Every loaf of bread is political - Reflections on collective care responses to Covid-19 in Cape Town.

Feminist perspectives on care have demonstrated how capitalism undervalues care work. The Covid-19 pandemic highlighted this further, as systems of production and social reproduction became destabilized globally. In many countries, the formal pandemic response fell short of attending to the daily, fundamental care needs of people living through the crisis, especially those compromised by the socio-economic effects of the pandemic. These needs were often attended to at the community level. This article explores a community-led network of care, known as CANs, that emerged in response to the pandemic in Cape Town. It makes three overarching observations. The first is that community-led responses were characterised by a push towards the collectivisation of care work. The second is that this enabled emergent strategies and relational practices of care, centring notions of solidarity, inter-dependence and horizontal exchange of resources and knowledge. Finally, we observed that, although the devaluation of care work limited the recognition and material support extended to CANs, opportunities to re-politicise care work as resistance work emerged. These represent a prefigurative moment in which alternative logics and strategies can transform the vision of our health and care systems, and the notion of community participation in and ownership of those systems.

A socio-political history of South Africa's National Health Insurance.

BACKGROUND: Spurred by the WHO's endorsement of universal health coverage as a goal of all health systems, many countries are undertaking health financing reforms. The nature of these reforms, and the policy processes by which they are achieved, will depend on context-specific factors, including the history of reform efforts and the political imperatives driving reforms. South Africa's pursuit of universal health coverage through a National Health Insurance is the latest in a nearly 100-year history of health system reform efforts shaped by social and political realities. METHODS: We conducted an interdisciplinary, retrospective literature review to explore how these reform efforts have unfolded, and been shaped by the contextual realities of the moment. We began the review by identifying peer-reviewed literature on health system reform in South Africa, and iteratively expanded the search through author tracking, citation tracking and purposeful searches for material on particular events or processes referenced in the initial body of evidence. Data was extracted and organised chronologically into nine periods. RESULTS: The analysis suggests that in South Africa politics; the power of the private sector; competing policy priorities and budgetary constraints; and ideas, values and ideologies have been particularly important in constraining, and sometimes spurring, health system reform efforts. Political transitions and pressures - including the introduction of apartheid in 1948, anti-apartheid opposition, the transition to democracy, and corruption and governance failures - have alternately created political imperatives for reform, and constrained reform efforts. In addition, the country's political history has given rise to dominant ideas, values and ideologies that imbue health system reform with a particular social meaning. While these ideas and values increase opposition and complicate reform efforts, they also help to expose the inequities of the current system as problematic and re-emphasise the need for reform. CONCLUSION: Ultimately, this analysis demonstrates the context-specific nature of health system reform processes and the influence of history on what sorts of reforms are politically feasible and socially acceptable, even in the context of a global push for universal health coverage.

What research evidence can support the decolonisation of global health? Making space for deeper scholarship in global health journals.

Much of the current global health publishing landscape is restricted in its epistemological diversity, relying heavily on a biomedical lens to examine and report on global health issues. In this Viewpoint, we argue that the space within global health journals needs to be expanded to include diverse forms of research scholarship, thereby shifting the kinds of stories that get told in these spaces. We particularly call for the inclusion of deeper research that values the tacit, experiential knowledge possessed by actors (eg, communities, health-care workers, policy makers, activisits, and researchers) in low-income and middle-income countries, and legitimises the perspectives of local doers and thinkers; research that pays careful attention to context, and does not treat local realities as mere background occurrences; and research that draws on alternative, counter-dominant epistemologies, that allow for the crucial examination of power imbalances, and that challenge hegemonic discourses in global health. To decolonise academic work in the global health field, we should look beyond diversity in research authorship. We need to tackle other unconscious biases such as presumptions about the superiority of particular forms of evidence over others, and thereby expand the plurality of perspectives in global health.

