Realist evaluation in times of decolonising global health.
decolonisation
emancipation
global health
participatory action research
power
realist evaluation
Journal
The International journal of health planning and management
ISSN: 1099-1751
Titre abrégé: Int J Health Plann Manage
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8605825
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2022
Dec 2022
Historique:
revised:
20
05
2022
received:
24
01
2022
accepted:
24
05
2022
pubmed:
2
6
2022
medline:
31
12
2022
entrez:
1
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Realist evaluation (RE) is a theory-driven evaluation approach inspired by scientific realism. It has become increasingly popular in the field of global health where it is often applied in low- and middle-income countries. This makes it timely to discuss RE's relationship to the emerging decolonisation of global health movement. In this short perspective, we argue that the principles and practices that underpin RE have great potential to contribute to the decolonisation endeavour. Both the focus on the inclusion of local stakeholders and the openness to the rival theories these stakeholders bring to the fore, are promising. However, in practice, we see that a lack of acknowledgement of power imbalances and different ontologies and an overreliance on Western-based theories thwart this potential. We therefore suggest that realist evaluations performed by external researchers, especially in the field of global health, should actively engage with issues of (power) inequities. This is not only the just thing to do, but will also contribute to a better understanding of the intervention and may facilitate the emancipation of the disenfranchised. One way of doing this is through the adoption of participatory (action) research methods, currently underused in realist evaluations. We finally give a short example of an evaluation that combines emancipatory and participatory practice development with a realist approach. The Afya-Tek project in Tanzania has an innovative bottom-up approach throughout the full evaluation cycle and shows the possible strength of the proposed combination to create better interventions, more empowered stakeholders, and more illuminating programme theories.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
37-44Subventions
Organisme : Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Organisme : Fondation Botnar
Informations de copyright
© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. Sage; 1997.
Mukumbang FC, Kabongo EM, Eastwood JG. Examining the application of retroductive theorizing in realist-informed studies. Int J Qual Methods. 2021;20:160940692110535. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211053516
Marchal B, van Belle S, van Olmen J, Hoerée T, Kegels G. Is realist evaluation keeping its promise? A review of published empirical studies in the field of health systems research. Evaluation. 2012;18(2):192-212. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389012442444
Affun-Adegbulu C, Adegbulu O. Decolonising global (public) health: from western universalism to global pluriversalities. BMJ Glob Health. 2020;5(8):e002947. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002947
Abimbola S, Pai M. Will global health survive its decolonisation? Lancet. 2020;396(10263):1627-1628. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32417-X
Khan M, Abimbola S, Aloudat T, Capobianco E, Hawkes S, Rahman-Shepherd A. Decolonising global health in 2021: a roadmap to move from rhetoric to reform. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(3):e005604. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005604
Bhaskar R. A Realist Theory of Science. Verso books; 2008.
Astbury B, Leeuw FL. Unpacking black boxes: mechanisms and theory building in evaluation. Am J Eval. 2010;31(3):363-381. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214010371972
De Weger E, van Vooren NJE, Wong G, et al. What's in a realist configuration? Deciding which causal configurations to use, how, and why. Int J Qual Methods. 2020:160940692093857. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920938577
Manzano A. The craft of interviewing in realist evaluation. Evaluation. 2016;22(3):342-360. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389016638615
Fletcher AJ. Applying critical realism in qualitative research: methodology meets method. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2017;20(2):181-194. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1144401
Mukumbang FC. Retroductive theorizing: a contribution of critical realism to mixed methods research. J Mix Methods Res. 2021:155868982110498. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898211049847
Henrich J, Heine SJ, Norenzayan A. Most people are not WEIRD. Nature. 2010;466(7302):29. https://doi.org/10.1038/466029a
Olufadewa II, Adesina MA, Ayorinde T. From Africa to the World: reimagining Africa's research capacity and culture in the global knowledge economy. J Glob Health. 2020;10(1):010321. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.10.010321
Garcia-Basteiro AL, Abimbola S. The challenges of defining global health research. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(12):e008169. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-008169
Cornwall A, Jewkes R. What is participatory research? Soc Sci Med. 1995;41(12):1667-1676. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(95)00127-S
Vaughn LM, Jacquez F. Participatory research methods-choice points in the research process. Journal of Participatory Research Methods. 2020;1(1):1-14. https://doi.org/10.35844/001c.13244
Khan C, Chovanec DM. Is participatory action research relevant in the Canadian workplace. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Education. 2010;5(1):34-44. https://doi.org/10.20355/c5pk58
Pawson R. The Science of Evaluation: A Realist Manifesto. Sage publications; 2013.
Mukumbang FC, van Wyk B. Leveraging the Photovoice methodology for critical realist theorizing. Int J Qual Methods. 2020:160940692095898. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920958981
Westhorp G, Stevens K, Rogers PJ. Using realist action research for service redesign. Evaluation. 2016;22(3):361-379. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389016656514
Gilmore B. Realist evaluations in low- and middle-income countries: reflections and recommendations from the experiences of a foreign researcher. BMJ Glob Health. 2019;4(5):e001638. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001638
Mukumbang FC, Marchal BE, van Belle S, van Wyk B. Using the realist interview approach to maintain theoretical awareness in realist studies. Qual Res. 2020;20(4):485-515:1468794119881985. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794119881985
Wong G. Data gathering in realist reviews: looking for needles in haystacks. In: Emmel N, Greenhalgh J, Manzano A, Monaghan M, Dalkin S, eds. Doing realist research. Sage; 2018:131-145.
Pawson R. Digging for nuggets: how ‘bad’ research can yield ‘good’ evidence. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2006;9(2):127-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570600595314
Roy A. Worlding the South: toward a post-colonial urban theory. In: Parnell S, Oldfield S, eds. The Routledge handbook on cities of the Global South. Routledge; 2014:31-42.
Langacker RW. Grammar and Conceptualization. Mouton de Gruyter; 1999:427.
De Souza DE. A critical realist approach to systems thinking in evaluation. Evaluation. 2022;0(0):72-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890211064639
Rifkin SB, Muller F, Bichmann W. Primary health care: on measuring participation. Soc Sci Med. 1988;26(9):931-940. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(88)90413-3
Tornquist O, Webster N, Stokke K. Rethinking Popular Representation. Palgrave Macmillan; 2009:273.
Masunaga Y, Jaiteh F, Manneh E, et al. The community Lab of ideas for health: community-based transdisciplinary solutions in a malaria elimination trial in the Gambia. Original research. Front Public Health. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.637714
Sarkar NDP, Peeters Grietens K, Dillip A. Towards a digitally-enabled, community-based responsive health system in Tanzania: a formative study for the Afya-Tek digitised health initiative. Lancet Global Health. 2020;8:S35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30176-5