Volume 24, Issue 2 pp. 175-183
Original Article

Community participation for rural healthcare design: description and critique of a method

Amy Nimegeer BA MLitt MBA PhD

Amy Nimegeer BA MLitt MBA PhD

MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Jane Farmer MA PhD

Corresponding Author

Jane Farmer MA PhD

Faculty of Health Sciences, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia

Correspondence

Jane Farmer

Professor of Health Services Research and Policy

Faculty of Health Sciences

La Trobe University

PO Box 199, Bendigo

Victoria 3552, Australia

E-mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Sarah Anne Munoz BA PhD

Sarah Anne Munoz BA PhD

Centre for Rural Health, University of the Highlands and Islands, Inverness, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Mags Currie BSc MSc PhD

Mags Currie BSc MSc PhD

Social, Economic & Geographical Sciences Department, The James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, UK

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 11 February 2015
Citations: 13

Abstract

This paper outlines a community participation process that was developed to engage rural community stakeholders in designing new health services. The paper explains what led up to the process and provides critique around applying the process for other health services and in other communities. Internationally, community participation is widely invoked, but it is only broadly explained in the literature, other than reviews of outcomes or descriptions of problems. This paper provides an actual process, derived from iterative research, that others could use, but explains caveats in the method and its application. From developing this method of community participation for service design, we conclude that rather than being a benign and inherently ‘good thing’, community participation is a process into which health services managers and communities should enter cautiously. Stronger parameters around desirable outcomes and awareness of potential pitfalls in the process are important to address.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.