ARCH Stakeholder Mapping Report

More documents

Info

in the planning phase whilst engaging them. Communities should be involved in deciding steps to be taken, giving feedback, and building consensus. Research initiatives must also come from the community in order to ensure sustainability of implemented initiatives. Additionally, dialogue between researchers and policy makers and implementers should be fostered so that policy makers understand research recommendations and are able to action them, likewise researchers can generate appropriate and needed research questions for policy makers and implementers. This shows that a workspace is needed to foster the dialogue between different stakeholders in the research uptake process. A solution to this could be the development of a virtual workspace: policy lab. Limitations: Overall, participants were able to identify stakeholders they had heard of, or had interacted with in some way, but their limited ability to completely characterise the stakeholders on the snowballing table could be attributed to limited knowledge in what the stakeholders do or workshop time constraints. Similarly, it was difficult for the workshop participants to categorise every stakeholder they had snowballed earlier on the power-interest matrix. As such, participants categorised broader stakeholder groups on the power-interest and not specific organisation names. These data were better captured in the online form because for every stakeholder entry, respondents had to categorise the stakeholder instantaneously. Nevertheless, the workshops enabled richer discussions especially revolving around the concept of research uptake. 4.Next steps Using the data collated from the stakeholder mapping exercises, a stakeholder engagement plan is being developed for the ARCH programme. Working alongside ARCH partners, regional coordinators and engaged stakeholders, the Global health network will: • Creation of a virtual workspace (policy lab) to foster dialogue between different stakeholders, raise awareness and visibility and to link research groups working on recommendation strategies and outputs for their findings • Develop tools and resources so that research uptake can be easily embedded in the planning phase of research projects, such as embedding it in protocol development tools • Use these findings and our evolving outputs to develop training courses, awareness videos and as a module within the Diploma in Global Health Research we are developing • Showcase studies’ methodologies and research results dissemination activities that have achieved successful translation into policy and/or practice • Build in a Research Uptake workstream within our regional coordination centre and research capacity network programmes (such as EDCTP, REDe, ALERRT and others) with nominated champions who can work together through the ARCH hub • Connect research consortia, development agencies and others through the hub to engage together in this aim • Publish and present at conferences to raise awareness and engagement We also recognise that stakeholder mapping is neither a static nor a “once off” process. As such, we will continue to iteratively map and engage with more stakeholders using the online survey throughout the programme. 8
5. References 1. Reed MS, Graves A, Dandy N, Posthumus H, Hubacek K, Morris J, et al. Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J Environ Manage [Internet]. 2009 Apr [cited 2020 Nov 15];90(5):1933–49. Available from: https://abdn.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/whos-in-andwhy-a-typology-of-stakeholder-analysis-methods-for-na 2. Reed MS, Curzon R. Stakeholder mapping for the governance of biosecurity: a literature review. J Integr Environ Sci [Internet]. 2015 Jan 2 [cited 2020 Oct 16];12(1):15–38. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1943815X.2014.975723 3. Khan SB. Translation of the shortened dental arch research into clinical practice: a stakeholder mapping approach. BDJ Open [Internet]. 2020 Dec 1 [cited 2020 Nov 13];6(1). Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC7387451/?report=abstract 4. Roy K, Shinde S, Sarkar BK, Malik K, Parikh R, Patel V. India’s response to adolescent mental health: a policy review and stakeholder analysis [Internet]. Vol. 54, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. Dr. Dietrich Steinkopff Verlag GmbH and Co. KG; 2019 [cited 2020 Nov 17]. p. 405–14. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC6443608/?report=abstract 5. Wang J, Aenis T. Stakeholder analysis in support of sustainable land management: Experiences from southwest China. J Environ Manage. 2019 Aug 1;243:1–11. 6. Katz R, Graeden E, Abe K, Attal-Juncqua A, Boyce MR, Eaneff S. Mapping stakeholders and policies in response to deliberate biological events. Heliyon [Internet]. 2018 Dec 1 [cited 2020 Nov 6];4(12):e01091. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC6310771/?report=abstract 7. Godakandage SSP, Senarath U, Jayawickrama HS, Siriwardena I, Wickramasinghe SWADA, Arumapperuma P, et al. Policy and stakeholder analysis of infant and young child feeding programmes in Sri Lanka. BMC Public Health [Internet]. 2017 Jun 13 [cited 2020 Nov 15];17(S2):522. Available from: http://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-017-4342-4 8. Puri S, Fernandez S, Puranik A, Anand D, Gaidhane A, Quazi Syed Z, et al. Policy content and stakeholder network analysis for infant and young child feeding in India. BMC Public Health [Internet]. 2017 Jun 13 [cited 2020 Nov 9];17(S2):461. Available from: http://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889- 017-4339-z 9. Makan A, Fekadu A, Murhar V, Luitel N, Kathree T, Ssebunya J, et al. Stakeholder analysis of the Programme for Improving Mental health carE (PRIME): Baseline findings. Int J Ment Health Syst [Internet]. 2015 Jul 8 [cited 2020 Oct 23];9(1):1–12. Available from: https://link.springer.com/articles/10.1186/s13033-015-0020-z 10. Slabá M. Stakeholder profile and stakeholder mapping of SMEs. Littera Scr [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 Oct 22]; Available from: http://journals.vstecb.cz/category/littera-scripta/9-rocnik/1_2016/ 11. Petruney T, Harlan S V., Lanham M, Robinson ET. Increasing Support for Contraception as HIV Prevention: Stakeholder Mapping to Identify Influential Individuals and Their Perceptions. Shea BJ, editor. PLoS One [Internet]. 2010 May 24 [cited 2020 Oct 23];5(5):e10781. Available from: https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010781 12. CARIAA, ASSAR. Stakeholder and influence network mapping exercise with the government, development and research actors in Namibia [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2020 Nov 13]. Available from: http://www.uct.ac.za/ 13. Barkhordarian A, Demerjian G, Jan A, Sama N, Nguyen M, Du A, et al. Stakeholder engagement analysis - a bioethics dilemma in patient-targeted intervention: Patients with temporomandibular joint disorders. J Transl Med [Internet]. 2015 Jan 20 [cited 2020 Nov 20];13(1):15. Available from: 9
Page 1 and 2: Applying Research to Policy and Pra
Page 3 and 4: 1. Introduction: Applying Research
Page 5 and 6: 1) explore what research uptake mea
Page 7: 8 In some contexts, research work i
Page 11 and 12: 6. Annex Annex 1: Workshop exercise

ARCH Stakeholder Mapping Report

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?