The neglect of culture in global health research and practice

Aubel, Judi; Chibanda, Dixon

doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2022-009914

Cited by 23 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The community representatives are the principal stakeholders; they play a vital role in selecting the project and deciding its objective according to the literature on community ownership 10 . However, the community's voice might be neglected in global and international health contexts 16,17 . Outsider stakeholders often play the dominant role in selecting the project, including its objectives in mainstream practices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…10 However, the community's voice might be neglected in global and international health contexts. 16,17 Outsider stakeholders often play the dominant role in selecting the project, including its objectives in mainstream practices. Consequently, this creates a gap between the community's own perceived needs to improve health issues and funder preferences.…”

Section: The Role Of the Three Types Of Community Project Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The role of stakeholder structure in fostering community ownership: A case study of community‐based projects

Kobashi,

Goto,

Chi

2023

Health Planning & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community health projects have played a crucial role in improving health issues. Listening to communities' voices and achieving community ownership are essential for conducting effective health projects. However, there are limited studies on the frameworks for collecting, aggregating, and operationalizing community preferences and values. In this study, we selected two cases of community field surveys from Japan and Cambodia to discuss who may represent a community and propose a practical approach to achieving community ownership. Both cases involved various stakeholders. From the insights of these two cases, we suggested the following three key components in the community project: the community representative, the communicator, and the institute outside the community. Notably, the community representative's role as the community's direct voice should be properly recognized and institutionalised to establish community ownership. We proposed the following key terms of the qualifications of community representatives: they should be able to represent voices from the community, should have extensive experience to decide the project direction and manage the project, and should be independent of outside actors. Our theoretical model of the structure of different stakeholder groups in community‐based projects will be helpful to accelerate community capacity strengthening; moreover, it can help build the appropriate community institution and process, including multi‐stakeholder groups to promote community ownership in health programs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Role Of the Three Types Of Community Project Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of stakeholder structure in fostering community ownership: A case study of community‐based projects

Kobashi,

Goto,

Chi

2023

Health Planning & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From within GMH, Aubel and Chibanda (2022) observe that the continued lip service to culture in the field is problematic, yet they also note that the notion of ‘culture’ is predominantly mobilized by scholars from the Global North, and used in potentially essentializing ways. Culture, they argue, may in fact not be the framework through which local communities choose to express their priorities and needs (Aubel & Chibanda, 2022). Similarly, Hartmann and colleagues (2022) warn against ‘cultural repackaging’ of mental health interventions in GMH.…”

Section: Making Middle-groundsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contingent universality: The epistemic politics of global mental health

Bemme

2023

Transcult Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The field of global mental health (GMH) has undergone profound changes over the past decade. Outgrowing its earlier agenda it has performed a reflexive turn, broadened towards a social paradigm and developed new modes of knowledge production, all of which reshaped ‘mental health’ as a global object of knowledge and care, and the epistemic politics of the field. Drawing on long-term ethnographic fieldwork among GMH experts and recent agenda-setting publications, I discuss how GMH advocates and critical observers alike have created conceptual and practical middle-grounds between different forms of mental health knowledge – across culture, epistemic power, lived experience, policy platforms and academic disciplines – framing their dynamic encounters as dialogue, adaptation, participation, co-production or integration. Ultimately, I argue, GMH today is focusing less on establishing mental health as a universal problem than on managing its inherent multiplicity through alignment and integration across different bodies of knowledge. Global knowledge, so conceived, is fluid and malleable and produced in open-ended knowledge practices, governed by what I call ‘contingent universality’. It is not new that the concepts and practices of the psy-disciplines are malleable and multiple, internally and externally contested, rapidly changing over time and not easily transferrable across space. What is new is that within the increasingly heterogenous epistemic space of GMH, these features have become assets rather than liabilities. GMH knowledge achieves both global reach and local relevance precisely because ‘mental health’ can be many things; it can be expressed in a wide range of idioms and concepts, and its problems and solutions align easily with others, at many scales. These fluid and integrative knowledge practices call for renewed empirical, critical and collaborative engagement.

show abstract

“…ECRs should apply for grant funding in equitable partnership with principal/coinvestigators from the country being studied and propose to do so when this is not currently offered. We must recognise and value cultural differences in working style, values, communication, team collaboration and writing 11. Safe and supportive conversations with supervisors can foster these skills and build more inclusive working cultures.…”

Section: Forge Equitable Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decoloniality in global health research: ten tasks for early career researchers

Keynejad,

Deraz,

Ingenhoff

et al. 2023

BMJ Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The neglect of culture in global health research and practice

Cited by 23 publications

References 12 publications

The role of stakeholder structure in fostering community ownership: A case study of community‐based projects

The role of stakeholder structure in fostering community ownership: A case study of community‐based projects

Contingent universality: The epistemic politics of global mental health

Decoloniality in global health research: ten tasks for early career researchers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About