Perceived Policy Appropriateness as an Interpretive Mechanism of Citizen Compliance: Toward an Integrated Framework for Malaria Control Policy Implementation in Uganda

Citizen compliance is central to policy implementation, particularly where policy outcomes depend on voluntary action by individuals, households and communities. However, explanations that focus primarily on information exposure, individual motivation or institutional conditions may not fully explain how citizens evaluate policy recommendations within their social and institutional contexts. This qualitative case study examines the concept of perceived policy appropriateness as an interpretive mechanism for understanding citizens’ compliance with the national malaria control policy recommendations in Gulu District, Northern Uganda. Data were collected through interviews with 25 community members and 25 key informants, complemented by a review of policy documents. The data were analysed thematically, informed by the Behavioural Public Administration (BPA), Institutional Theory and the Health Belief Model (HBM) perspectives. Five interconnected dimensions emerged: sociocultural interpretation of malaria, communication credibility, institutional and operational conditions, governance processes and citizens’ compliance decisions. Participants’ accounts indicated that interpretations of malaria, the credibility and accessibility of health information, experiences of public institutions and material and institutional constraints informed responses to recommended practices. The paper therefore proposes an integrated interpretive framework that distinguishes policy understanding and evaluation from practical capacity to comply and actual behavioural responses. The framework offers a conceptual contribution to policy implementation scholarship rather than a validated causal model and requires further empirical testing in different contexts and policies.