A Systematic Review of Alternative Service Delivery in Africa for Taming Wicked Risks
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31098/jgrcs.v4i2.2555Keywords:
Problems; Wicked Risks; Alternative Service Delivery; Service Delivery Innovation; Partnering; Digital GovernanceAbstract
This research considers the role that alternative service delivery can play in addressing wicked problems. The aim of this research is, firstly, to determine which evidence and knowledge are available on alternative service delivery arrangements relevant to African countries to inform decisions about addressing wicked problems on the continent. Second, this research determines suitable mechanisms for an alternative service delivery model for mitigating wicked risks in Africa. This research is based on a systematic literature review. This systematic literature review reveals that most work on alternative service delivery has been done in developed countries, with developing African countries being left behind in research on alternative service delivery. Furthermore, most of the alternative service delivery efforts have not focused on addressing wicked problems. A large number of articles on alternative service delivery models show that alternative delivery is not a preferred approach in Africa. This research recommends an alternative service delivery model that is based on digital governance, service delivery innovation and partnerships. Robust governance responses are needed to mitigate these wicked risks, and alternative service delivery presents robust features to mitigate these risks given that it is more flexible, agile, adaptable, and decentralized in nature than simply relying on traditional government responses. Lastly, risk-informed decision-making should be placed at the center of the reform agenda for a smart and sustainable society.
Downloads
References
Beard, S. J., Rees, M., Richards, C., & Rios Rojas, C. (2023). The era of global risk: An introduction to existential risk studies. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers.
Benson, D., & Jordan, A. (2017). Environmental governance. In The international encyclopedia of geography: People, the earth, environment and technology. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg0631
Bernstein, P. L. (1996). Against the gods: The remarkable story of risk. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Bjørnsen, K., & Aven, T. (2025). A risk science perspective on the treatment of uncertainty in EIAs: An illustrative case from Norwegian EIA regulation. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 110, 107656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2024.107656
Bleda, M., & Krupnik, S. (2024). Risks of policy failure in direct R&D support. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 209, 123654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123654
Carayannopoulos, G., & McConnel, A. (2018). Bringing lessons from crisis management into the realm of wicked problems. Australian Journal of Political Science, 53(3), 353-369. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2018.1450067
Casady, C. B., Eriksson, K., Levitt, R. E., & Scott, R. W. (2020). (Re)defining public-private partnerships (PPPs) in the new public governance (NPG) paradigm: An institutional maturity perspective. Public Management Review, 22(2), 161-183. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1577909
Cleary, S., & Malleret, T. (2006). Resilience to risk: Business success in turbulent times. Pretoria: Human & Rousseau.
Cleland, J. A., Patterson, F., & Hanson, M. D. (2018). Thinking of selection and widening access as complex and wicked problems. Medical Education, 52, 1228-1239. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13670
Cristofoli, D., Cucciniello, M., Micacchi, M., Trivellato, B., Turrini, A., & Valotti, G. (2022). “One, none, and a hundred thousand” recipes for a robust response to turbulence. Public Administration, 101(1), 106-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12870
Davison, A., Patel, Z., & Greyling, S. (2016). Tackling wicked problems and tricky transitions: Change and continuity in Cape Town’s environmental policy landscape. Local Environment, 21(9), 1063-1081. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2015.1066321
Daviter, F. (2017). Coping, taming or solving: Alternative approaches to the governance of wicked problems. Policy Studies, 38(6), 571-588. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2017.1384543
Department for Education. (2021). Risk assessment and action planning for Prevent in higher education (HE): Notes for trainers. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/risk-assessment-and-action-planning-when-implementing-the-prevent-duty-in-higher-education-he/risk-assessment-and-action-planning-for-prevent-in-higher-education-he-notes-for-trainers#consequential-risk
Dunleavy, P., & Margetts, H. (2015). Design principles for essentially digital governance. In Proceedings of the 111th annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, 3-6 September 2015. Retrieved from http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/64125/
Evans, J. P. (2012). Environmental governance. London: Routledge.
Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, 22(2), 338-342. Retrieved from https://faseb.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF
Farias, P., Goldsmith, S., Flumian, M., Mendoza, G., Wiseman, J., Porrúa, M., Páez, P. C., García, A. C., & Zanabria, G. (2017). Governments that serve: Innovations that improve service delivery to citizens. New York: Inter-American Development Bank.
