A systematic review of frameworks for the interrelationships of mental health evidence and policy in low- and middle-income countries

Background: The interrelationships between research evidence and policy-making are complex. Different theoretical frameworks exist to explain general evidence–policy interactions. One largely unexplored element of these interrelationships is how evidence interrelates with, and influences, policy/political agenda-setting. This review aims to identify the elements and processes of theories, frameworks and models on interrelationships of research evidence and health policy-making, with a focus on actionability and agenda-setting in the context of mental health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: A systematic review of theories was conducted based on the BeHeMOTh search method, using a tested and refined search strategy. Nine electronic databases and other relevant sources were searched for peer-reviewed and grey literature. Two reviewers screened the abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, extracted data and performed quality assessments. Analysis was based on a thematic analysis. The included papers had to present an actionable theoretical framework/model on evidence and policy interrelationships, such as knowledge translation or evidence-based policy, specifically target the agenda-setting process, focus on mental health, be from LMICs and published in English. Results: From 236 publications included in the full text analysis, no studies fully complied with our inclusion criteria. Widening the focus by leaving out ‘agenda-setting’, we included ten studies, four of which had unique conceptual frameworks focusing on mental health and LMICs but not agenda-setting. The four analysed frameworks confirmed research gaps from LMICs and mental health, and a lack of focus on agenda-setting. Frameworks and models from other health and policy areas provide interesting conceptual approaches and lessons with regards to agenda-setting. Conclusion: Our systematic review identified frameworks on evidence and policy interrelations that differ in their elements and processes. No framework fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Four actionable frameworks are applicable to mental health and LMICs, but none specifically target agenda-setting. We have identified agenda-setting as a research theory gap in the context of mental health knowledge translation in LMICs. Frameworks from other health/policy areas could offer lessons on agenda-setting and new approaches for creating policy impact for mental health and to tackle the translational gap in LMICs

IMBER – Research for marine sustainability: Synthesis and the way forward

The Integrated Marine Biogeochemistry and Ecosystem Research (IMBER) project aims at developing a comprehensive understanding of and accurate predictive capacity of ocean responses to accelerating global change and the consequent effects on the Earth system and human society. Understanding the changing ecology and biogeochemistry of marine ecosystems and their sensitivity and resilience to multiple drivers, pressures and stressors is critical to developing responses that will help reduce the vulnerability of marine-dependent human communities. This overview of the IMBER project provides a synthesis of project achievements and highlights the value of collaborative, interdisciplinary, integrated research approaches as developed and implemented through IMBER regional programs, working groups, project-wide activities, national contributions, and external partnerships. A perspective is provided on the way forward for the next 10 years of the IMBER project as the global environmental change research landscape evolves and as new areas of marine research emerge. IMBER science aims to foster collaborative, interdisciplinary and integrated research that addresses key ocean and social science issues and provides the understanding needed to propose innovative societal responses to changing marine systems

Bridging or Maintaining Distance: A Matched Comparison of Parent and Service Provider Realities (SUMMARY REPORT)

When service providers and parents engage with each other to improve family circumstances, do they have similar impressions of what is important and what is helpful? Our purpose in interviewing parents who have been involved in child protection services and their service providers was to understand how parents and service providers view each other, their interactions, and the services they are engaged in. We were also interested in the “official record”—the files that describe parents, children, their needs, and the services provided in response. A comparison of the perspectives of service providers, parents, and files highlights some of the barriers and assumptions at work when service providers and parents engage with each other to improve family functioning. Contrasting these three versions of events highlights how differences are bridged or maintained. To begin our matched comparison of parent, file, and service provider realities we present a “case study” summarizing a parent’s perspective, the corresponding service provider’s perspective, as well as an excerpt taken from this particular parent’s file with the Children’s Aid Society. This offers a glimpse of the data that was used to form the basis for the report. It illustrates the nature of the information, the types of comparisons undertaken, as well as more generally to provide a sense of the three perspectives included

Fashion Education In Sustainability In Practice

This paper sets out the experiences of and critical reflections on devising and delivering a Masters level fashion education course in sustainability at London College of Fashion, UK. The course, first established in 2008, has been created from a collaborative, participatory, ecological paradigm and draws on an approach to fashion education that is oriented towards process, action and creative participation in all aspects of the transition to sustainability: social, environmental, economic. This stands in contrast to conventional educational models that concentrate on product or outcome and the preparation of students for economic life. The paper describes the Masters course’s broad disciplinary approach and its theoretical framework, drawn from design for sustainability. Through reference to student work, the paper goes on to set out some of the opportunities and challenges that working in this way has presented, including among others; bridging of epistemological differences at an institutional level; new roles for designers working within a framework of sustainability; and emerging ways to visualize the process and practice of sustainability

From scaling to governance of the land system: bridging ecological and economic perspectives

One of the main unresolved problems in policy making is the step from scale issues to effective governance. What is appropriate for a lower level, such as a region or location, might be considered undesirable at a global scale. Linking scaling to governance is an important issue for the improvement of current environmental management and policies. Whereas social–ecological science tends to focus on adaptive behavior and aspects of spatial ecological data, new institutional economics focuses more on levels in institutional scales and temporal dimensions. Consequently, both disciplines perceive different scaling challenges while aiming at a similar improvement of effective governance. We propose that future research needs to focus on four themes: (1) How to combine spatial properties such as extent and grain with the economic units of market and agent; (2) How to combine the different governance instruments proposed by both perspectives; (3) How to communicate the different scaling perspectives (hierarchy vs. no hierarchy) and meanings to policy makers and other stakeholders; and (4) How to deal with the non-equilibrium conditions in the real world and the disciplinary perspectives. Here, we hypothesize that a combined system perspective of both disciplines will improve our understanding of the missing link between scaling and governanc