Enhancing governance in Kazakhstan: the case for role separation

In Kazakhstan, many government ministries perform functions that go beyond their original mandate. The Ministry of Health engages in budgeting and procurement, while the Ministry of Education handles financial allocations and pricing. This overlap blurs accountability and reduces efficiency. To improve governance, professional and economic roles must be separated clearly.

Sectoral ministries are designed to set policy and professional standards. Over time, however, they have taken on economic responsibilities – determining tariffs, allocating funds, and managing procurement. This combination leads to duplication, confusion, and corruption risks.

Ministries should focus on the substance of their fields – medicine, education, science – while financial and economic evaluation should rest with the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of National Economy, and specialized agencies.

Kazakhstan’s healthcare system concentrates too many responsibilities in one place. The Ministry of Health sets clinical standards, purchases medicines, plans budgets, and controls prices. When one institution manages both medical and financial decisions, conflicts of interest inevitably arise.

A better model is to separate medical and economic functions:

•  The Ministry of Health should focus on healthcare policy – developing treatment standards, overseeing quality, and planning the long-term development of the system.

•  The economic block – such as the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of National Economy, or an independent agency – should handle pricing, cost analysis, and budget efficiency.

This division increases transparency and reduces lobbying influence, ensuring that medical priorities are not overshadowed by financial concerns.

For example, in drug procurement, the Health Ministry could define which medicines are essential and assess their medical effectiveness. The financial authorities, in turn, would calculate optimal prices and funding sources. This would prevent cases where budget constraints dictate medical choices.

Experience from other countries shows that such a model leads to better quality and lower corruption risks. When clinical and financial decisions are made by different institutions, systems become more resilient and accountable.

The same issue exists in the education system. The Ministry of Science and Higher Education not only sets curricula and accredits universities but also distributes state grants and funding. This means the same body both defines the rules and controls the money.

This structure leads to market distortions. In some cases, the cost of a state-funded grant is higher than a private tuition fee in the same university – a clear sign of weak external financial oversight.

If the Ministry of Finance or an independent expert board evaluated spending and outcomes, grant sizes and allocations could be adjusted based on real performance and needs.

Private schools and universities face similar challenges. Because the Ministry acts both as regulator and financier, administrative barriers often discourage private initiatives.

A more balanced approach would be to delegate financial decisions to inter-ministerial commissions or independent agencies, allowing the Education Ministry to focus on quality and standards.

Why Division of Roles Matters

1. Transparency. When decisions are reviewed by multiple agencies, mistakes and misuse become less likely.

2. Professional focus. Doctors, teachers, and scientists concentrate on their core work, while economists manage resources.

3. Accountability. Each institution is responsible for its part of the process, making management more predictable.

4. Budget efficiency. Independent financial evaluation directs public funds toward the most productive areas.

5. Support for private initiatives. When regulation and funding are separate, administrative barriers decline, and innovation grows.

What Kazakhstan can do

1. Audit ministerial functions. Clearly define which tasks belong to professional regulation and which to economic management.

2. Establish independent agencies. Create specialized bodies to assess the economic impact of programs in health and education.

3. Implement cross-ministerial coordination. All decisions with budget implications should undergo external financial review.

4. Enhance public accountability. Ministries should report on results, not only expenditures.

5. Encourage private sector participation. Simplify rules and ensure equal access for private clinics and schools.

Each ministry should focus on what it does best. Sectoral ministries should manage policies, standards, and quality. Economic authorities should handle budgets, efficiency, and fiscal balance.

Separating these functions will not complicate governance – it will make it more transparent and effective. In the long run, this approach will strengthen trust, improve performance, and make public services more responsive to citizens’ needs.