Fenwick, J., Miller, K. J., & McTavish, D. (2012). Co-governance or meta-bureaucracy? Perspectives of local governance ‘partnership’ in England and Scotland. The Policy Press, 40(3), 405-422. https://doi.org/10.1332/147084411X581907
Furlong, K., & Bakker, K. (2010). The contradictions in ‘alternative’ service delivery: Governance, business models, and sustainability in municipal water supply. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 28(2), 349-368. https://doi.org/10.1068/c09122
Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
Govender, I. (2016). Monitoring and evaluating service delivery as a wicked problem in South Africa. Journal of Human Ecology, 55(1,2), 21-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/09709274.2016.11907006
Hanisch, M., Goldsby, C. M., Fabian, N. E., & Oehmichen, J. (2023). Digital governance: A conceptual framework and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 162, 113777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113777
Head, B. W., & Alford, J. (2015). Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management. Administration & Society, 47(6), 711-739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399713481601
Henderson, K. (2002). Alternative service delivery in developing countries: NGOs and other non-profits in urban areas. Public Organisation Review, 2, 99-116. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016051211179
Lamothe, S. & Lamothe, M. (2023). Toward a better understanding of local service provision: Implications for studying the determinants of production choice. Public Admin Rev, 84, 904–917. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13759
Lazarus, R. J. (2010). Super wicked problems and climate change: Restraining the present to liberate the future. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown Law Faculty Publications. Retrieved from https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1152&context=facpub
Levin, K., Cashore, B., Bernstein, S., & Auld, G. (2012). Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: Constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change. Policy Sciences, 45, 123-152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-012-9151-0
Masenya, M., & Mthombeni, A. (2023). Governance, ethics and public service delivery: The ramifications of corruption. Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability, 3(2), 39-48. https://doi.org/10.31098/jgrcs.v3i2.1893
Martins, N., & Ledimo, O. (2015). The perceptions and nature of service delivery innovation among government employees: An exploratory study. Journal of Governance and Regulation, 4(4), 575-580. https://doi.org/10.22495/jgr_v4_i4_c5_p1
Mathebula, N. C (2024). Indicators of sovereign risk of South Africa’s International Monetary Fund Loan: The nexus between political risks and economic growth. Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability, 4(1), 15-29. https://doi.org/10.31098/jgrcs.v4i1.2214
Mert, A., & Pattberg, P. (2015). Public-private partnerships and the governance of ecosystem services. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/ecosystem-services/publicprivate-partnerships-and-the-governance-of-ecosystem-services/C8AA4DD64772AF08BFA934AEB659C319
Milakovich, M. (2021). Digital governance: Applying advanced technologies to improve public service. New York: Routledge.
Moed, H., Bar-Ilan, J., & Halevi, A. (2016). New methodology for comparing Google Scholar and Scopus. Journal of Infometrics, 10, 533-551. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1512.05741
Montuori, I. (2011). Systems approach. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/1067750/The_Systems_Approach_to_Creativity
Nel, D. (2014). Systematic risk management and strategic control in public private partnerships (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Johannesburg, South Africa.
Nel, D. (2017). Multi-sector stakeholder partnerships as a mechanism for creating public value. African Journal of Public Affairs, 9(9), 63-79. Retrieved from https://journals.co.za/doi/pdf/10.10520/EJC-c13bb4b6a
Nel, D. (2018). An assessment of emerging hybrid public-private partnerships in the energy sector in South Africa. International Journal of Economics and Finance Studies, 10(1), 33-49. Retrieved from https://sobiad.org/eJOURNALS/journal_IJEF/archieves/IJEF_2018_1/d-nel.pdf
Nel, D. (2020). Allocation of risk in public-private partnerships in information and communications technology. International Journal of eBusiness and eGovernment Studies, 12(1), 17-32. https://doi.org/10.34111/ijebeg.202012102
Nel, D., & Masilela, L. (2020). Open governance for improved service delivery innovation in South Africa. International Journal of eBusiness and eGovernment Studies, 12(1), 33-47. https://doi.org/10.34111/ijebeg.202012103
Nel-Sanders, D. (2023). Revolutionizing public private partnerships: A transition to the Fifth Industrial Revolution. International Journal of Innovation in Management Economics and Social Science, 3(1), 12-29. https://doi.org/10.52547/ijimes.3.1.12
Nel-Sanders, D., & Thomas, P. (2021). Overcoming COVID-19 risk in South African nature-based tourism through the use of disruptive technologies. Retrieved from https://ujcontent.uj.ac.za/esploro/outputs/9911722407691
Niskanen, V., Rask, M., & Raisio, H. (2021). Wicked problems in Africa: A systematic literature review. SAGE Open, 11(3), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211032163
Nzimakwe, T. I. (2015). Adopting innovation strategies to enhance service delivery implications for public sector institutions. Administratio Publica, 23(2), 57-72. Retrieved from https://journals.co.za/doi/pdf/10.10520/ejc-adminpub-v26-n4-a8
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2016). Open government: The global context and the way forward. Paris: OECD.
