Search results

Considers the potential use of operational research for strengthening community participation – terms that have formerly been employed ambiguously or with a variety of meanings. Begins by providing some explanation of “operational research”, identifying specifically those factors which have prompted the development of a “new paradigm” operational research. Of these, considers the need for new practices and particularly the value of operational research adopting practices derivative from participatory research. Outlines development of community operational research as an example of new paradigm operational research; some of the work of the Community Operational Research Unit in the UK is illustrated. Concludes by examining the value of community operational research as a potential tool for strengthening community participation.

Reflects on three years′ experience of Annual Reports on the Public Health. Argues that the material benefits do not warrant an overly substantial amount of dedicated time – a five‐year strategic public health programme, supported by a periodic cross‐sectional analysis, is more appropriate and would exploit much wider sources of data than those generally appearing in Annual Reports, Considers the value of the Decennial Census of Population, as a data source. Suggests that it must be used in conjunction with other sources of “hard” data. Also argues that methods for collecting and incorporating qualitative data must be developed, together with a framework for informed policy analysis, which would facilitate a participative dialogue compatible with the aims of the “new” public health.

This paper describes work undertaken in Pakistan within a project to strengthen the health planning system, aimed at improving the capacity of the planning cells to identify priorities and develop broad strategic guidelines. The work starts from the premise that identification of priorities requires two stages. In the first stage, problems must be structured and defined in a way that is accepted by all major stakeholders in the planning process. In the second stage, a transparent process of decision making must exist which will provide the means for the planning group to establish priorities and time‐scales. The tools chosen in this instance were selected in relation to the characteristics of the local environment, and the paper describes these.