Co-constructing inclusive knowledge within converging fields: Environmental governance and health care

Assmuth, Timo; Lyytimäki, Jari

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2014.12.022

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Multistakeholder governance may include formal institutions and regimes to enforce compliance, as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either have agreed to or perceive to be in their interest (Burger and Mayer 2003, Haufler 2003, Fidler 2010. Thus, challenges relating to the governance of the science-policy interface are common to various fields, such as sustainability and One Health, and are reflected in converging approaches (Assmuth and Lyytimäki 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It aims at directing governance toward (i) learning to live with change and uncertainty, (ii) combining different types of knowledge, (iii) fostering selforganization, and (iv) nurturing resilience (Folke et al 2005, Chaffin et al 2014. In health, knowledge integration was recently introduced and listed as one of the core challenges of 21st century epidemiology (Lee and Brumme 2013, Assmuth and Lyytimäki 2015, Körner et al 2016, Lebov et al 2017. Since 2015, the Network for the Evaluation of One Health (NEOH) has engaged with ca.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

EVOLvINC: EValuating knOwLedge INtegration Capacity in multistakeholder governance

Hitziger¹,

Aragrande²,

Berezowski³

et al. 2019

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research and policy processes in many fields, such as sustainability and health, are increasingly relying on transdisciplinary cooperation among a multitude of governmental, nongovernmental, and private actors from local to global levels. In the absence of hierarchical chains of command, multistakeholder governance may accommodate conflicting or diverse interests and facilitate collective action, but its effectiveness depends on its capacity to integrate systems, transformation, and target knowledge. Approaches to foster such governance are nascent and quickly evolving, and methodological standards to facilitate comparison and learning from best practice are needed. However, there is currently no evaluation approach that (i) comprehensively assesses the capacity for knowledge integration in multistakeholder governance, (ii) draws on the best available knowledge that is being developed in various fields, and (iii) combines a systematic and transferable methodological design with pragmatic feasibility. We brought together 20 experts from institutions in nine countries, all working on evaluation approaches for collaborative sciencepolicy initiatives. In a synthesis process that included a 2-day workshop and follow-up work among a core group of participants, we developed a tool for evaluating knowledge integration capacity in multistakeholder governance (EVOLvINC). Its 23 indicators incorporate previously defined criteria and components of transdisciplinary evaluations into a single, comprehensive framework that operationalizes the capacity for integrating systems, target, and transformation knowledge during an initiative's (a) design and planning processes at the policy formulation stage, (b) organization and working processes at the implementation stage, and (c) sharing and learning processes at the evaluation stage of the policy cycle. EVOLvINC is (i) implemented through a questionnaire, (ii) builds on established indicators where possible, (iii) offers a consistent and transparent semiquantitative scoring and aggregation algorithm, and (iv) uses spider diagrams for visualizing results. The tool builds on experience and expertise from both the northern and southern hemispheres and was empirically validated with seven science-policy initiatives in six African and Asian countries. As a generalized framework, EVOLvINC thus enables a structured reflection on the capacity of multistakeholder governance processes to foster knowledge integration. Its emphasis on dialog and exploration allows adaptation to contextual specificities, highlights relative strengths and weaknesses, and suggests avenues for shaping multistakeholder governance toward mutual learning, capacity building, and strengthened networks. The validation suggests that the adaptive capacity of multistakeholder governance could be best enhanced by considering systems characteristics at the policy formulation stage and fostering adaptive and generic learning at the evaluation stage of the policy cycle.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

EVOLvINC: EValuating knOwLedge INtegration Capacity in multistakeholder governance

Hitziger¹,

Aragrande²,

Berezowski³

et al. 2019

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The role of policy may be to modify actors' expectations in agreement with a desired behavior (Nyborg et al 2016), which may also be a role of scientific production and communication. Co-construction of and brokering on knowledge in an array of fields, notably ecology, human health and veterinary science but also social sciences, will thus be needed (Assmuth and Lyytimäki 2015). Typical desired behaviors under One Health may be reduction of antibiotics or bushmeat consumption, and enhancing collaboration between environmental, health and social sciences across professional sectors.…”

Section: Framing Nature In One Health: Consequences For Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The good, the bad and the ugly: framing debates on nature in a One Health community

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Originating in medical and veterinary spheres, the One Health concept stands as an open call for collaboration also between these disciplines or professions and those of environmental and social science. However, the communities of practice in question show uneasy or under-developed collaborations, due to a variety of factors. We argue that an important factor is the way issues are raised and questions are formulated, i.e., their framing. Based on complementary perspectives on health and knowledge, this overview provides an inter-and trans-disciplinary analysis of the role of the framing of « nature » in One Health discourses as a barrier or a facilitator to collaboration, as revealed by the scientific literature. We find that the lack of reflection by scientists about the framing under which they operate appears as a major factor of misunderstanding between disciplines, and a barrier for inter-and trans-disciplinary solutions to improve management of health risks and benefits. Hence, to build such solutions, framing will have to be a conscious and repeated step in the process, acknowledging and explaining the diversity of viewpoints and values. The interdisciplinary dialogues inherent in this process promote translation between scientific domains, policy-makers and citizens, with a critical but pluralistic recourse to various framings of health risks and benefits associated with nature, and a deep awareness of their practical and ethical consequences.

show abstract

“…We believe that, in terms of the interdisciplinary, intersectoral and multi-institutional One Health approach, knowledge integration at every stage of policy development, in every policy cycle, could strengthen the coordination and governance of One Health implementation. Although some integration of knowledge from different disciplines, institutions and sectors can, and does, take place intuitively, in many circumstances, we believe that it needs to become a regular, routine and institutionalized process at project, programme and policy levels 8 , 18 , 22 . In the development of health policies, knowledge assessment is often confined to the last, that is evaluation, stage of each policy cycle 23 .…”

Section: Coordination and Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge integration in One Health policy formulation, implementation and evaluation

Hitziger

Esposito²,

Canali

et al. 2018

Bull. World Health Organ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The One Health concept covers the interrelationship between human, animal and environmental health and requires multistakeholder collaboration across many cultural, disciplinary, institutional and sectoral boundaries. Yet, the implementation of the One Health approach appears hampered by shortcomings in the global framework for health governance. Knowledge integration approaches, at all stages of policy development, could help to address these shortcomings. The identification of key objectives, the resolving of trade-offs and the creation of a common vision and a common direction can be supported by multicriteria analyses. Evidence-based decision-making and transformation of observations into narratives detailing how situations emerge and might unfold in the future can be achieved by systems thinking. Finally, transdisciplinary approaches can be used both to improve the effectiveness of existing systems and to develop novel networks for collective action. To strengthen One Health governance, we propose that knowledge integration becomes a key feature of all stages in the development of related policies. We suggest several ways in which such integration could be promoted.

show abstract

Co-constructing inclusive knowledge within converging fields: Environmental governance and health care

Cited by 14 publications

References 45 publications

EVOLvINC: EValuating knOwLedge INtegration Capacity in multistakeholder governance

EVOLvINC: EValuating knOwLedge INtegration Capacity in multistakeholder governance

The good, the bad and the ugly: framing debates on nature in a One Health community

Knowledge integration in One Health policy formulation, implementation and evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About