Unpacking power dynamics in research and evaluation on social accountability for sexual and reproductive health and rights.


Journal

International journal for equity in health
ISSN: 1475-9276
Titre abrégé: Int J Equity Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101147692

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 02 2021
Historique:
received: 27 11 2020
accepted: 01 02 2021
entrez: 7 2 2021
pubmed: 8 2 2021
medline: 14 9 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Over the past decade, social accountability for health has coalesced into a distinct field of research and practice. Whether explicitly stated or not, changed power relations are at the heart of what social accountability practitioners seek, particularly in the context of sexual and reproductive health. Yet, evaluations of social accountability programs frequently fail to assess important power dynamics. In this commentary, we argue that we must include an examination of power in research and evaluation of social accountability in sexual and reproductive health, and suggest ways to do this. The authors are part of a community of practice on measuring social accountability and health outcomes. We share key lessons from our efforts to conduct power sensitive research using different approaches and methods.First, participatory research and evaluation approaches create space for program participants to engage actively in evaluations by defining success. Participation is also one of the key elements of feminist evaluation, which centers power relations rooted in gender. Participatory approaches can strengthen 'traditional' health evaluation approaches by ensuring that the changes assessed are meaningful to communities.Fields from outside health offer approaches that help to describe and assess changes in power dynamics. For example, realist evaluation analyses the causal processes, or mechanisms, grounded in the interactions between social, political and other structures and human agency; programs try to influence these structures and/or human agency. Process tracing requires describing the mechanisms underlying change in power dymanics in a very detailed way, promoting insight into how changes in power relationships are related to the broader program.Finally, case aggregation and comparison entail the aggregation of data from multiple cases to refine theories about when and how programs work. Case aggregation can allow for nuanced attention to context while still producing lessons that are applicable to inform programming more broadly.We hope this brief discussion encourages other researchers and evaluators to share experiences of analysing power relations as part of evaluation of social accountability interventions for sexual and reproductive health so that together, we improve methodology in this crucial area.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33549116
doi: 10.1186/s12939-021-01398-2
pii: 10.1186/s12939-021-01398-2
pmc: PMC7866686
doi:

Types de publication

Letter Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

56

Subventions

Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International

Références

BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Jul 22;20(1):679
pubmed: 32698814
Health Policy Plan. 2017 Dec 1;32(suppl_5):v1-v3
pubmed: 29244107
Reprod Health Matters. 2018 Nov;26(54):137-144
pubmed: 30427282
Health Policy Plan. 2018 May 1;33(4):611-621
pubmed: 29471544
Gates Open Res. 2020 Mar 5;4:26
pubmed: 33134856
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Mar 29;17(1):34
pubmed: 30925889
Health Policy Plan. 2016 Oct;31(8):1069-78
pubmed: 27117482
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016 Dec;135(3):372-379
pubmed: 27784594
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Aug;5(8):
pubmed: 32759186
BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2011 Dec 16;11 Suppl 3:S4
pubmed: 22376057
AIDS Care. 2013;25 Suppl 1:S55-66
pubmed: 23745631
Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2019 May;27(2):1622357
pubmed: 31533591
Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2020 Dec;28(3):1794411
pubmed: 32835637
Lancet. 2019 Jun 15;393(10189):2369-2371
pubmed: 31155277
Glob Public Health. 2018 Dec;13(12):1853-1864
pubmed: 29671373
Int J Equity Health. 2020 Jul 8;19(1):111
pubmed: 32635915
J Health Popul Nutr. 2020 Dec 7;39(1):13
pubmed: 33287891
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Aug 22;18(1):653
pubmed: 30134881
Health Policy Plan. 2017 Feb;32(1):125-140
pubmed: 27375128

Auteurs

Marta Schaaf (M)

Independent Consultant, 357 Sixth Ave., NY, 11215, Brooklyn, USA. martaschaafconsult@gmail.com.

Suzanne Cant (S)

World Vision International, 39 Garden St, Blairgowrie, Victoria, 3942, Australia.

Joanna Cordero (J)

Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland.

Sana Contractor (S)

COPASAH Sexual and Reproductive Rights Hub, CHSJ, Basement of Young Women's Hostel No 2, Avenue 21, G block, Saket, New Delhi, 110017, India.

Etobssie Wako (E)

CARE USA, 151 Ellis Street NE, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Cicely Marston (C)

Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH