The Voice of Non-State Actors Essay Example

take charge and bring diverse perspectives that significantly impact policy subsystems. These complexities can lead to alterations in policies and substantial changes in the policy agenda, especially under specific political circumstances. Other political factors such as shifts in public opinion influenced by media, social and political campaigns, and adjustments within committees also contribute to changes in the policy agenda.

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and civil society groups played a crucial role in formulating the antiretroviral therapy policy in Thailand. Their goal was to advocate for nationwide access to treatment since initially only those who could afford medical care had access. To develop this policy, civil society organizations examined sources from governmental institutions like the Ministry of Public Health and assessed Thailand's economic conditions.The government collaborated with other entities to establish a healthcare policy covering all citizens. Non-state actors acted as intermediaries between the government and the people by disseminating information during implementation. This collaboration received a boost in 2003 through National Access in Antiretroviral Programs (NAPHA), leading to the implementation of ART across provinces with high HIV prevalence in Thailand. The involvement of non-state actors is significant as they can influence the policy-making process by pressuring the government for new health policies and implementing control over governmental actions. During the implementation of universal health care and antiretroviral therapy, specific civil groups ensured equal health cover for all citizens regardless of their social class and status. Scientists and other intellectual classes provided technical assistance for the implementation of the universal health care bill (Piot, 2006). The inclusion of civil organizations in the policymaking process increases people's trust in government initiatives as these organizations work closely with them, giving

a sense of belonging and significance when participating in policymaking. In Thailand, public participation in policymaking was approved in 1997 through constitutional amendments, allowing individuals to participate in public decision-making - marking the beginning of civil groups' involvement in policy formulation process.Non-state actors advocated for the integration of antiretroviral therapy (ART) into Thailand's universal health care program, which was approved by the Thai government. Ever since, these non-state actors have actively contributed to shaping health policies. Prior to 2003, they were viewed as outsiders; however, the inclusion of a universal health program in Thailand marked a significant milestone that granted them a voice. The implementation of this policy resulted in changes in government operations with support from organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Despite their involvement, non-state actors encountered difficulties in exerting authority over policy formulation. Concerns about sovereignty arose when international bodies like the World Health Organization got involved. Nonetheless, government interests took precedence, leading to preferential treatment for government agencies, experts, and consultants. Opposition from economic technocrats within the government created uncertainty regarding funding and the future of ART inclusion in universal health care. Challenges faced during ART implementation included unclear objectives, limited resources, opposition from government officials, and insufficient communication among stakeholders. The Ministry of Health expressed reservations about rapidly advancing therapy due to concerns about national readiness and long-term funding availability.The involvement of non-state actors in policy formulation is viewed as a means to include all citizens' perspectives and take necessary actions in Thailand. However, numerous countries do not give substantial responsibilities to civil organizations during national decision-making processes and consider their participation as interference or a challenge to

national autonomy.