Role of actor networks in primary health care implementation in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Primary health care (PHC) improvement is often undermined by implementation gaps in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The influence that actor networks might have on the implementation has received little attention up to this point. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to offer insights about actor networks and how they support PHC implementation in LMICs. METHODS: We reviewed primary studies that utilised social network analysis (SNA) to determine actor networks and their influence on aspects of PHC in LMICs following the five-stage scoping review methodological framework by Arksey and O'Malley. Narrative synthesis was applied to describe the included studies and the results. RESULTS: Thirteen primary studies were found eligible for this review. Ten network types were identified from the included papers across different contexts and actors: professional advice networks, peer networks, support/supervisory networks, friendship networks, referral networks, community health committee (CHC) networks, inter-sectoral collaboration networks, partnership networks, communications networks, and inter-organisational network. The networks were found to support PHC implementation at patient/household or community-level, health facility-level and multi-partner networks that work across levels. The study demonstrates that: (1) patient/household or community-level networks promote early health-seeking, continuity of care and inclusiveness by enabling network members (actors) the support that ensures access to PHC services, (2) health facility-level networks enable collaboration among PHC staff and also ensure the building of social capital that enhances accountability and access to community health services, and (3) multi-partner networks that work across levels promote implementation by facilitating information and resource sharing, high professional trust and effective communication among actors. CONCLUSION: This body of literature reviewed suggests that, actor networks exist across different levels and that they make a difference in PHC implementation. Social Network Analysis may be a useful approach to health policy analysis (HPA) on implementation.

A discourse and content analysis of representation in the mainstream media of the South African National Health Insurance policy from 2011 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Media is a crucial factor in shaping public opinion and setting policy agendas. There is limited research on the role of media in health policy processes in low- and middle-income countries. This study profiles South Africa as a case example, currently in the process of implementing a major health policy reform, National Health Insurance (NHI). METHODS: A descriptive, mixed methods study was conducted in five sequential phases. Evidence was gathered through a scoping review of secondary literature; discourse analysis of global policy documents on universal health coverage and South African NHI policy documents; and a content and discourse analysis of South African print and online media texts focused on NHI. Representations within media were analysed and dominant discourses that might influence the policy process were identified. RESULTS: Discourses of 'health as a global public good' and 'neoliberalism' were identified in global and national policy documents. Similar neoliberal discourse was identified within SA media. Unique discourses were identified within SA media relating to biopolitics and corruption. Media representations revealed political and ideological contestation which was not as present in the global and national policy documents. Media representations did not mirror the lived reality of most of the South African population. The discourses identified influence the policy process and hinder public participation in these processes. They reinforce social hierarchy and power structures in South Africa, and might reinforce current inequalities in the health system, with negative repercussions for access to health care. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to understand mainstream media as part of a people-centred health system, particularly in the context of universal health coverage reforms such as NHI. Harmful media representations should be counter-acted. This requires the formation of collaborative and sustainable networks of policy actors to develop strategies on how to leverage media within health policy to support policy processes, build public trust and social cohesion, and ultimately decrease inequalities and increase access to health care. Research should be undertaken to explore media in other diverse formats and languages, and in other contexts, particularly low- and middle-income countries, to further understand media's role in health policy processes.

How does power shape district health management team responsiveness to public feedback in low- and middle-income countries: an interpretive synthesis.

Responsiveness is a core element of World Health Organization's health system framework, considered important for ensuring inclusive and accountable health systems. System-wide responsiveness requires system-wide action, and district health management teams (DHMTs) play critical governance roles in many health systems. However, there is little evidence on how DHMTs enhance health system responsiveness. We conducted this interpretive literature review to understand how DHMTs receive and respond to public feedback and how power influences these processes. A better understanding of power dynamics could strengthen responsiveness and improve health system performance. Our interpretive synthesis drew on English language articles published between 2000 and 2021. Our search in PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus combined terms related to responsiveness (feedback and accountability) and DHMTs (district health manager) yielding 703 articles. We retained 21 articles after screening. We applied Gaventa's power cube and Long's actor interface frameworks to synthesize insights about power. Our analysis identified complex power practices across a range of interfaces involving the public, health system and political actors. Power dynamics were rooted in social and organizational power relationships, personal characteristics (interests, attitudes and previous experiences) and world-views (values and beliefs). DHMTs' exercise of 'visible power' sometimes supported responsiveness; however, they were undermined by the 'invisible power' of public sector bureaucracy that shaped generation of responses. Invisible power, manifesting in the subconscious influence of historical marginalization, patriarchal norms and poverty, hindered vulnerable groups from providing feedback. We also identified 'hidden power' as influencing what feedback DHMTs received and from whom. Our work highlights the influence of social norms, structures and discrimination on power distribution among actors interacting with, and within, the DHMT. Responsiveness can be strengthened by recognising and building on actors' life-worlds (lived experiences) while paying attention to the broader context in which these life-worlds are embedded.

