattern for assessing Iran's Health System Governance.
 Methods: The present study was descriptive in terms of purpose, qualitative in terms of application, and qualitative in terms of data type, which was conducted based on thematic analysis and deductive-inductive approach. 14 health system experts were selected through non-random-purposive sampling. To calculate reliability, test-retest reliability and coder reliability were used, which were 70 and 87 %, respectively. Also, Waltz and Basel method was used to assess the content validity of the extracted indices which was 85 %.
 Results: After 6 stages of thematic analysis, 137 basic themes, 15 organizing themes and 5 comprehensive themes (health system accountability, health system participation, health system policy formulation, health system service provision, health system efficiency and quality) were obtained, and finally, a model for assessing the governance of the health system in the Islamic Republic of Iran was designed. Organizational accountability included 7 themes, ethical accountability, 9, and legal accountability included 6 .Financial accountability included 8 basic themes, and efficiency and quality, 10 basic themes. Implementation included 8 themes, comprehensiveness, 4, reporting, 12, and transparency, 6. Structural policy included 23 themes, social inclusion and justice policy, 6, and fiscal policy included 11 basic themes. Medical services included 4 themes, financial services, 7, human services and human rights, 9, and information and technology services included 7 basic themes. In this pattern, participation and policy formulation were considered input, and accountability, efficiency and quality and service delivery were considered output.
 Conclusion: Lack of a clear definition for an appropriate interdepartmental cooperation, Lack of meritocracy, having a guild oriented attitude, conflict of interests, not using a policymaking approach based on a collective evidence and wisdom are among the shortcomings of the current health system governance. In addition, healthcare costs imposed on people are too high.

Background Research has shown that national large-scale e-health projects are rarely defined as successful. Methods We have conducted a search in the PubMed database on governance models. Results Our search resulted in 220 hits, 11 papers included. We sorted these in four health systems Governance takes three different paths. 1) governance of e-health - how governments govern e-health programs through national and regional strategies, standards, incentives, legislation 2) governance through e-health - e-health as a strategic tool to obtain national health policy goals 3) governance in e-health - governance in medical networks initiated bottom-up and run by clinicians. In the Single-Payer we find two papers. Both these describe governance of e-health. When the processes had been running for a period of time it shifted to governance through e-health. Two papers from New Zealand describe top-down governance model of e-health. Under the Multi-Payer health system we find a paper that describes the experiences of realizing a national telehealth network in Australia through a governance model in e-health. Under Unknown health system and national governance models, we include a paper that describes a governance model of e-health in Haiti. Two other papers describe the tension between non-profit and for-profit organizations on access to health data and domain names. The authors questions how governments shall realize governance models which captures these new aspects in healthcare. The second paper describes the challenges faced by the authorities’ governance of the purchase and sale of health domains when public health institutions do not have an overview of this. The papers in this category may question if there is a need for a fourth governance model in e-health on the global level. Conclusions The development of governance models are not static but part of processes and context dependent. Need for a fourth governance model on the global level. Key messages Research has shown that national large-scale e-health projects are rarely defined as successful. Currently scattered knowledge on how large-scale e-health projects that bring economic, clinical and societal benefits are governed.

Social accountability is an important element in health system governance, which is necessary for health system reform and reaching Universal Health Coverage. Understanding the social accountability mechanism and tools will help policymakers to design policies according to the context. We aimed to explore the extent of the application of social accountability in health system governance, its results, challenges, and tools. We conducted a scoping review study, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping review. An inclusive search in bibliographic databases and search engines was done to identify peer review articles and grey literatures, published in English in the range of 2010 to 2021. Search terms were (social accountability), (public accountability), AND (health system). Thirty-one records met inclusion criteria from 286 potentially relevant sources, which included 25 peer-review articles and 6 grey literatures. Maternal and child health was the main health subject for social accountability interventions. We identified some social accountability tools to apply at the health facility and community levels. Social accountability has some benefits for the health system and for the community and some challenges to the implementation of social accountability were listed. Social accountability improves health system performance. It contains different tools and strategies applied at different levels of the health system. Successful social accountability initiatives that are strategic, multi-interventional, and context-specific can produce good results in health services and social domains.

