Table A3

Analysis using the local integrated health and social care network framework by Shiffman et al. (2016)a

Actor featuresPolicy environmentIssue characteristics
Global integrated health and social careLeadershipbGovernancecCompositiondFraminge strategiesAllies and opponentsfFundinggNormshSeverityiTractabilityjAffected groupsk
The international foundation for integrated care AustraliaPersistent well connected; excellent coalition-building skillsCongruentHeterogeneousEmergent awarenessAllies promoting the approachTerm fundingAppropriate and aligned with the IC approachHigh severity; High Burden to systemComplex solution; Threat to status quoPriority and vulnerable groups with insufficient political power

Note(s):aTable created by authors with categories described in Shiffman et al. (2016) 

bThe ability of an individual to define the issue in a way that resonates with key organisations, bringing these together and once linked, guiding them to effective collective action

cThis is how a network steers itself to achieve goals its members agree to (in a coordinated way)

dThis refers to the diversity of the members of the network, e.g. the inclusion of linking scientists, advocates, funders, policymakers and programme implement with a global approach

eThis refers to how the network actors publicly position an issue to attract attention and resources

fThis encompasses those groups whose interests align with a network’s goals (allies) and those who have opposed interests (opponents)

gThis refers to the network’s type of funding model

hThis includes all standards of appropriate behaviour for actors with a given identity

iThe degree as to how the problems lead to high mortality and morbidity, economic damage or social disruption

jThe degree as to how problems are perceived to be soluble (clear link between a condition and its structural causes)

kClear identification of the target group

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal