The use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) remains prevalent in most developing countries including Zimbabwe, South Africa and India. Health care provision in these three countries continues to depend on both orthodox and traditional systems. This paper seeks to explore how the political, social and economic backgrounds have previously influenced and continue to influence CAM health policies taken by these countries. There is thus need to analyse why Zimbabwe, South Africa and India took different approaches in policy formulation and implementation as well as an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the different approaches taken by each country. This paper also seeks to analyse CAM evidence from the three countries as well as relating the impact of the different policies on practice. It maybe postulated that the Zimbabwean case for implementing a CAM health policy by legislating the Zimbabwe Traditional Healer’s Association (ZINATHA) was mainly driven by a populist approach adopted by post-colonial politicians. On the contrary, the reverse seems true for India where there was a significant need and preference for the Ayurvedic system in comparison to orthodox medication among some sectors of the community. There are also significant similarities and differences in the road towards professionalization of traditional medicine in Zimbabwe and South Africa. It is therefore of paramount importance to compare and contrast how the different socio-economic and political dynamics yielded different end products in these countries. Analysis will also be made on how each of the country’s policies impact on practice, hence enabling recommendations for improved traditional medication practices.
|Number of pages||8|
|Journal||International Journal of Herbal Medicine|
|Publication status||Accepted/In press - 29 May 2014|