Health system governance has to do with decision-making – who makes decisions, when, where, how and why. At the district level – the level of care which operationalises health policies – governance is critical, yet remains little understood. Governance has the ability to influence health system performance, and this is essential in maternal and newborn health, where timely decisions are required to support policy implementation. In this regard, district managers are particularly important. They are the link in the middle of the health system, connecting top-end policy formulation to bottom-end implementation. Their abilities to interpret, translate, support and challenge policy will have an effect on what gets operationalised. However, capacity weaknesses in district management and leadership are often cited as a factor in poor health system performance. This thesis seeks to deepen understandings of district-level management, leadership and decision-making for policy and programme management and implementation for maternal and newborn health. Within this, the thesis also seeks to understand the scope for change that an intervention to strengthen management and leadership capacities can bring. This thesis contributes to the applied field of health policy and systems research by drawing on policy implementation theory, organisational management theory and complexity theory as its theoretical basis. A realist approach methodology was undertaken to understand the contexts in which district managers are embedded, how this influences their decision-making, and what the effects of a managerial intervention are, given these contexts. The thesis followed an embedded case study flexible design. The first case study was an exploratory qualitative case study to understand how and why district managers make decisions in maternal and newborn health policy implementation. The second case study was an historical case study of district manager decision-space over time. The third case study was an explanatory qualitative case study of the management and leadership intervention. The final validation of our theorising throughout the cases was achieved through the administration of a questionnaire across all district health management teams of the Great Accra Region. This thesis demonstrates that district managers find themselves in contexts of strong hierarchical authority and resource uncertainty – in particular, lacking financial transparency. This promotes a management and leadership typology which attunes managers towards serving the health system bureaucracy, resulting in reduced district-level responsiveness to maternal and newborn health challenges. The outcome is that district manager decision-space is narrow surrounding resource allocation decisions, and this in turn affects local planning programming and management. The thesis further demonstrates that broader patterns of centralised governmental decision-making have affected the development of the district health system over time. Particularly, the sequencing of decentralisation processes has ensured that national-level decision-making has remained empowered in contrast to district-level decision-making. System fragmentation – through reduced Government of Ghana funds and increasingly verticalised donor funds – has also been a contributor. This accounts for the observed hierarchical authority and resource uncertainty which affects district managers. As a result of these contexts, this thesis also showed that an intervention to strengthen management and leadership capacities was limited in its sustainability. This thesis raises the issues of health system organisation as critical to the potential of district management and leadership effectiveness. It provides evidence that weaknesses in district management and leadership arise out of the organisational governance mismatches in autonomy and responsibility. It suggests that in strengthening management and leadership, approaches which seek to address organisational capacities, not only individual capacities, are needed to convey sustainable change. Advancements in this regard have the scope to improve district manager decision-making for maternal and newborn health policy and programme implementation in the future.

Introduction: Improving health systems requires good governance alongside technical interventions. Evidence suggests that strengthening governance results in more responsive health systems. Despite receiving increased attention, governance is still a relatively new area of health systems and policy research. There is no universally agreed way to define, measure or assess health system governance. Little information exists regarding governance at sub-national (health policy implementation) level. Assessing governance at different health system levels (national, county and health facility) in Kenya is the aim of this study. The specific research objectives explored are: 1) factors influencing health system governance in Kenya; 2) key stakeholders’ perspectives on health system governance and 3) whether the status of health system governance differs with the functionality of health facilities. Methods: The study employed qualitative research methods, interviews with 39 key informants from three levels of the Kenya health system. The study used a conceptual framework adapted from previously published tools for assessing governance and draws on “institutional analysis” theory to help analyse and interpret the findings. Findings: Key factors that influence governance in the health system include devolution, rapidly changing political context, constrained health financing and challenges in managing the health workforce. The most notable influence appeared to be the impact of devolution and frequent health workers’ strikes. Stakeholders shared their views on all six principles of governance and these revealed opportunities for abuse of the system, weak enforcement of policies and accountability measures, and a lack of participation in policy development. They also commented on the lack of improvement in equity in the health system. Careful analysis using the new institutional economics theory showed that there were observed differences in governance at facility level: fully functional versus not fully functional. The most surprising difference was that staff responding to the lack or weakness of formal institutions by creating informal arrangements that might circumvent or support the goals of the formal system. Fully functional facilities had accountability mechanisms that they self-enforced; by contrast, facilities that were not fully functional lacked both self-enforcement and effective third party enforcement mechanisms. Norms and practices for controlling corruption were clear in fully functional facilities but confused in some not fully functional facilities. Conclusions: This study provides an in-depth exploration of what factors influence institutional arrangements for good governance and how these were enforced or not. Analysis guided by theory, with a strong emphasis on context, is an important contribution to the existing literature on governance. This study critically evaluated existing frameworks to assess health system governance from a cross-disciplinary perspective which can inform future research on governance. The findings highlight research implications for Kenya at policy and operational levels particularly, on the need to monitor health system governance over time due to rapidly changing political and socioeconomic circumstances, especially concurrent devolution.

