Dataset Information

Policymaking through a knowledge lens: Using the embodied-enacted-inscribed knowledge framework to illuminate the transfer of knowledge in a mental health policy consultation process - A South African case study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Marrying principles of evidence-based policymaking, with its focus on what works, with principles of consultative policymaking, with its focus on what works for whom, means finding ways to integrate multiple knowledge inputs into policy decisions. Viewed through the lens of the embodied-enacted-inscribed knowledge framework, policy consultation is a site of knowledge enactment, where the embodied knowledge enacted by individuals engages with the inscribed knowledge contained in policy documents, creating new forms of embodied and inscribed knowledge that move beyond these spaces.

Aim

Using this knowledge framework, this study aimed to trace the movement of knowledge inputs through South Africa's mental health policy consultation summit.

Methods

Breakaway group session transcripts from the national consultation summit were thematically analysed to identify the types of knowledge that participants explicitly drew on (experiential or evidence-based) during discussions and how these knowledge inputs were used, responded to, and captured.

Findings

Findings suggest that there was little explicit reference to either evidence-based or experiential knowledge in most of the talk. While slightly more evidence-based than experiential knowledge claims were made, this did not render these claims any more likely to be responded to or engaged with in group discussions, or to be inscribed in group recommendations.

Discussion

The importance of designing participatory processes that enable optimal use of knowledge inputs in these enacted spaces is discussed.

Conclusion

Attending to the specific ways in which knowledge is transformed and moved through a policy consultation process has the potential to enhance the value that consultation offers policymakers.

SUBMITTER: Marais DL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7806173 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Policymaking through a knowledge lens: Using the embodied-enacted-inscribed knowledge framework to illuminate the transfer of knowledge in a mental health policy consultation process - A South African case study.

Marais Debra Leigh DL Petersen Inge I Quayle Michael M

PloS one 20210113 1

<h4>Background</h4>Marrying principles of evidence-based policymaking, with its focus on what works, with principles of consultative policymaking, with its focus on what works for whom, means finding ways to integrate multiple knowledge inputs into policy decisions. Viewed through the lens of the embodied-enacted-inscribed knowledge framework, policy consultation is a site of knowledge enactment, where the embodied knowledge enacted by individuals engages with the inscribed knowledge contained i ...[more]

PMID: 33439892

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:It is widely recognised that mental health policies should be developed in consultation with those tasked with their implementation and the users affected by them. In the South African legislative context public participation in policymaking is assumed, with little guidance on how to conduct consultation processes, nor how to use consultation inputs in policy decisions. METHODS:The South African Mental Health Policy Framework and Strategic Plan was adopted in 2013 after an extensive consultation process. Focussing on the 2012 provincial and national consultation summit, this case-study conducted key informant interviews and undertook documentary analysis to explore the process through which consultation inputs were-or were not-transferred to inform this policy. Between 2013 and 2016 seven interviews were conducted, and 11 documents (policy drafts and summit outputs) and transcripts of 23 audio-recorded sessions from the national summit were analysed. RESULTS:Findings revealed that no substantive changes were made to the mental health policy following the consultation summits. There do not seem to have been systematic processes for facilitating and capturing knowledge inputs, or for transferring these inputs between provincial and national levels. There was also no further consultation regarding priorities identified for implementation prior to finalisation of the policy, with participants highlighting concerns about policy implementation at local levels as a result. This represents a lost opportunity for greater involvement of service users in policy development. CONCLUSIONS:Together with poor service-user representation, the format of the consultation process limited participant interaction and the possibility for engagement with, or uptake of, more experiential forms of knowledge. Several procedural elements were found to limit the elicitation and transference of consultation contributions for uptake into policy. Recommendations for future policy consultations include adapting the format of participatory processes to enable optimal use of participant knowledge, as well as greater service-user participation.

Project description:BackgroundResearch use in policymaking is multi-faceted and has been the focus of extensive study. However, virtually no quantitative studies have examined whether the determinants of research use vary according to the type of research use or phase of policy process. Understanding such variation is important for selecting the targets of implementation strategies that aim to increase the frequency of research use in policymaking.MethodsA web-based survey of US state agency officials involved with children's mental health policymaking was conducted between December 2019 and February 2020 (n = 224, response rate = 33.7%, 49 states responding (98%), median respondents per state = 4). The dependent variables were composite scores of the frequency of using children's mental health research in general, specific types of research use (i.e., conceptual, instrumental, tactical, imposed), and during different phases of the policy process (i.e., agenda setting, policy development, policy implementation). The independent variables were four composite scores of determinants of research use: agency leadership for research use, agency barriers to research use, research use skills, and dissemination barriers (e.g., lack of actionable messages/recommendations in research summaries, lack of interaction/collaboration with researchers). Separate multiple linear regression models estimated associations between determinant and frequency of research use scores.ResultsDeterminants of research use varied significantly by type of research use and phase of policy process. For example, agency leadership for research use was the only determinant significantly associated with imposed research use (β = 0.31, p < 0.001). Skills for research use were the only determinant associated with tactical research use (β = 0.17, p = 0.03) and were only associated with research use in the agenda-setting phase (β = 0.16, p = 0.04). Dissemination barriers were the most universal determinants of research use, as they were significantly and inversely associated with frequency of conceptual (β = -0.21, p = 0.01) and instrumental (β = -0.22, p = 0.01) research use and during all three phases of policy process.ConclusionsDecisions about the determinants to target with policy-focused implementation strategies-and the strategies that are selected to affect these targets-should reflect the specific types of research use that these strategies aim to influence.

