Table 3.
The summary of the findings by themes derived from the administrative process theory
| Themes | Key findings | |
|---|---|---|
| Policymaking procedures | (i) Policy and legislative process | Several formal opportunities for intersectoral negotiations in Fiji and Vanuatu |
| Gap between rules and actual policymaking | ||
| Centralised decision-making in Fiji | ||
| Inadequate consultations | ||
| Limited capacity or intention for stakeholder involvement | ||
| Limited stakeholder capacity for meaningful contribution | ||
| (ii) Terms of engagement with the tobacco industry | Lack of official terms of engagement | |
| Regular interaction and inadequate transparency measures | ||
| Limited screening for individual conflicts of interest | ||
| Limited oversight from third parties | ||
| No awareness raising or lobby transparency measures on tobacco industry interference | ||
| Checks and balances | Weak Parliament and limited oversight | |
| Limited judicial and executive oversight | ||
| Policymakers commitment to protect public interests | High-level government officials were perceived to have low commitment to protecting public health interests | |
| Clientelism and patronage as possible drivers of low commitment to protecting public health interests | ||
| Weak political part regulation contributing low commitment to protecting public health interests | ||
| Mid- and low-level government officials were more likely to be committed to protecting public health interests | ||
| Capability to analyse policy alternatives for public interest | Limited human capacity | |
| Limited technical capacity | ||
| Low financial capacity | ||
| Issues in performance management and accountability | ||
| Bureaucratic autonomy | Muted layers of decision-making and accountability in Fiji | |
| The role of political culture in policy makers’ limited proactivity in Fiji | ||
| Frequent changes in strategic direction | ||
| Public service reforms but with similar issues in Fiji | ||