Search

In this paper we aim at determining the link between EIA report substance and administratively just EIA decisions. In so doing, previous research based on 42 case studies from South Africa, which analysed whether they comprised administratively just decisions (i.e. that were lawful, procedurally fair and reasonable) were reviewed for the substance of the EIA reports on which the decisions were based. The research found that administratively just decisions can be achieved even with weak EIA report substance in areas such as: need and desirability, identifying alternatives, dealing with significance, and addressing mitigation measures. We thereby conclude that administrative justice may be a false safety net in ensuring more environmentally sustainable EIA outcomes if not supported and informed by good EIA report substance. We conclude by making recommendations to improve substance and thereby strengthening administrative justice in EIA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Criteria for the evaluation of the effectiveness of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) have evolved internationally from the requirement for mere procedural effectiveness, to include criteria such as substantial and incremental effectiveness. This paper provides an overview of the international evolution of effectiveness evaluation for SEA and its parallel progression in South Africa. Within this context, the effectiveness of the two SEA case studies conducted in support of national-scale renewable energy planning in South Africa was reviewed against internationally recognised effectiveness criteria to test their ability to influence decision making for renewable energy projects in the country. The evaluation was informed by the role of the first author as the project director in the case studies. The review found the SEAs to be partially effective, mainly through the introduction of new legislation, processes and systems at the national level that operationalise the outcomes of the SEA. A fundamental limitation emerged in determining whether incremental effectiveness had been achieved as it is too soon to evaluate the effectiveness of the recently promulgated legislation and instruments. The paper builds on previous work on effectiveness evaluations and provides the perspective of an administrative implementer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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 decision-making in the development and implementation of public services. 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). 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. 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. 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on South Africa's post-apartheid foreign policy decision-making has stagnated. For more than a quarter century analysts have generally drawn on secondary material from other scholars, newspaper reporting, and the speeches of government officials to elucidate how South Africa crafts and carries out its foreign policy. The accessibility of previously classified archival documents and the availability of policy makers for research interviews holds the potential to advance scholarship on South African foreign policy along two fronts. First, these primary sources offer insight into foreign policy decision-making processes. And second, they encourage a critical re-evaluation of many of the traditional understandings and tropes that have dominated the study of South African foreign policy. This paper outlines the state of foreign policy studies in South Africa and then demonstrates the power of primary research to alter key ideas about the conduct and content of South African foreign policy through three case studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

District-level initiatives to improve maternal, neonatal and child health (MNCH) generally do not take governance as their primary lens on health system strengthening. This paper is a case study of a district and sub-district governance mechanism, the Monitoring and Response Unit (MRU), which aimed to improve MNCH outcomes in two districts of South Africa. The MRU was introduced as a decision-making and accountability structure, and constituted of a "triangle" of managers, clinicians and information officers. An independent evaluation of the MRU initiative was conducted, three years after establishment, involving interviews with 89 district actors. Interviewees reported extensive changes in the scope, quality and organization of MNCH services, attributing these to the introduction of the MRU and enhanced support from district clinicians. We describe both the formal and informal aspects of the MRU as a governance mechanism, and then consider the pathways through which the MRU plausibly acted as a catalyst for change, using the institutional constructs of credible commitment, coordination and cooperation. In particular, the MRU promoted the formation of non-hierarchical collaborative networks; improved coordination between community, PHC and hospital services; and shaped collective sense-making in positive ways. We conclude that innovations in governance could add significant value to the district health system strengthening for improved MNCH. However, this requires a shift in focus from strengthening the front-line of service delivery, to change at the meso-level of sub-district and district decision-making; and from purely technical, data-driven to more holistic approaches that engage collective mindsets, widen participation in decision-making and nurture political leadership skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since the publication of the reports by the Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH), many research papers have documented inequities, explaining causal pathways in order to inform policy and programmatic decision-making. At the international level, the sustainable development goals (SDGs) reflect an attempt to bring together these themes and the complexities involved in defining a comprehensive development framework. However, to date, much less has been done to address the monitoring challenges, that is, how data generation, analysis and use are to become routine tasks. Objective: To test proposed indicators of social determinants of health (SDH), gender, equity, and human rights with respect to their relevance in tracking progress in universal health coverage and population health (level and distribution). Design: In an attempt to explore these monitoring challenges, indicators covering a wide range of social determinants were tested in four country case studies (Bangladesh, Brazil, South Africa, and Vietnam) for their technical feasibility, reliability, and validity, and their communicability and usefulness to policy-makers. Twelve thematic domains with 20 core indicators covering different aspects of equity, human rights, gender, and SDH were tested through a review of data sources, descriptive analyses, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions. To test the communicability and usefulness of the domains, domain narratives that explained the causal pathways were presented to policy-makers, managers, the media, and civil society leaders. Results: For most countries, monitoring is possible, as some data were available for most of the core indicators. However, a qualitative assessment showed that technical feasibility, reliability, and validity varied across indicators and countries. Producing understandable and useful information proved challenging, and particularly so in translating indicator definitions and data into meaningful lay and managerial narratives, and effectively communicating links to health and ways in which the information could improve decision-making. Conclusions: This exercise revealed that for monitoring to produce reliable data collection, analysis, and discourse, it will need to be adapted to each national context and institutionalised into national systems. This will require that capacities and resources for this and subsequent communication of results are increased across countries for both national and international monitoring, including the successful implementation of the SDGs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Resource allocation in health is universally challenging, but especially so in resource-constrained contexts in the Global South. Pursuing a strategy of evidence-based decision-making and using tools such as Health Technology Assessment (HTA), can help address issues relating to both affordability and equity when allocating resources. Three BRICS and Global South countries, China, India and South Africa have committed to strengthening HTA capacity and developing their domestic HTA systems, with the goal of getting evidence translated into policy. Through assessing and comparing the HTA journey of each country it may be possible to identify common problems and shareable insights. Objectives: This collaborative paper aimed to share knowledge on strengthening HTA systems to enable enhanced evidence-based decision-making in the Global South by: Identifying common barriers and enablers in three BRICS countries in the Global South; and Exploring how South-South collaboration can strengthen HTA capacity and utilisation for better healthcare decision-making. Methods: A descriptive and explorative comparative analysis was conducted comprising a Within-Case analysis to produce a narrative of the HTA journey in each country and an Across-Case analysis to explore both knowledge that could be shared and any potential knowledge gaps. Results: Analyses revealed that China, India and South Africa share many barriers to strengthening and developing HTA systems such as: (1) Minimal HTA expertise; (2) Weak health data infrastructure; (3) Rising healthcare costs; (4) Fragmented healthcare systems; and (5) Significant growth in non-communicable diseases. Stakeholder engagement and institutionalisation of HTA were identified as two conducive factors for strengthening HTA systems. Conclusion: China, India and South Africa have all committed to establishing robust HTA systems to inform evidence-based priority setting and have experienced similar challenges. Engagement among countries of the Global South can provide a supportive platform to share knowledge that is more applicable and pragmatic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]