Intersectional insights into racism and health: not just a question of identity.

Intersectionality is a useful tool to address health inequalities, by helping us understand and respond to the individual and group effects of converging systems of power. Intersectionality rejects the notion of inequalities being the result of single, distinct factors, and instead focuses on the relationships between overlapping processes that create inequities. In this Series paper, we use an intersectional approach to highlight the intersections of racism, xenophobia, and discrimination with other systems of oppression, how this affects health, and what can be done about it. We present five case studies from different global locations that outline different dimensions of discrimination based on caste, ethnicity and migration status, Indigeneity, religion, and skin colour. Although experiences are diverse, the case studies show commonalities in how discrimination operates to affect health and wellbeing: how historical factors and coloniality shape contemporary experiences of race and racism; how racism leads to separation and hierarchies across shifting lines of identity and privilege; how racism and discrimination are institutionalised at a systems level and are embedded in laws, regulations, practices, and health systems; how discrimination, minoritisation, and exclusion are racialised processes, influenced by visible factors and tacit knowledge; and how racism is a form of structural violence. These insights allow us to begin to articulate starting points for justice-based action that addresses root causes, engages beyond the health sector, and encourages transnational solidarity.

What Is COVID-19 Teaching Us About Community Health Systems? A Reflection From a Rapid Community-Led Mutual Aid Response in Cape Town, South Africa.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has exposed the wide gaps in South Africa's formal social safety net, with the country's high levels of inequality, unemployment and poor public infrastructure combining to produce devastating consequences for a vast majority in the country living through lockdown. In Cape Town, a movement of self-organising, neighbourhood-level community action networks (CANs) has contributed significantly to the community-based response to COVID-19 and the ensuing epidemiological and social challenges it has wrought. This article describes and explains the organising principles that inform this community response, with the view to reflect on the possibilities and limits of such movements as they interface with the state and its top-down ways of working, often producing contradictions and complexities. This presents an opportunity for recognising and understanding the power of informal networks and collective action in community health systems in times of unprecedented crisis, and brings into focus the importance of finding ways to engage with the state and its formal health system response that do not jeopardise this potential.

Strengthening Research and Practice in Community Health Systems: A Research Agenda and Manifesto.

While there have been increased calls for strengthening community health systems (CHSs), key priorities for this field have not been fully articulated. This paper seeks to fill this gap, presenting a collaboratively defined research agenda, accompanied by a 'manifesto' on strengthening research and practice in the CHS. The CHS research agenda domains were developed through a modified concept mapping process with a team of 33 experts on the CHS including policy-makers, implementers and researchers from institutions in six countries: Uganda, Guatemala, South Africa, Sweden, Tanzania and Zambia. The process began remotely with brainstorming research priorities and concluded in a one-week workshop that was held in Zambia where priorities for strengthening CHS were discussed, grouped into domains, interpreted, and drafted into a collective declaration. Eight domains of research priorities for CHSs were identified: clarifying the purpose and values of the CHS, ensure inclusivity; design, implementation and monitoring of strategies to strengthen the CHS; social, political and historical contexts of CHS; community health workers (CHWs); social accountability; the interface between the CHS and the broader health system; governance and stewardship; and finally, the ethical methodologies for researching the CHS. By harnessing a set of diverse and rich experiences and perspectives on CHS through a structured process, a multifaceted research agenda and manifesto that transcend context, disciplines and time were developed. We posit this as an entry into greater debate and diversity in the field as we continue to find ways to strengthen research and practice in the CHS.

