Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
21 October 2024 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Stephen Collett
Centre for Health Systems Research & Development team
For more than three decades, the Centre for Health Systems Research & Development (CHSR&D) has been actively involved in efforts to strengthen health systems and improve health outcomes through its research and community engagement initiatives. Pictured are members of the CHSR&D team. From the left: Prof Gladys Kigozi-Male, Bridget Smit, Dr Ngwi Mulu, and Prof Michelle Engelbrecht. Absent, Prof Christo Heunis.

The Centre for Health Systems Research & Development (CHSR&D) at the University of the Free State (UFS) has played a key role in health systems research in South Africa. Established in 1993, the centre is built on a strong foundation of medical sociology and the sociology of health, addressing some of the most critical challenges in public health. For more than three decades, the centre has been actively involved in efforts to strengthen health systems and improve health outcomes through its research and community engagement initiatives.

The centre’s primary mission is clear: to generate and disseminate scientific knowledge that informs and improves health policies, strategies, and practices at the local, provincial, and national levels. As health systems worldwide continue to grapple with new and emerging challenges, the CHSR&D has positioned itself as a critical resource for evidence-based solutions that drive progress towards improved health outcomes. The centre also provides postgraduate training and capacity building that contributes to expanding expertise in health, health systems, and health-care research and development.

Focus on priority health programmes

According to Prof Michelle Engelbrecht, Director of the centre and an Associate Professor, the CHSR&D’s research portfolio covers a wide range of issues that are critical to the development of a strong health system. “The centre focuses on areas such as public health policy implementation and operational functioning, human resources for health, occupational health, and priority health programmes such as tuberculosis (TB) and HIV prevention and control, sexual and reproductive health, as well as mental health. In response to the recent COVID-19 outbreak, the centre prioritised research to enhance understanding of this global crisis. Notable studies from the past five years include COVID-19 vaccine literacy and acceptability, the psychological well-being of nurses during the second wave of COVID-19, and the impact of COVID-19 on essential health services in the Free State. Additionally, over the past five years, the centre has focused on the increased co-morbidity between TB and mental health, aiming to develop more holistic approaches to TB treatment towards improved TB programme performance.”

One of the CHSR&D's most impactful initiatives is its work in sexual and reproductive health, specifically its programme aimed at including men in the pregnancy and birth process. Historically, men have often been excluded from prenatal, childbirth, and postnatal care, which can negatively affect the health of mothers and babies. The centre is working to change this by advocating for men’s involvement in all stages of the pregnancy and birth process, creating a more supportive environment for expectant mothers and improving family health outcomes. By focusing on developing support systems and resources for men to participate actively in reproductive health, they are also working to shift policies and cultural norms that have traditionally sidelined male involvement in these critical moments.

As the world continues to confront the challenges posed by universal access to health care, South Africa is undertaking the greatest experiment ever in attempting to equalise access to quality health care by treating health care not as a commodity, but as a human right, namely through the implementation of National Health Insurance (NHI). Prof Christo Heunis, also an Associate Professor in the centre, says that the CHSR&D’s work in these areas is more important than ever. “If NHI is to be successful, (public) health systems strengthening is required. Health-related research and development, as well as the capacity to conduct such research and development – to inform health systems strengthening – is the fundamental purpose of CHSR&D.”

Collaboration with communities 

Engaging with the community is at the heart of the CHSR&D’s work. The centre has a long history of working with local communities to identify health priorities and develop solutions that are responsive to the needs of those they serve. Prof Gladys Kigozi-Male, an Associate Professor as well, notes that this commitment ensures that the centre's work is not only academically thorough, but also practically relevant and impactful.

The CHSR&D also works closely with key partners and collaborators to expand the reach and impact of its research. “The centre has a longstanding partnership with the Free State Department of Health and is actively involved in the Provincial Health Research Committee. These collaborations allow the centre to contribute to health systems strengthening in meaningful ways, particularly through citizen-centred assessment of public health-care service delivery,” adds Prof Kigozi-Male.

In addition to its local collaborations, the centre partners with international academic institutions such as the University of South Carolina (USA) and Makerere University in Kampala (Uganda). These partnerships enable the CHSR&D to exchange knowledge and best practices with global health experts, further enhancing the quality and impact of its research. Civil society organisations such as Mosamaria Aids Ministry, Sonke Gender Justice, and loveLife also play a critical role in the centre’s work, helping to bridge the gap between research and implementation on the ground.

Quality, reliability, and future goals

"At the Centre for Health Systems Research & Development, we align with the UFS’ Vision 130, which emphasises transformation and an outward approach. We are dedicated to engaging with local and regional communities, pursuing knowledge that addresses the needs and aspirations of the Free State, South Africa, and the broader African continent. Our commitment to maintaining the highest standards of quality and reliability in our research is unwavering. By employing a variety of methodological approaches – quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods – we ensure that our research findings are comprehensive and can confidently inform health policies and strategies," notes Prof Engelbrecht.

In conclusion, the CHSR&D remains a critical player in the landscape of public health research and development. Its commitment to high-quality research ensures that it will continue to drive progress in health systems development and improve health outcomes for the foreseeable future. CHSR&D staff are dedicated to providing high-quality postgraduate supervision, undertaking necessary research to strengthen health systems, producing internationally impactful publications, and remaining locally and regionally relevant.

