Lusia Kornelius and Zucky Bauleth-Nashima
As the global market experiences major uncertainties, probable recession and unprecedented social dynamics, there is pressure on healthcare systems, and the Namibian health sector is no exception. Namibia is facing significant challenges concerning procurement and availability of essential medical supplies. Recent tariff hikes under U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration not only magnify the trade war but also disrupt the global supply chain, impacting the export and import of goods across the globe. The effect is directly felt by pharmaceutical suppliers and distributors, thereby resulting in disrupted or delayed service delivery. This disruption may cause friendshoring and rerouting to stable countries, which may require new regulations and negotiations.
The Namibian health sector, already exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and still to recover, is being further impaired by the ongoing economic turmoil. The pandemic revealed the importance of having intact health systems and policies to combat diseases. The shift was seen in the way policies were swiftly replaced with immediate plans and control mechanisms to contain the pandemic and ensure the necessary supplies were available to ensure the health of the population. A lot of practices, such as e-business, virtual consultations and digital marketing, were intensified during the pandemic and have remained normal practices to date.
Although the Public Procurement Act 15 of 2015, which serves as a framework for acquiring goods and services in the public health sector, has advantages such as promoting transparency, value for money, empowering Namibian businesses, promoting local sourcing and employment creation, there is a dire need for reform to cater to the ever-changing dynamics, especially in the health sector. Namibia witnessed a robust move in the procurement sphere in March 2025, whereby a bridge on the B1 road between Windhoek and Rehoboth collapsed due to heavy rainfall. Motorists could not travel between two towns, so an alternative route was swiftly provided using the emergency procurement method. The same approach could be applied to the procurement of critical supplies in the health sector, such as chronic medication, anaesthetic supplies, prophylaxis, and preventative utilities like mosquito nets that are repeatedly out of stock. This method should, however, not be a leeway to avoid proper planning and accountability. It should be used in unforeseen circumstances to allow operational continuity while the traditional procurement procedures are being followed.
In addition, the direct procurement method can potentially be a redress in critical sectors like health. Allowing health institutions to procure directly from suppliers instead of going through the middleman not only reduces cost but also allows the public entities to have control over contract performance and directly build relationships with suppliers. This procedure can come in handy when there are issues of cash flow or times of budget allocation, as the buyer can easily negotiate payment terms. State institutions may give suppliers comfort and guaranteed payment as opposed to a small private entity when negotiating for prompt delivery.
Policymakers could also emulate success stories in Africa and around the globe to address immediate challenges in the health sector. For instance, the Rwandan government has a tracking system known as the Electronic Logistics Management Information System (ELMIS). It reportedly improved the country’s procurement and distribution of essential medical supplies through effective data usage and collaboration with local suppliers. Ghana’s procurement innovation strategy is also worth benchmarking. Its National Health Insurance Scheme has partnered with private stakeholders and is incorporating e-procurement solutions to streamline supply chains. One can also zoom in on the United Kingdom’s National Health Service approach of collaborative procurement to harness bargaining power. Countries like Tanzania, India and China have invested in pharmaceutical manufacturing hubs, which have proven to provide timely and affordable supplies.
Despite a provision of direct and emergency procurement methods of critical health supplies in the Act, various institutions continue to experience stockouts and delays of critical goods, resulting in poor service delivery. It is evident there are more factors contributing to the problem, such as poor store management, ineffective inventory management systems, poor planning, uniform decision-making despite available data, as well lack of local manufacturing hubs.
A case of malaria infections that spike every rainy season is one of the scenarios that can inform therapeutic committees, laboratory workforces, and public health surveillance work groups to be prepared. Seasonal flu is another scenario where one can use on-demand forecasting, as every winter we expect a surge; one can stock up on anti-influenza drugs and immune boosters, e.g., vitamin C, to prevent service disruption. A proactive approach and disaster management plans should form part of the healthcare sector, not only in human intervention preparedness but also budget-wise, in case of any worst-case scenario.
While it is essential to review the current rigorous procurement methods, the systemic review should cut across all other factors that contribute to stockouts and public service interruptions. Proven methods like effective stock management principles, prior planning and capacity building for local manufacturing can help navigate procurement hurdles. It is important to study the usage and ensure buffer stock is maintained while prioritising demand forecasting. The ability to interpret data, make informed decisions, and analyse trends can also avoid recurring situations. Data such as the drug resistance pattern can inform policymakers and management in procuring effective medical supplies.
We truly believe the Procurement Act review, a systematic overhaul of the procurement and supply chain procedures, and collaboration and partnership can overcome procurement obstacles in the health sector.
Lusia Kornelius is a logistics and supply chain management professional with an honours in business administration. A former health sector employee, she now works as a business development consultant, specialising in procurement, project, and business development. She is currently pursuing an MBA in Management Strategy. Zucky Bauleth-Nashima, writing in her personal capacity, is a technical procurement officer at NIP/CDC. She holds qualifications in biomedical sciences, medical pharmacology, clinical research, and an MBA in management strategy. She is a PhD candidate in medical microbiology.