The Multiple Lenses on the Community Health System: Implications for Policy, Practice and Research.

Community health systems (CHSs) have historically been approached from multiple perspectives, with different purposes and methodological and disciplinary orientations. The terrain is, on the one hand, vast and diverse. On the other hand, under the banner of universal health coverage (UHC) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a streamlined version of 'community health' is increasingly being consolidated in global health and donor communities. With the view to informing debate and practice, this paper seeks to synthesise approaches to the CHS into a set of 'lenses,' drawing on the collective and multi-disciplinary knowledge (both formal and experiential) of the authors, a collaborative network of 23 researchers from seven institutions across six countries (spanning low, middle and high income). With a common view of the CHS as a complex adaptive system, we propose four key lenses, referred to as programmatic, relational, collective action and critical lenses. The lenses represent different positionalities in community health, encompassing macro-level policy-maker, front-line and community vantage points, and purposes ranging from social justice to instrumental goals. We define and describe the main elements of each lens and their implications for thinking about policy, practice and research. Distilling a set of key lenses offers a way to make sense of a complex terrain, but also counters what may emerge as a dominant, single narrative on the CHS in global health. By making explicit and bringing together different lenses on the CHS, the limits and possibilities of each may be better appreciated, while promoting integrative, systems thinking in policy, practice and research.

Health system responsiveness: a systematic evidence mapping review of the global literature.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organisation framed responsiveness, fair financing and equity as intrinsic goals of health systems. However, of the three, responsiveness received significantly less attention. Responsiveness is essential to strengthen systems' functioning; provide equitable and accountable services; and to protect the rights of citizens. There is an urgency to make systems more responsive, but our understanding of responsiveness is limited. We therefore sought to map existing evidence on health system responsiveness. METHODS: A mixed method systemized evidence mapping review was conducted. We searched PubMed, EbscoHost, and Google Scholar. Published and grey literature; conceptual and empirical publications; published between 2000 and 2020 and English language texts were included. We screened titles and abstracts of 1119 publications and 870 full texts. RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-one publications were included in the review. Evidence mapping shows substantially more publications between 2011 and 2020 (n = 462/621) than earlier periods. Most of the publications were from Europe (n = 139), with more publications relating to High Income Countries (n = 241) than Low-to-Middle Income Countries (n = 217). Most were empirical studies (n = 424/621) utilized quantitative methodologies (n = 232), while qualitative (n = 127) and mixed methods (n = 63) were more rare. Thematic analysis revealed eight primary conceptualizations of 'health system responsiveness', which can be fitted into three dominant categorizations: 1) unidirectional user-service interface; 2) responsiveness as feedback loops between users and the health system; and 3) responsiveness as accountability between public and the system. CONCLUSIONS: This evidence map shows a substantial body of available literature on health system responsiveness, but also reveals evidential gaps requiring further development, including: a clear definition and body of theory of responsiveness; the implementation and effectiveness of feedback loops; the systems responses to this feedback; context-specific mechanism-implementation experiences, particularly, of LMIC and fragile-and conflict affected states; and responsiveness as it relates to health equity, minority and vulnerable populations. Theoretical development is required, we suggest separating ideas of services and systems responsiveness, applying a stronger systems lens in future work. Further agenda-setting and resourcing of bridging work on health system responsiveness is suggested.

