IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v121y2017i2p158-168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the unanticipated effects of multi-sectoral partnerships in chronic disease prevention

Author

Listed:
  • Willis, Cameron David
  • Corrigan, Crystal
  • Stockton, Lisa
  • Greene, Julie Kathryn
  • Riley, Barbara Lyn

Abstract

Multi-sectoral partnerships are important parts of many public health efforts to address chronic diseases, such as cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. Despite the potential value of multi-sectoral approaches, uncertainty exists regarding their effects on individuals, organizations, communities and populations. This article reports on a study that examined the unanticipated effects (both positive and negative) of the Public Health Agency of Canada’s (the Agency) Multi-sectoral Partnerships initiative, which supports more than 30 multi-sectoral partnership projects across Canada. Thirteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff from organizations participating in 3 diverse partnership projects as part of the Agency’s multi-sectoral partnerships initiative. Multiple unanticipated effects were identified and organized into 4 themes: (1) insights about the flexibility and responsiveness of government; (2) access to new and valuable resources (people, skills, expertise); (3) opportunity to build new capacities; and (4) understanding realistic timelines for partnership activities and outcomes. While these effects were unanticipated for study participants, they resonate with insights from the literature on multi-sectoral partnerships. These results raise a number of questions for consideration as partnership initiatives continue to evolve, including the types of training that partners might need; the individual and organizational capacities required for partnership approaches; and the evaluation techniques that might be most useful to capture the non-linear effects of partnership approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Willis, Cameron David & Corrigan, Crystal & Stockton, Lisa & Greene, Julie Kathryn & Riley, Barbara Lyn, 2017. "Exploring the unanticipated effects of multi-sectoral partnerships in chronic disease prevention," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 158-168.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:121:y:2017:i:2:p:158-168
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.11.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016885101630327X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.11.019?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Willis, C.D. & Riley, B.L. & Herbert, C.P. & Best, A., 2013. "Networks to strengthen health systems for chronic disease prevention," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 103(11), pages 39-48.
    2. Buse, Kent & Harmer, Andrew M., 2007. "Seven habits of highly effective global public-private health partnerships: Practice and potential," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 259-271, January.
    3. Trickett, E.J. & Beehler, S. & Deutsch, C. & Green, L.W. & Hawe, P. & McLeroy, K. & Lin Miller, R. & Rapkin, B.D. & Schensul, J.J. & Schulz, A.J. & Trimble, J.E., 2011. "Advancing the science of community-level interventions," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 101(8), pages 1410-1419.
    4. Ian Sanderson, 2009. "Intelligent Policy Making for a Complex World: Pragmatism, Evidence and Learning," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 699-719, December.
    5. Ian Sanderson, 2009. "Intelligent Policy Making for a Complex World: Pragmatism, Evidence and Learning," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57, pages 699-719, December.
    6. Galea, Gauden & McKee, Martin, 2014. "Public–private partnerships with large corporations: Setting the ground rules for better health," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 138-140.
    7. Sterman, J.D., 2006. "Learning from evidence in a complex world," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(3), pages 505-514.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gates, Emily F., 2016. "Making sense of the emerging conversation in evaluation about systems thinking and complexity science," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 62-73.
    2. O’Connor John, 2022. "Strengthening the science–policy interface in Ireland," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 70(4), pages 29-52, December.
    3. Crabolu, Gloria & Font, Xavier & Eker, Sibel, 2023. "Evaluating policy complexity with Causal Loop Diagrams," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    4. Ansell, Christopher K. & Bartenberger, Martin, 2016. "Varieties of experimentalism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 64-73.
    5. Claire A Dunlop, 2014. "The Possible Experts: How Epistemic Communities Negotiate Barriers to Knowledge Use in Ecosystems Services Policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(2), pages 208-228, April.
    6. Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi & Shona Hilton & Chris Bonell & Lyndal Bond, 2014. "Understanding the Development of Minimum Unit Pricing of Alcohol in Scotland: A Qualitative Study of the Policy Process," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-10, March.
    7. Jessica H. Phoenix & Lucy G. Atkinson & Hannah Baker, 2019. "Creating and communicating social research for policymakers in government," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-11, December.
    8. Walton, Mat, 2014. "Applying complexity theory: A review to inform evaluation design," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 119-126.
    9. Stucki, Iris, 2018. "Evidence-based arguments in direct democracy: The case of smoking bans in Switzerland," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 148-156.
    10. Deas, L. & Mattu, L. & Gnich, W., 2013. "Intelligent policy making? Key actors' perspectives on the development and implementation of an early years' initiative in Scotland's public health arena," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 1-8.
    11. Nguyen, Sun V. & Langston, Nancy & Wellstead, Adam & Howlett, Michael, 2020. "Mining the evidence: Public comments and evidence-based policymaking in the controversial Minnesota PolyMet mining project," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    12. Belinda McFadgen & Dave Huitema, 2018. "Experimentation at the interface of science and policy: a multi-case analysis of how policy experiments influence political decision-makers," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(2), pages 161-187, June.
    13. Plante, Charles, 2018. "Policy or Window Dressing? Exploring the Impact of Poverty Reduction Strategies on Poverty Rates among the Canadian Provinces," SocArXiv xtnfg, Center for Open Science.
    14. Paul Cairney, 2015. "Debate: What is complex government and what can we do about it?," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 3-6, January.
    15. Crabolu, Gloria & Font, Xavier & Eker, Sibel, 2023. "Evaluating Policy Instrument Complexity With Causal Loop Diagrams," SocArXiv 2c83b, Center for Open Science.
    16. Paul Lewis, 2021. "The innovation systems approach: an Austrian and Ostromian perspective," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 34(1), pages 97-114, March.
    17. Yi Yang, 2021. "Critical realism and complexity theory: Building a nonconstructivist systems research framework for effective governance analysis," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 177-183, January.
    18. Ralston, Rob, 2021. "The informal governance of public-private partnerships in UK obesity policy: Collaborating on calorie reduction or reducing effectiveness?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 289(C).
    19. Greenhalgh, Trisha & Engebretsen, Eivind, 2022. "The science-policy relationship in times of crisis: An urgent call for a pragmatist turn," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 306(C).
    20. Pierre-Olivier Bédard, 2015. "The Mobilization of Scientific Evidence by Public Policy Analysts," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(3), pages 21582440156, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:121:y:2017:i:2:p:158-168. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.