Policymaking through a knowledge lens: Using the embodied-enacted-inscribed knowledge framework to illuminate the transfer of knowledge in a mental health policy consultation process – A South African case study

Author:

Marais Debra LeighORCID,Petersen Inge,Quayle Michael

Abstract

Background Marrying principles of evidence-based policymaking, with its focus on what works, with principles of consultative policymaking, with its focus on what works for whom, means finding ways to integrate multiple knowledge inputs into policy decisions. Viewed through the lens of the embodied-enacted-inscribed knowledge framework, policy consultation is a site of knowledge enactment, where the embodied knowledge enacted by individuals engages with the inscribed knowledge contained in policy documents, creating new forms of embodied and inscribed knowledge that move beyond these spaces. Aim Using this knowledge framework, this study aimed to trace the movement of knowledge inputs through South Africa’s mental health policy consultation summit. Methods Breakaway group session transcripts from the national consultation summit were thematically analysed to identify the types of knowledge that participants explicitly drew on (experiential or evidence-based) during discussions and how these knowledge inputs were used, responded to, and captured. Findings Findings suggest that there was little explicit reference to either evidence-based or experiential knowledge in most of the talk. While slightly more evidence-based than experiential knowledge claims were made, this did not render these claims any more likely to be responded to or engaged with in group discussions, or to be inscribed in group recommendations. Discussion The importance of designing participatory processes that enable optimal use of knowledge inputs in these enacted spaces is discussed. Conclusion Attending to the specific ways in which knowledge is transformed and moved through a policy consultation process has the potential to enhance the value that consultation offers policymakers.

Publisher

Public Library of Science (PLoS)

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Reference43 articles.

1. Sociological perspectives on the politics of knowledge in health care: introduction to themed issue;C Brosnan;Heal Sociol Rev,2016

2. Who decides what evidence is?;D Rose;Developing a multiple perspectives paradigm in mental health,2006

3. Deconstructing the evidence-based discourse in health sciences: truth, power and fascism;D Holmes;Int J Evid Based Healthc,2006

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3