Towards an Explanation of the Social Value of Health Systems: An Interpretive Synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Health systems are complex social systems, and values constitute a central dimension of their complexity. Values are commonly understood as key drivers of health system change, operating across all health systems components and functions. Moreover, health systems are understood to influence and generate social values, presenting an opportunity to harness health systems to build stronger, more cohesive societies. However, there is little investigation (theoretical, conceptual, or empirical) on social values in health policy and systems research (HPSR), particularly regarding the capacity of health systems to influence and generate social values. This study develops an explanatory theory for the 'social value of health systems.' METHODS: We present the results of an interpretive synthesis of HPSR literature on social values, drawing on a qualitative systematic review, focusing on claims about the relationship between 'health systems' and 'social values.' We combined relational claims extracted from the literature under a common framework in order to generate new explanatory theory. RESULTS: We identify four mechanisms by which health systems are considered to contribute social value to society: Health systems can: (1) offer a unifying national ideal and build social cohesion, (2) influence and legitimise popular attitudes about rights and entitlements with regard to healthcare and inform citizen's understanding of state responsibilities, (3) strengthen trust in the state and legitimise state authority, and (4) communicate the extent to which the state values various population groups. CONCLUSION: We conclude that, using a systems-thinking and complex adaptive systems perspective, the above mechanisms can be explained as emergent properties of the dynamic network of values-based connections operating within health systems. We also demonstrate that this theory accounts for how HPSR authors write about the relationship between health systems and social values. Finally, we offer lessons for researchers and policy-makers seeking to bring about values-based change in health systems.

Social values and health systems in health policy and systems research: a mixed-method systematic review and evidence map.

Because health systems are conceptualized as social systems, embedded in social contexts and shaped by human agency, values are a key factor in health system change. As such, health systems software-including values, norms, ideas and relationships-is considered a foundational focus of the field of health policy and systems research (HPSR). A substantive evidence-base exploring the influence of software factors on system functioning has developed but remains fragmented, with a lack of conceptual clarity and theoretical coherence. This is especially true for work on 'social values' within health systems-for which there is currently no substantive review available. This study reports on a systematic mixed-methods evidence mapping review on social values within HPSR. The study reaffirms the centrality of social values within HPSR and highlights significant evidence gaps. Research on social values in low- and middle-income country contexts is exceedingly rare (and mostly produced by authors in high-income countries), particularly within the limited body of empirical studies on the subject. In addition, few HPS researchers are drawing on available social science methodologies that would enable more in-depth empirical work on social values. This combination (over-representation of high-income country perspectives and little empirical work) suggests that the field of HPSR is at risk of developing theoretical foundations that are not supported by empirical evidence nor broadly generalizable. Strategies for future work on social values in HPSR are suggested, including: countering pervasive ideas about research hierarchies that prize positivist paradigms and systems hardware-focused studies as more rigorous and relevant to policy-makers; utilizing available social science theories and methodologies; conceptual development to build common framings of key concepts to guide future research, founded on quality empirical research from diverse contexts; and using empirical evidence to inform the development of operationalizable frameworks that will support rigorous future research on social values in health systems.

Models of public-private engagement for health services delivery and financing in Southern Africa: a systematic review.

In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the private sector-including international donors, non-governmental organizations, for-profit providers and traditional healers-plays a significant role in health financing and delivery. The use of the private sector in furthering public health goals is increasingly common. By working with the private sector through public -: private engagement (PPE), states can harness private sector resources to further public health goals. PPE initiatives can take a variety of forms and understanding of these models is limited. This paper presents the results of a Campbell systematic literature review conducted to establish the types and the prevalence of PPE projects for health service delivery and financing in Southern Africa. PPE initiatives identified through the review were categorized according to a PPE typology. The review reveals that the full range of PPE models, eight distinct models, are utilized in the Southern African context. The distribution of the available evidence-including significant gaps in the literature-is discussed, and key considerations for researchers, implementers, and current and potential PPE partners are presented. It was found that the literature is disproportionately representative of PPE initiatives located in South Africa, and of those that involve for-profit partners and international donors. A significant gap in the literature identified through the study is the scarcity of information regarding the relationship between international donors and national governments. This information is key to strengthening these partnerships, improving partnership outcomes and capacitating recipient countries. The need for research that disaggregates PPE models and investigates PPE functioning in context is demonstrated.