8 research outputs found

    Citizen engagement in public services in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A mixed‐methods systematic review of participation, inclusion, transparency and accountability (PITA) initiatives

    Get PDF
    Background: How do governance interventions that engage citizens in public service delivery planning, management and oversight impact the quality of and access to services and citizens’ quality of life? This systematic review examined high quality evidence from 35 citizen engagement programmes in low- and middle-income countries that promote the engagement of citizens in service delivery through four routes: participation (participatory priority setting); inclusion of marginalised groups; transparency (information on rights and public service performance), and/or citizen efforts to ensure public service accountability (citizen feedback and monitoring); collectively, PITA mechanisms. We collected quantitative and qualitative data from the included studies and used statistical meta-analysis and realist-informed framework synthesis to analyse the findings. Results: The findings suggest that interventions promoting citizen engagement by improving direct engagement between service users and service providers, are often effective in stimulating active citizen engagement in service delivery and realising improvements in access to services and quality of service provision, particularly for services that involve direct interaction between citizens and providers. However, in the absence of complementary interventions to address bottlenecks around service provider supply chains and service use, citizen engagement interventions alone may not improve key wellbeing outcomes for target communities or state-society relations. In addition, interventions promoting citizen engagement by increasing citizen pressures on politicians to hold providers to account, are not usually able to influence service delivery. Conclusions: The citizen engagement interventions studied were more likely to be successful: (1) where the programme targeted a service that citizens access directly from front-line staff, such as healthcare, as opposed to services accessed independently of service provider staff, such as roads; (2) where implementers were able to generate active support and buy-in for the intervention from both citizens and front-line public service staff and officials; and (3) where the implementation approach drew on and/or stimulated local capacity for collective action. From a research perspective, the review found few studies that investigated the impact of these interventions on women or other vulnerable groups within communities, and that rigorous impact evaluations often lack adequately transparent reporting, particularly of information on what interventions actually did and how conditions compared to those in comparison communities

    Rationale and design of a complex intervention measuring the impact and processes of social accountability applied to contraceptive programming: CaPSAI Project

    No full text
    Background: There are numerous barriers leading to a high unmet need for family planning and contraceptives (FP/C). These include limited knowledge and information, poor access to quality services, structural inefficiencies in service provision and inadequately trained and supervised health professionals. Recently, social accountability programs have shown promising results in addressing barriers to accessing sexual and reproductive health services. As a highly complex participatory process with multiple and interrelated components, steps and actors, studying social accountability poses methodological challenges. The Community and Provider driven Social Accountability Intervention (CaPSAI) Project study protocol was developed to measure the impact of a social accountability intervention on contraceptive uptake and use and to understand the mechanisms and contextual factors that influence and generate these effects (with emphasis on health services actors and community members). Methods: CaPSAI Project is implementing a social accountability intervention where service users and providers assess the quality of local FP/C services and jointly identify ways to improve the delivery and quality of such services. In the project, a quasi-experimental study utilizing an interrupted time series design with a control group is conducted in eight intervention and eight control facilities in each study country, which are Ghana and Tanzania. A cross-sectional survey of service users and health care providers is used to measure social accountability outcomes, and a cohort of women who are new users of FP/C is followed up after the completion of the intervention to measure contraceptive use and continuation. The process evaluation utilizes a range of methods and data sources to enable a fuller description of how the findings were produced. Conclusion: This complex study design could provide researchers and implementers with the means to better measure and understand the mechanisms and contextual factors that influence social accountability processes in reproductive health, adding important findings to the evidence base

    COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in low- and middle-income countries

    Full text link
    AbstractWidespread acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines is crucial for achieving sufficient immunization coverage to end the global pandemic, yet few studies have investigated COVID-19 vaccination attitudes in lower-income countries, where large-scale vaccination is just beginning. We analyze COVID-19 vaccine acceptance across 15 survey samples covering 10 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Asia, Africa and South America, Russia (an upper-middle-income country) and the United States, including a total of 44,260 individuals. We find considerably higher willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine in our LMIC samples (mean 80.3%; median 78%; range 30.1 percentage points) compared with the United States (mean 64.6%) and Russia (mean 30.4%). Vaccine acceptance in LMICs is primarily explained by an interest in personal protection against COVID-19, while concern about side effects is the most common reason for hesitancy. Health workers are the most trusted sources of guidance about COVID-19 vaccines. Evidence from this sample of LMICs suggests that prioritizing vaccine distribution to the Global South should yield high returns in advancing global immunization coverage. Vaccination campaigns should focus on translating the high levels of stated acceptance into actual uptake. Messages highlighting vaccine efficacy and safety, delivered by healthcare workers, could be effective for addressing any remaining hesitancy in the analyzed LMICs.</jats:p
    corecore