Rethlefsen, M. L., & Page, M. J. (2022). PRISMA 2020 and PRISMA-S: common questions on tracking records and the flow diagram. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 110(2), 253.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1994). The hollowing out of the state: The changing nature of the public service in Britain. The Political Quarterly, 65(2), 138-151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.1994.tb00441.x
Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155-169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730
Russell, E. W., & Bvuma, D. G. (2001). Alternative service delivery and public service transformation in South Africa. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 14(3), 241-264. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550110390819
Salvador, M., & Sancho, D. (2023). Local governments facing turbulence: Robust governance and institutional capacities. Social Sciences, 12(462), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12080462
Scientific Publishing Consulting. (2023). Scopus/Web of Science vs. Google Scholar: Comparative analysis. Retrieved from https://spubl.kg/en/blog/scopus-web-of-science-vs-google-scholar-how-to-choose#:~:text=International%20databases%20such%20as%20Scopus%20and%20Web%20of%20Science%20offer,information%20search%20and%20citation%20tracking
Spikin, I. C. (2013). Risk management theory: The integrated perspective and its application in the public sector. Gestión Pública, 21, 89-126. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/5604762.pdf
Türkelli, G. E. (2021). Multistakeholder partnerships for development and the financialisation of development assistance. Development and Change, 53(1), 84-116. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12687
United Nations. (2015). Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2015/12/sustainable-development-goals-kick-off-with-start-of-new-year/#:~:text=The%2017%20SDGs%20build%20on,and%20other%20diseases%3B%20ensure%20environmental
Van der Steen, M., & Van Twist, M. (2020). How is the future unknown? Strategies for preparing for an uncertain future. Retrieved from https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/35419/chapter-abstract/303170282?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Van der Waldt, G. (2023). Preparing for digital governance: Mapping competency domains for postgraduate programmes in Public Administration and Management. Administratio Publica, 31(2), 91-112. Retrieved from https://journals.co.za/doi/pdf/10.10520/ejc-adminpub_v31_n2_a6
Velotti, L., Botti, A., & Vesci, M. (2012). Public private partnerships and network governance: What are the challenges? Public Performance & Management Review, 36(2), 340-365. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576360209
Vinogradov, D., Shadrina, E., & Kokareva, L. (2014). Public procurement mechanisms for public-private partnerships. Journal of Public Procurement, 14(4), 538-566. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOPP-14-04-2014-B004
Wells, J. (2020). 5 Ways to survive the crisis. Retrieved from https://jwellscfo.medium.com/5-ways-to-survive-the-crisis-a4da6bcaadd3
Zamoras, J. M. J., Dalumpines, S. S., & Refugio, J. G. (2024) Cryptocurrency investment risks and perceived usefulness: Basis of cryptocurrency risk management plan. Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability, 4(4), 72-88. https://doi.org/10.31098/jgrcs.v4i1.2295
Zio, E., & Pedroni, N. (2012). Risk-informed decision-making processes. Toulouse: Foundation for an Industrial Safety Culture.
Downloads
Article Metrics
- 0 times
- 0 times
Published
Citation Check
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Danielle Nel-Sanders
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Content Licensing, Copyright, and Permissions
1. License
Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability (JGRCS) has CC-BY NC or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly work for non-commercial purpose. The non-commercial use of the article will be governed by the Creative Commons Attribution license as currently displayed on Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Creative Commons License
2. Author’s Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author(s), has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author(s).
3. User Rights
Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability (JGRCS) objective is to disseminate articles published are as free as possible. Under the Creative Commons license, this journal permits users to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work for non-commercial purposes only. Users will also need to attribute authors and this journal on distributing works in the journal.
4. Rights of Authors
Authors retain the following rights:
Copyright, and proprietary rights relating to the article, such as patent rights,
The right to use the substance of the article in future own works, including lectures and books, The right to reproduce the article for own purposes, The right to self-archive the article, the right to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the article's published version (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal (Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability).
The author has a non-exclusive publishing contract with a publisher and the work is published with a more restrictive license, the author retains all the rights to publish the work elsewhere, including commercially, because she/he is not subject to the conditions of her / his own license, regardless of the type of CC license chosen.
5. Co-Authorship
If the article was jointly prepared by other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.
6. Termination
This agreement can be terminated by the author or Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability (JGRCS) upon two months’ notice where the other party has materially breached this agreement and failed to remedy such breach within a month of being given the terminating party’s notice requesting such breach to be remedied. No breach or violation of this agreement will cause this agreement or any license granted in it to terminate automatically or affect the definition of Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability (JGRCS).
7. Royalties
This agreement entitles the author to no royalties or other fees. To such extent as legally permissible, the author waives his or her right to collect royalties relative to the article in respect of any use of the article by This agreement can be terminated by the author or Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability (JGRCS) upon two months’ notice where the other party has materially breached this agreement and failed to remedy such breach within a month of being given the terminating party’s notice requesting such breach to be remedied. No breach or violation of this agreement will cause this agreement or any license granted in it to terminate automatically or affect the definition of Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability (JGRCS) or its sublicensee.
8. Miscellaneous
Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability (JGRCS) will publish the article (or have it published) in the journal if the article’s editorial process is successfully completed and Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability or its sublicensee has become obligated to have the article published. Journal of Governance Risk Management Compliance and Sustainability may conform the article to a style of punctuation, spelling, capitalization, referencing and usage that it deems appropriate. The author acknowledges that the article may be published so that it will be publicly accessible and such access will be free of charge for the readers
