ABSTRACT
The recent experience in South Korea with the Citizen Committee for Participation has important implications for NHI coverage decisions in many countries where public participation remains a pending health policy issue. Korea’s experiences are especially important considering the past experience in Oregon, where an attempt to list the benefits package through a formula confronted obstacles from the public; the objections arose chiefly due to a discrepancy between the lay public’s value perceptions and the priority list, which was generated mainly by cost-effectiveness. Korea’s approach provides a feasible example of implementing A4R in institutional governance under limited resources. People’s values may vary at different times and circumstances, which may make it difficult to implement a formula-based decision process (as in Oregon).