Project description:BACKGROUND:It is unclear how to engage a wide range of knowledge users in research. We aimed to map the evidence on engaging knowledge users with an emphasis on policy-makers, health system managers, and policy analysts in the knowledge synthesis process through a scoping review. METHODS:We used the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for scoping reviews. Nine electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE), two grey literature sources (e.g., OpenSIGLE), and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were searched from 1996 to August 2016. We included any type of study describing strategies, barriers and facilitators, or assessing the impact of engaging policy-makers, health system managers, and policy analysts in the knowledge synthesis process. Screening and data abstraction were conducted by two reviewers independently with a third reviewer resolving discrepancies. Frequency and thematic analyses were conducted. RESULTS:After screening 8395 titles and abstracts followed by 394 full-texts, 84 unique documents and 7 companion reports fulfilled our eligibility criteria. All 84 documents were published in the last 10 years, and half were prepared in North America. The most common type of knowledge synthesis with knowledge user engagement was a systematic review (36%). The knowledge synthesis most commonly addressed an issue at the level of national healthcare system (48%) and focused on health services delivery (17%) in high-income countries (86%). Policy-makers were the most common (64%) knowledge users, followed by healthcare professionals (49%) and government agencies as well as patients and caregivers (34%). Knowledge users were engaged in conceptualization and design (49%), literature search and data collection (52%), data synthesis and interpretation (71%), and knowledge dissemination and application (44%). Knowledge users were most commonly engaged as key informants through meetings and workshops as well as surveys, focus groups, and interviews either in-person or by telephone and emails. Knowledge user content expertise/awareness was a common facilitator (18%), while lack of time or opportunity to participate was a common barrier (12%). CONCLUSIONS:Knowledge users were most commonly engaged during the data synthesis and interpretation phases of the knowledge synthesis conduct. Researchers should document and evaluate knowledge user engagement in knowledge synthesis. REGISTRATION DETAILS:Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/4dy53/ ).

Project description:Background: This article offers a new perspective of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as network governance (NG) using the policy network theory (PNT) for the analysis. Methods: Two case studies were selected from the ASEAN Community to examine the applicability and effectiveness of NG in promoting ASEAN cooperation. These case studies were chosen due to their prominence and the prevalence of critical comments about their effectiveness in promoting cooperation. The content analysis utilised primary data from ASEAN reports, documents, research articles and processes, and studies on NG and policy networks. A literature review was conducted using online academic databases and ASEAN-related websites. The search covered the period from June 2019 to March 2021, with further searches conducted between January and July 2023. These data collection efforts provided a robust analysis of the case studies within the NG and ASEAN integration contexts. Results: The findings show ASEAN as a hybrid structure which has supported its survival and relevance. This approach provides legitimacy for ASEAN globally by purposefully adopting structures similar to the EU without the supranational elements. It also showcases ASEAN's motivation for asserting its centrality. Adopting a hybrid structure has led to ASEAN's soft institutionalisation, driven by its norms and characterised by a less empowered secretariat, where the member states are the decision-makers and implementors of policies. It opens a pathway to recognising ASEAN states' autonomy, where the actors' will and interests affect decision-making and define performance. Conclusions: This article demonstrates NG's viability in promoting ASEAN's centrality in regional cooperation and institutional arrangements and allows for a nuanced assessment of its performance considering the context of the issue and ASEAN's history and emphasising the member states' primacy in policymaking. The NG framework contributes to ASEAN's legitimacy, regional cooperation and performance despite its inherent limitations.

Dataset Information

Policymaking through a knowledge lens: Using the embodied-enacted-inscribed knowledge framework to illuminate the transfer of knowledge in a mental health policy consultation process - A South African case study.

Background

Aim

Methods

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion

Publications

Policymaking through a knowledge lens: Using the embodied-enacted-inscribed knowledge framework to illuminate the transfer of knowledge in a mental health policy consultation process - A South African case study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets