Q4.1 Core Health Policy in Context How would you briefly describe the policy process?
From an individual point of view, evaluating the academic rigor of sources for HPSR is always complex (Gilsen and World Health Organization, 2012). These references provide essential guides on the principles governing the evaluation in terms of academic rigor of HPSR sources.
To start with, the credibility and ownership of the source are very important. Therefore, for me, scrutinizing the credentials and skills of the writer(s) are paramount. HPSR, as emphasized in "Health policy and systems research: Gilson’s (2012) “a methodology reader” is not an easy read; it requires specialization and high levels of knowledge.
Secondly, the peer review mechanism is instrumental in enhancing validity of a source (Gilson & World Health Organization, 2012). Academic merit demands peer-reviewed resources. The reference to the same source, "Health policy and systems research: the validity, rigor and systematicness in the research process can be highlighted by the article, Methodology for a ‘Methodology Reader’ (Gilson, 2012).
Finally, the reliability of the originating media may not be overlooked. The participation of renowned organizations like the WHO provides legitimacy to HPSR sources of information. Other references to WHO publications such as “World Health Report 2000” add weight to these sources for the purposes of supporting or undermining this discussion as well.
Lastly, the mode of approach as well as the research design employed in a given source is very essential (Gilson and World Health Organization, 2012; Peters 2018). HPSR is normally multidisciplinary; it employs numerous disciplines such as economics, sociology, anthropology, politics, health studies, and medical statistics in its practice.
Finally, the relevance of the source to health systems and policy as one of the paramount factors (Peters, 2018). HPSR aims at changing policies and systems of health to achieve equitable outcomes and enhance quality of services through purposeful pursuit of health goals. This is mirrored at times by the references that place emphasis on policy influence and pursuit of healthcare goals.
The above discussion summarises some of the relevant considerations when evaluating the credibility of the HPSR sources on which one can draw to inform how to improve health system and policies. Collectively, they jointly maintain integrity and quality of research in such dynamic and crucial area.
Q4.2 Complementary History of Medicine At the start of South Africa’s democracy, many brilliant policies were created. What are the factors that impacted the poor implementation of many of these policies?
Soon after the beginning of South Africa’s new democracy, a succession of carefully considered measures was enacted to help combat inherited problems stemming from apartheid. However, implementation of these policies faced many challenges which impeded their effectiveness. This paper will examine the core underlying causes as to why the implementations fell short of the optimal standards.
Apartheid’s legacy looms large over South Africa after apartheid (AHPSR, NAIHSR, 2008). This is due to apartheid regime which was a system of maintaining segregation on racial grounds. This led to permanent social, economic and political differences that are still in place even long after formal apartheid. The policies that were aimed at improving social equity and justice always clashed with the existing inequalities and social divisions, which made their application very difficult (Gilson & World Health Organization, 2012).
Another major limitation was resource constraints (AHPSR, 2008). The newly-elected government lacked both financial and manpower support. Though extensive policies with high expectations were put into place, enough funds were not available in order to do so. The resource deficit hindered supply of required platforms, systems, and other means for realizing these targets. This was like trying to build a magnificent house with limited money and labor.
It became more complex when issues of politics came in. Here we have a multi-party arrangement and a politically fragmented situation. Since apartheid was abolished in South Africa, there has been an increase in the political parties and interest, causing struggles and disagreements for powers. Political wrangles posed hurdles to enacting a harmonious policy. Sometimes, it was similar to group work where people had disagreements on how they should move forward with their studies (CHEPSAA, 2015).
The governance and bureaucracy did not provide good conditions for effective policy implementation in South Africa. Government institutions had to be transformed – many of them were inefficient with a high dose of corruption (AHPSR, 2008). Policy translations were affected by bureaucratic constraints like inadequate capacity and expertise. It seemed the good builders had not yet arrived, as the blueprints for the policies appeared well designed but the builders seemed not experienced or efficient.
Social discontent and protest was widespread (AHSPR, 2008). Various societies and special interests associations went to the street demonstrating at how their grievances had not been attended to. The protests may lead to disruption of the policy application in an orderly manner as well as to generate uncertainties, just like some ongoing project under development where interruptions occur every now and then.
At times, however, the consequences were inadvertent (AHPSR, 2008). While some well-meaning policies such as land reform or affirmative actions met resistance and added other problems. Like an unexpected difficulty that occurs when building an edifice, the implementation of these policies was made complex by these unintended side effects.
It had a lot to do with economic factors [AHPSR, 2008]. This included, among other things, rampant unemployment and glaring inequalities that undermined its capacity to fund and sustain the programmes. Such policies were equivalent to trying to construct a house without even the required bricks which were supposedly non-existent.
The world was watching as South Africa moved toward a democracy (AHPSR, 2008). Therefore, there are more complications for policy implementation due to external pressures and influences that can hamper effective implementation of policies made by government. It felt as if every construction activity on the worksite were always being supervised by outsiders.
Finally, the problems which these policies tried to resolve entailed enormous complexity (AHPSR, 2008). Multiple methods of solving these deeply established societal and financial concerns were needed. These problems constituted some large conundrum involving multiple elements that would take time and deliberation to untangle them.
Finally, South Africa’s policy after apartheid had many problems when it came into reality despite being ideal and promising. There was a combination of factors that made these difficulties. These included legacy of apartheid, resource constraint, political and bureaucratically challenges, social unrest , unforeseen effect of this policies, economic limitations, international pressure, and complexity of this problem itself. Slowly but surely, South Africa is making headway by tackling these concerns, and it has not been an easy journey for effective implementation of policy in post-apartheid period.
Q4.3 Cross-cutting Research Conceptualization What is the difference between formal research and simply gathering information?
Formal research differs from just collecting information in that they possess unique attributes such as objectives and operations. These are substantive and affect results and uses for every approach.
Formal research and informal data collection in the natural world are two fundamentally different entities. Research has been defined as a formal and an ordered manner on the basis of finding answers to specific questions, testing hypothesis and making contribution to an overall body on knowledge (Davis et al.,2014). It follows rigorous methods and established research paradigms in order to ensure that the results are valid and reliable. However, an informal kind of data collection is much more fluid and randomised in nature and may stem from either out of personal interest, awareness purposes, or just practical necessity for instance. The argument is neither empirically sound nor rooted in any theory.
The essence to which these two ways differ manifests in the fact that their purposes are substantially different. In formal research, there are usually well defined research objectives. Its purpose is to answer research queries, solving problems and making contribution in some filed of knowledge. Often this leads to theory, modelling or practical solutions with significant impacts. However, informal information gathering often fails to have explicit research objectives. Such a data collection is normally conducted for getting data necessary for daily works and acquiring personal knowledge that can be used right away without necessarily being scientifically utilized.
Another difference lies in the processes involved in the two activities. Formal research involves a clear process such as identifying the problem, researching literature, generating hypotheses, collecting of data, analyzing data and interpreting it. This involves choosing the appropriate research paradigms, conceptual frameworks and research methods. Formal data analysis is usually large, including things like statistical techniques or, perhaps, more complex approaches used for concluding about real new results. On the other hand, random information gathering normally does not utilize an orderly approach where data is systematically collected following a prescribed procedure. Data analysis is usually insignificant or absent, and information appears literally with minimal or zero research.
Finally, the process of formal research and informal information gathering are greatly different in nature, means and ultimate purpose. Formal research is a systematic, rigorous and purposeful approach that aims at making contribution to knowledge and practicality. However, informal information gathering is mostly unplanned, ad hoc, and based on some urgent utilitarian or purely individual motives.
Comments