Governance of the health system is a relatively new concept and there are gaps in understanding what health system governance is and how it could be assessed. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to describe the concept of governance and the theories underpinning as applied to health systems; and to identify which frameworks are available and have been applied to assess health systems governance. Frameworks were reviewed to understand how the principles of governance might be operationalized at different levels of a health system. Electronic databases and web portals of international institutions concerned with governance were searched for publications in English for the period January 1994 to February 2016. Sixteen frameworks developed to assess governance in the health system were identified and are described. Of these, six frameworks were developed based on theories from new institutional economics; three are primarily informed by political science and public management disciplines; three arise from the development literature and four use multidisciplinary approaches. Only five of the identified frameworks have been applied. These used the principal–agent theory, theory of common pool resources, North’s institutional analysis and the cybernetics theory. Governance is a practice, dependent on arrangements set at political or national level, but which needs to be operationalized by individuals at lower levels in the health system; multi-level frameworks acknowledge this. Three frameworks were used to assess governance at all levels of the health system. Health system governance is complex and difficult to assess; the concept of governance originates from different disciplines and is multidimensional. There is a need to validate and apply existing frameworks and share lessons learnt regarding which frameworks work well in which settings. A comprehensive assessment of governance could enable policy makers to prioritize solutions for problems identified as well as replicate and scale-up examples of good practice.

BackgroundGlobally, good health system performance has resulted from continuous reform, including adaptation of Decentralisation by Devolution policies, for example, the Direct Health Facility Financing (DHFF). Generally, the role of decentralisation in the health sector is to improve efficiency, to foster innovations and to improve quality, patient experience and accountability. However, such improvements have not been well realised in most low- and middle-income countries, with the main reason cited being the poor mechanism for disbursement of funds, which remain largely centralised. The introduction of the DHFF programme in Tanzania is expected to help improve the quality of health service delivery and increase service utilisation resulting in improved health system performance. This paper describes the protocol, which aims to evaluate the effects of DHFF on health system performance in Tanzania.MethodsAn evaluation of the effect of the DHFF programme will be carried out as part of a nationwide programme rollout. A before and after non-controlled concurrent mixed methods design study will be employed to examine the effect of the DHFF programme implementation on the structural quality of maternal health, health facility governing committee governance and accountability, and health system responsiveness as perceived by the patients’ experiences. Data will be collected from a nationally representative sample involving 42 health facilities, 422 patient consultations, 54 health workers, and 42 health facility governing committees in seven regions from the seven zones of the Tanzanian mainland. The study is grounded in a conceptual framework centered on the Theory of Change and the Implementation Fidelity Framework. The study will utilise a mixture of quantitative and qualitative data collection tools (questionnaires, focus group discussions, in-depth interviews and documentary review). The study will collect information related to knowledge, acceptability and practice of the programme, fidelity of implementation, structural qualities of maternal and child health services, accountability, governance, and patient perception of health system responsiveness.DiscussionThis evaluation study will generate evidence on both the process and impact of the DHFF programme implementation, and help to inform policy improvement. The study is expected to inform policy on the implementation of DHFF within decentralised health system government machinery, with particular regard to health system strengthening through quality healthcare delivery. Health system responsiveness assessment, accountability and governance of Health Facility Government Committee should bring autonomy to lower levels and improve patient experiences. A major strength of the proposed study is the use of a mixed methods approach to obtain a more in-depth understanding of factors that may influence the implementation of the DHFF programme. This evaluation has the potential to generate robust data for evidence-based policy decisions in a low-income setting.

Background:Health system performance assessment (HSPA) is a major tool for evidence-based governance in health systems and patient/population-orientation is increasingly considered as an important aspect. The IPHA study aims (1) to undertake a comprehensive performance assessment of the German health system from a population perspective based on the intermediate and final dimensions defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) and (2) to identify differences in HSPA between (a) common user characteristics and (b) user types, which differ in their interactions and patterns of action within the health system.Methods and Analysis: A cross-sectional survey was conducted between October and December 2018 with statutorily and privately health insured to assess the German health system from a population perspective related to the past 12 months. The random sample consists of 32 000 persons insured by AOK Nordost and 20 000 persons insured by Debeka. Data from the survey will subsequently be linked with health insurance claims data at the individual level for each respondent who has given consent for data linkage. Claims data covers the time period January 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018. The combination of the 2 data sources allows to identify associations between insured patient characteristics and differences in the assessment of health system performance. The survey consists of 71 items measuring all final and intermediate health system goals defined by the WHO and user characteristics like health literacy, self-efficacy, the attention an individual pays to his or her health or disease, the personal network, autonomy, compliance and sociodemographics. The claims data contains information on morbidity, care delivery, service utilization, (co)payments and sociodemography. Discussion: The study represents a promising attempt to perform a holistic HSPA using a population perspective. For this purpose, a questionnaire was designed that contains both validated and new items in order to collect data on all relevant health system dimensions. In particular, linking survey data on HSPA with claims data is of high potential for assessing and analysing determinants of health system performance from the population perspective.

