UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

Negotiating multisectoral evidence: a qualitative study of knowledge exchange at the intersection of transport and public health

Guell, C; Mackett, RL; Oglivie, D; (2017) Negotiating multisectoral evidence: a qualitative study of knowledge exchange at the intersection of transport and public health. BMC Public Health , 17 (17) 10.1186/s12889-016-3940-x. Green open access

[img]
Preview
Text
B70 Guell, Mackett & Oglivie Negotiating Multisectoral BMC Public Health.pdf - Published version

Download (468kB) | Preview

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For the prevention and control of chronic diseases, two strategies are frequently highlighted: that public health should be evidence based, and that it should develop a multisectoral approach. At the end of a natural experimental study of the health impacts of new transport infrastructure, we took the opportunity of a knowledge exchange forum to explore how stakeholders assessed, negotiated and intended to apply multisectoral evidence in policy and practice at the intersection of transport and health. We aimed to better understand the challenges they faced in knowledge exchange, as well as their everyday experiences with working in multisectoral remits. METHODS: In 2015, we conducted participant observation during an interactive event with 41 stakeholders from national and local government, the third sector and academia in Cambridge, UK. Formal and informal interactions between stakeholders were recorded in observational field notes. We also conducted 18 semistructured interviews reflecting on the event and on knowledge exchange in general. RESULTS: We found that stakeholders negotiated a variety of challenges. First, stakeholders had to negotiate relatively new formal and informal multisectoral remits; and how to reconcile the differing expectations of transport specialists, who tended to emphasise the importance of precedence in guiding action, and health specialists’ concern for the rigour and synthesis of research evidence. Second, research in this field involved complex study designs, and often produced evidence with uncertain transferability to other settings. Third, health outcomes of transport schemes had political traction and were used strategically but not easily translated into cost-benefit ratios. Finally, knowledge exchange meant multiple directions of influence. Stakeholders were concerned that researchers did not always have skills to translate their findings into understandable evidence, and some stakeholders would welcome opportunities to influence research agendas. CONCLUSIONS: This case study of stakeholders’ experiences indicates that multisectoral research, practice and policymaking requires the ability and capacity to locate, understand and communicate complex evidence from a variety of disciplines, and integrate different types of evidence into clear business cases beyond sectoral boundaries.

Type: Article
Title: Negotiating multisectoral evidence: a qualitative study of knowledge exchange at the intersection of transport and public health
Open access status: An open access version is available from UCL Discovery
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-016-3940-x
Publisher version: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3940-x
Language: English
Additional information: © The Author(s). 2017. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Keywords: Multisectorality, Knowledge exchange, Evidence based practice, Public health, Population health interventions, Transport, Ethnographic research, United Kingdom
UCL classification: UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS > Faculty of Engineering Science
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS > Faculty of Engineering Science > Dept of Civil, Environ and Geomatic Eng
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1534662
Downloads since deposit
61Downloads
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item