Lessons from community participation in primary health care and water resource governance in South Africa: a narrative review

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorJennifer Hove
dc.contributor.authorLucia D’Ambruoso
dc.contributor.authorKathleen Kahn
dc.contributor.authorSophie Witter
dc.contributor.authorMaria van der Merwe
dc.contributor.authorDenny Mabetha
dc.contributor.authorKingsley Temboh
dc.contributor.authorRhian Twine
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-01T18:51:27Z
dc.date.available2024-04-01T18:51:27Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.description.abstractBackground: In South Africa, community participation has been embraced through the development of progressive policies to address past inequities. However, limited information is available to understand community involvement in priority setting, planning and decisionmaking in the development and implementation of public services. Objective: This narrative review aims to provide evidence on forms, extents, contexts and dynamics of community participation in primary health care (PHC) and water governance in South Africa and draw cross-cutting lessons. This paper focuses on health and water governance structures, such as health committees, Catchment Management Agencies (CMA), Water User Associations (WUAs), Irrigation Boards (IBs) and Community Management Forums (CMFs). Methods: Articles were sourced from Medline (Ovid), EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, WHO Global Health Library, Global Health and Science Citation Index between 1994 and 2020 reporting on community participation in health and water governance in South Africa. Databases were searched using key terms to identify relevant research articles and grey literature. Twenty-one articles were included and analysed thematically. Results: There is limited evidence on how health committees are functioning in all provinces in South Africa. Existing evidence shows that health committees are not functioning effectively due to lack of clarity on roles, autonomy, power, support, and capacity. There was slow progress in establishment of water governance structures, although these are autonomous and have mechanisms for democratic control, unlike health committees. Participation in CMAs/WUAs/IBs/CMFs is also not effective due to manipulation of spaces by elites, lack of capacity of previously disadvantaged individuals, inadequate incentives, and low commitment to the process by stakeholders. Conclusion: Power and authority in decision-making, resources and accountability are key for effective community participation of marginalized people. Practical guidance is urgently required on how mandated participatory governance structures can be sustained and linked to wider governance systems to improve service delivery.
dc.description.librarianPM2023
dc.facultyFaculty of Health Sciences
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10539/38264
dc.language.isoen
dc.schoolPublic Health
dc.subjectCommunity participation; primary health care; water governance; health committees; catchment management agencies
dc.titleLessons from community participation in primary health care and water resource governance in South Africa: a narrative review
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
ZGHA_15_2004730.pdf
Size:
1.21 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.43 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
SA-MRC/Wits Agincourt Unit (Research Outputs/Publications)