BackgroundSystems of governance play a key role in the operation and performance of health systems. In the past six decades, China has made great advances in strengthening its health system, most notably in establishing a health insurance system that enables residents of rural areas to achieve access to essential services. Although there have been several studies of rural health insurance schemes, these have focused on coverage and service utilization, while much less attention has been given to the role of governance in designing and implementing these schemes.MethodsInformation from publications and policy documents relevant to the development of two rural health insurance policies in China was obtained, analysed, and synthesise. 92 documents on CMS (Cooperative Medical Scheme) or NCMS (New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme) from four databases searched were included. Data extraction and synthesis of the information were guided by a framework that drew on that developed by the WHO to describe health system governance and leadership.ResultsWe identified a series of governance practices that were supportive of progress, including the prioritisation by the central government of health system development and certain health policies within overall national development; strong government commitment combined with a hierarchal administrative system; clear policy goals coupled with the ability for local government to adopt policy measures that take account of local conditions; and the accumulation and use of the evidence generated from local practices. However these good practices were not seen in all governance domains. For example, poor collaboration between different government departments was shown to be a considerable challenge that undermined the operation of the insurance schemes.ConclusionsChina’s success in achieving scale up of CMS and NCMS has attracted considerable interest in many low and middle income countries (LMICs), especially with regard to the schemes’ designs, coverage, and funding mechanisms. However, this study demonstrates that health systems governance may be critical to enable the development and operation of such schemes. Given that many LMICs are expanding health financing system to cover populations in rural areas or the informal sectors, we argue that strengthening specific practices in each governance domain could inform the adaptation of these schemes to other settings.

This article addresses several issues pertinent to health systems governance for health equity. It argues the importance of health systems using measures of positive health (well-being), discriminating in favour of historically less advantaged groups and weighing the costs of health care against investments in the social determinants of health. It cautions that the concept of governance could weaken the role of government, with disequalizing effects, while emphasizing the importance of two elements of good governance (transparency and participation) in health systems decision-making. It distinguishes between participation as volunteer labour and participation as exercising political rights, and questions the assumption that decentralization in health systems is necessarily empowering. It then identifies five health system roles to address issues of equity (educator/watchdog, resource broker, community developer, partnership developer and advocate/catalyst) and the implications of these roles for practice. Drawing on preliminary findings of a global research project on comprehensive primary health care, it discusses political aspects of progressive health system reform and the implications of equity-focused health system governance on health workers' roles, noting the importance of health workers claiming their identity as citizens. The article concludes with a commentary on the inherently political nature of health reforms based on equity; the necessary confrontation with power relations politics involves; and the health systems governance challenge of managing competing health discourses of efficiency and results-based financing, on the one hand, and equity and citizen empowerment, on the other.

Very often, important health system reforms are delayed, rendered ineffective or they simply go badly wrong. All too often this happens not because of a lack of money, health workers or health care facilities but because we adopt unfit ideas and decision and/or implement them insufficiently. The incapacity to develop, adopt and implement good decision is quintessentially the definition of bad governance. If we are to develop our health systems towards Universal Health Coverage and health systems performance improvement, we will need to strengthen our health system governance. Governance is vitally important to health systems reform and refers to how decisions are made and implemented - everything from the ability of policy-makers to take evidence-based and relevant decisions to their ability to implement policies and create alignment between different actors. In this workshop we will share experiences from a governance spring course for policy makers from Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Connected to this we will also share preliminary results of a study on National Level Health Systems Governance. The panelists will address five key issues The contribution of governance to Universal Health Coverage. This contribution will focus on a) the concept of governance defined as the way societies make and implement collective decisions and b) its 5 main domains including transparency, accountability, participation, integrity and capacity. (S Greer)Governance improvement needs in Eastern Europe and Central Asia: experiences from working with policy makers including countries like Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova Tajikistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. For purpose of peer-learning and contrasting experiences we have paired these countries with policy makers from Austria, Finland and Ireland (G Pastorino)Stakeholder participation in decision making and implementation: Very often, powerful stakeholders, like the medical profession, is over-represented and exerts immense veto power, while the voice of other professions, patients, and citizens remained unheard. What are the governance strategies and instruments to harness those underrepresented stakeholders for Universal Health Coverage? (G Fattore)Governing centralized and decentralized budgets in primary, social and hospital care: population-based health care in larger countries requires decentralization of part of the health care budget. What are the accountability lines and instruments that ensure that regional and local budget holders aligning with national policies for Universal Health Coverage? (L Hawkins)Governance contribution addressing corruption: According to surveys health systems are perceived prone to corruption. What is the contribution of governance to heal corruption and make the system work according to rules? (D Clarke) Key messages If we are to make progress towards Universal Health Coverage, we will need to strengthen health systems governance. Without strengthening health systems governance we will fail to manage stakeholders, budgets and corruption.