News Archive

Media: Sunday Times
2006-05-20

Sunday Times, 4 June 2006

True leadership may mean admitting disunity
 

In this edited extract from the inaugural King Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture at the University of the Free State, Professor Njabulo S Ndebele explores the leadership challenges facing South Africa

RECENT events have created a sense that we are undergoing a serious crisis of leadership in our new democracy. An increasing number of highly intelligent, sensitive and committed South Africans, across class, racial and cultural spectrums, confess to feeling uncertain and vulnerable as never before since 1994.

When indomitable optimists confess to having a sense of things unhinging, the misery of anxiety spreads. We have the sense that events are spiralling out of control and that no one among the leadership of the country seems to have a definitive handle on things.

There can be nothing more debilitating than a generalised and undefined sense of anxiety in the body politic. It breeds conspiracies and fear.

There is an impression that a very complex society has developed, in the last few years, a rather simple, centralised governance mechanism in the hope that delivery can be better and more quickly driven. The complexity of governance then gets located within a single structure of authority rather than in the devolved structures envisaged in the Constitution, which should interact with one another continuously, and in response to their specific settings, to achieve defined goals. Collapse in a single structure of authority, because there is no robust backup, can be catastrophic.

The autonomy of devolved structures presents itself as an impediment only when visionary cohesion collapses. Where such cohesion is strong, the impediment is only illusory, particularly when it encourages healthy competition, for example, among the provinces, or where a province develops a character that is not necessarily autonomous politically but rather distinctive and a special source of regional pride. Such competition brings vibrancy to the country. It does not necessarily challenge the centre.

Devolved autonomy is vital in the interests of sustainable governance. The failure of various structures to actualise their constitutionally defined roles should not be attributed to the failure of the prescribed governance mechanism. It is too early to say that what we have has not worked. The only viable corrective will be in our ability to be robust in identifying the problems and dealing with them concertedly.

We have never had social cohesion in South Africa — certainly not since the Natives’ Land Act of 1913. What we definitely have had over the decades is a mobilising vision. Could it be that the mobilising vision, mistaken for social cohesion, is cracking under the weight of the reality and extent of social reconstruction, and that the legitimate framework for debating these problems is collapsing? If that is so, are we witnessing a cumulative failure of leadership?

I am making a descriptive rather than an evaluative inquiry. I do not believe that there is any single entity to be blamed. It is simply that we may be a country in search of another line of approach. What will it be?

I would like to suggest two avenues of approach — an inclusive model and a counter-intuitive model of leadership.

In an inclusive approach, leadership is exercised not only by those who have been put in some position of power to steer an organisation or institution. Leadership is what all of us do when we express, sincerely, our deepest feelings and thoughts; when we do our work, whatever it is, with passion and integrity.

Counter-intuitive leadership lies in the ability of leaders to read a problematic situation, assess probable outcomes and then recognise that those outcomes will only compound the problem. Genuine leadership, in this sense, requires going against probability in seeking unexpected outcomes. That’s what happened when we avoided a civil war and ended up with an “unexpected” democracy.

Right now, we may very well hear desperate calls for unity, when the counter-intuitive imperative would be to acknowledge disunity. A declaration of unity where it manifestly does not appear to exist will fail to reassure.

Many within the “broad alliance” might have the view that the mobilising vision of old may have transformed into a strategy of executive steering with a disposition towards an expectation of compliance. No matter how compelling the reasons for that tendency, it may be seen as part of a cumulative process in which popular notions of democratic governance are apparently undermined and devalued; and where public uncertainty in the midst of seeming crisis induces fear which could freeze public thinking at a time when more voices ought to be heard.

Could it be that part of the problem is that we are unable to deal with the notion of opposition? We are horrified that any of us could be seen to have become “the opposition”. The word has been demonised. In reality, it is time we began to anticipate the arrival of a moment when there is no longer a single, overwhelmingly dominant political force as is currently the case. Such is the course of history. The measure of the maturity of the current political environment will be in how it can create conditions that anticipate that moment rather than seek to prevent it. We see here once more the essential creativity of the counter-intuitive imperative.

This is the formidable challenge of a popular post-apartheid political movement. Can it conceptually anticipate a future when it is no longer overwhelmingly in control, in the form in which it is currently, and resist, counter-intuitively, the temptation to prevent such an eventuality? Successfully resisting such an option would enable its current vision and its ultimate legacy to our country to manifest in different articulations, which then contend for social influence. In this way, the vision never really dies; it simply evolves into higher, more complex forms of itself. Consider the metaphor of flying ants replicating the ant community by establishing new ones.

We may certainly experience the meaning of comradeship differently, where we will now have “comrades on the other side”.

Any political movement that imagines itself as a perpetual entity should look at the compelling evidence of history. Few movements have survived those defining moments when they should have been more elastic, and that because they were not, did not live to see the next day.

I believe we may have reached a moment not fundamentally different from the sobering, yet uplifting and vision-making, nation-building realities that led to Kempton Park in the early ’90s. The difference between then and now is that the black majority is not facing white compatriots across the negotiating table. Rather, it is facing itself: perhaps really for the first time since 1994. Could we apply to ourselves the same degree of inventiveness and rigorous negotiation we displayed leading up to the adoption or our Constitution?

This is not a time for repeating old platitudes. It is the time, once more, for vision.

In the total scheme of things, the outcome could be as disastrous as it could be formative and uplifting, setting in place the conditions for a true renaissance that could be sustained for generations to come.

Ndebele is Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cape Town and author of the novel The Cry of Winnie Mandela

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept