Enhancing the use of stakeholder analysis for policy implementation research: towards a novel framing and operationalised measures.


Journal

BMJ global health
ISSN: 2059-7908
Titre abrégé: BMJ Glob Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101685275

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2020
Historique:
received: 15 04 2020
revised: 26 08 2020
accepted: 27 08 2020
entrez: 7 11 2020
pubmed: 8 11 2020
medline: 25 6 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Policy is shaped and influenced by a diverse set of stakeholders at the global, national and local levels. While stakeholder analysis is a recognised practical tool to assess the positions and engagement of actors relevant to policy, few empirical studies provide details of how complex concepts such as power, interest and position are operationalised and assessed in these types of analyses. This study aims to address this gap by reviewing conceptual approaches underlying stakeholder analyses and by developing a framework that can be applied to policy implementation in low-and-middle income countries. The framework was developed through a three-step process: a scoping review, peer review by health policy experts and the conduct of an analysis using key informant interviews and a consensus building exercise. Four characteristics were selected for inclusion: levels of knowledge, interest, power and position of stakeholders related to the policy. The framework development process highlighted the need to revisit how we assess the power of actors, a key issue in stakeholder analyses, and differentiate an actor's potential power, based on resources, and whether they exercise it, based on the actions they take for or against a policy. Exploration of the intersections between characteristics of actors and their level of knowledge can determine interest, which in turn can affect stakeholder position on a policy, showing the importance of analysing these characteristics together. Both top-down and bottom-up approaches in implementation must also be incorporated in the analysis of policy actors, as there are differences in the type of knowledge, interest and sources of power among national, local and frontline stakeholders. The developed framework contributes to health policy research by offering a practical tool for analysing the characteristics of policy actors and tackling the intricacies of assessing complex concepts embedded in the conduct of stakeholder analyses.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Policy is shaped and influenced by a diverse set of stakeholders at the global, national and local levels. While stakeholder analysis is a recognised practical tool to assess the positions and engagement of actors relevant to policy, few empirical studies provide details of how complex concepts such as power, interest and position are operationalised and assessed in these types of analyses. This study aims to address this gap by reviewing conceptual approaches underlying stakeholder analyses and by developing a framework that can be applied to policy implementation in low-and-middle income countries.
METHODS
The framework was developed through a three-step process: a scoping review, peer review by health policy experts and the conduct of an analysis using key informant interviews and a consensus building exercise. Four characteristics were selected for inclusion: levels of knowledge, interest, power and position of stakeholders related to the policy.
RESULT
The framework development process highlighted the need to revisit how we assess the power of actors, a key issue in stakeholder analyses, and differentiate an actor's potential power, based on resources, and whether they exercise it, based on the actions they take for or against a policy. Exploration of the intersections between characteristics of actors and their level of knowledge can determine interest, which in turn can affect stakeholder position on a policy, showing the importance of analysing these characteristics together. Both top-down and bottom-up approaches in implementation must also be incorporated in the analysis of policy actors, as there are differences in the type of knowledge, interest and sources of power among national, local and frontline stakeholders.
CONCLUSION
The developed framework contributes to health policy research by offering a practical tool for analysing the characteristics of policy actors and tackling the intricacies of assessing complex concepts embedded in the conduct of stakeholder analyses.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33158851
pii: bmjgh-2020-002661
doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002661
pmc: PMC7651378
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Subventions

Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_PC_16026
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 200346/Z/15/Z
Pays : United Kingdom

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: All authors report grants from Wellcome Trust, during the conduct of the study; LPV reports grants from Philippine College of Physicians, non-financial support from Sanofi and Cadila and grants from WHO Asia Pacific Observatory, outside the submitted work.

Références

East Mediterr Health J. 2014 Jun 09;20(5):300-8
pubmed: 24952287
Health Policy Plan. 2015 Feb;30(1):8-18
pubmed: 24342741
Public Health. 2010 Mar;124(3):159-66
pubmed: 20227095
Health Policy Plan. 2004 Sep;19(5):279-91
pubmed: 15310663
Health Policy Plan. 2008 Sep;23(5):361-8
pubmed: 18664526
Health Policy Plan. 2008 Sep;23(5):294-307
pubmed: 18650209
Eval Program Plann. 2011 Feb;34(1):1-12
pubmed: 20674980
BMJ Open. 2018 Jul 30;8(7):e024000
pubmed: 30061449
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016 Feb 09;5(6):355-63
pubmed: 27285513
Waste Manag. 2014 May;34(5):938-51
pubmed: 24636007
Int J Clin Pharm. 2016 Jun;38(3):655-62
pubmed: 26846316
Health Policy Plan. 2015 Dec;30 Suppl 2:ii84-ii94
pubmed: 26516154
Health Policy Plan. 2018 Mar 1;33(2):215-223
pubmed: 29237026
Health Policy. 2016 Mar;120(3):281-92
pubmed: 26876296
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013 Mar 04;13:58
pubmed: 23497057
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Nov 10;15(1):95
pubmed: 29126423
PLoS One. 2016 Sep 15;11(9):e0162154
pubmed: 27631089
Eur J Public Health. 2010 Oct;20(5):588-94
pubmed: 20350932
Eur J Public Health. 2011 Jun;21(3):295-9
pubmed: 20573656
Health Policy Plan. 2018 May 1;33(4):611-621
pubmed: 29471544
Health Policy Plan. 2000 Sep;15(3):338-45
pubmed: 11012410
J Educ Health Promot. 2018 Oct 29;7:135
pubmed: 30505863
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Oct 2;169(7):467-473
pubmed: 30178033
Health Policy Plan. 2013 May;28(3):263-78
pubmed: 22791557
Health Policy Plan. 2012 Mar;27 Suppl 1:i64-76
pubmed: 22388502
Health Policy Plan. 2013 Sep;28(6):626-35
pubmed: 23144229
Health Policy Plan. 2011 Sep;26(5):373-84
pubmed: 21183461
Health Care Manag (Frederick). 2012 Oct-Dec;31(4):365-74
pubmed: 23111489
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Apr 16;17(1):42
pubmed: 30992014
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2020 Feb;16(2):216-229
pubmed: 31133537
Health Policy Plan. 2013 Jul;28(4):358-66
pubmed: 22826517

Auteurs

Marysol Astrea Balane (MA)

College of Medicine, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines marysol.balane@gmail.com.

Benjamin Palafox (B)

Centre for Global Chronic Conditions, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Lia M Palileo-Villanueva (LM)

College of Medicine, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines.

Martin McKee (M)

Centre for Global Chronic Conditions, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Dina Balabanova (D)

Department of Global Health & Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH