Abstract
Abstract
Objective
The aim of this study was to map the phases and individual steps of the cooperative planning process, a specific participatory approach frequently used in German sports and physical activity promotion, and to explore facilitators, barriers, and challenges experienced by those leading its implementation in selected projects.
Background
More than half of the global population is not physically active enough. Therefore, the demand for more effective physical activity programs is growing. Participatory-based interventions, using the cooperative planning process, offer the potential to plan new programs that match population group and setting characteristics. This approach was extensively applied in German sports and physical activity fields, serving as a mechanism to develop and implement specific measures to change the population’s behaviour. We analysed four German empirical projects promoting sports and physical activity to identify how the approach was adapted to each project, which phases were considered, and which key performance indicators enhanced (facilitators), exacerbated (barriers), or challenged the process.
Methods
This study used a mixed-methods approach, including a systematic analysis of documents (n = 10) and in-depth, semi-structured interviews (n = 4) with the empirical projects’ scientific members.
Results
The cooperative planning process was shaped across its phases by several facilitators, challenges, and barriers. Diverse assessment procedures and recruitment tools can facilitate preparation of the process, while moderation requires particular attention during the development phase. Identifying a champion in the transition subphase and providing ongoing scientific counselling can assure the implementation of an action plan with tailored measures for sports and physical activity promotion.
Conclusions
This study contributes to a better understanding of the complexity of the cooperative planning approach and, therefore, flexibility in sports and physical activity promotion projects. Many preparation actions, several challenges in the planning process, and a critical transition in implementation responsibilities should be considered by future projects intending to adopt the approach.
Funder
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
Reference71 articles.
1. Amico, K. L., Wieland, M. L., Weis, J. A., Sullivan, S. M., Nigon, J. A., & Sia, I. G. (2011). Capacity building through focus group training in community-based participatory research. Education for health (Abingdon, England), 24(3), 638.
2. Amt für Sport und Gesundheitsförderung – Bewegung tut gut (2015). Sportentwicklungsplanung in Erlangen. http://bewegung-erlangen.de/sportentwicklungsplanung/. Accessed 19 Mar 2021.
3. Baum, F., MacDougall, C., & Smith, D. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of epidemiology and community health, 60(10), 854–857. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2004.028662.
4. Bisset, S., & Potvin, L. (2007). Expanding our conceptualization of program implementation: lessons from the genealogy of a school-based nutrition program. Health Education Research, 22(5), 737–746. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyl154.
5. Blackstock, K., Kelly, G., & Horsey, B. (2007). Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability. Ecological Economics, 60, 726–742.