» Articles » PMID: 33564855

Learning from Intersectoral Action Beyond Health: a Meta-narrative Review

Overview
Date 2021 Feb 10
PMID 33564855
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Intersectoral action (ISA) is considered pivotal for achieving health and societal goals but remains difficult to achieve as it requires complex efforts, resources and coordinated responses from multiple sectors and organizations. While ISA in health is often desired, its potential can be better informed by the advanced theory-building and empirical application in real-world contexts from political science, public administration and environmental sciences. Considering the importance and the associated challenges in achieving ISA, we have conducted a meta-narrative review, in the research domains of political science, public administration, environmental and health. The review aims to identify theory, theoretical concepts and empirical applications of ISA in these identified research traditions and draw learning for health. Using the multidisciplinary database of SCOPUS from 1996 to 2017, 5535 records were identified, 155 full-text articles were reviewed and 57 papers met our final inclusion criteria. In our findings, we trace the theoretical roots of ISA across all research domains, describing the main focus and motivation to pursue collaborative work. The literature synthesis is organized around the following: implementation instruments, formal mechanisms and informal networks, enabling institutional environments involving the interplay of hardware (i.e. resources, management systems, structures) and software (more specifically the realms of ideas, values, power); and the important role of leaders who can work across boundaries in promoting ISA, political mobilization and the essential role of hybrid accountability mechanisms. Overall, our review reaffirms affirms that ISA has both technical and political dimensions. In addition to technical concerns for strengthening capacities and providing support instruments and mechanisms, future research must carefully consider power and inter-organizational dynamics in order to develop a more fulsome understanding and improve the implementation of intersectoral initiatives, as well as to ensure their sustainability. This also shows the need for continued attention to emergent knowledge bases across different research domains including health.

Citing Articles

Building Responsive Intersectoral Initiatives for Newcomers in Toronto: Learning from Service Providers' Experiences in the Context of COVID‑19.

Jackson C, Mondal S, Di Ruggiero E, Gautier L Ann Glob Health. 2025; 91(1):3.

PMID: 39867167 PMC: 11759525. DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4583.


Methods for evaluating intersectoral action partnerships to address the social determinants of health: a scoping review.

Asirvatham R, Nelson A, Northam J, Lucyk K Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can. 2024; 44(10):440-449.

PMID: 39388295 PMC: 11542738. DOI: 10.24095/hpcdp.44.9.04.


Examining the Contextual Factors Influencing Intersectoral Action for the SDGs: Insights From Canadian Federal Policy Leaders.

Trowbridge J, Tan J, Hussain S, Di Ruggiero E Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024; 13:8108.

PMID: 39099489 PMC: 11365081. DOI: 10.34172/ijhpm.8108.


Strengthening collaboration within Dutch municipalities for a healthier living environment: experiences and possible improvements according to civil servants.

Mourits K, Spitters H, van der Velden K, Bekker M, Molleman G Front Public Health. 2024; 12:1406178.

PMID: 39005982 PMC: 11242545. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1406178.


Navigating intersectoral collaboration in nutrition programming: implementors' perspectives from Assam, India.

Aivalli P, Gilmore B, Srinivas P, De Brun A Arch Public Health. 2024; 82(1):82.

PMID: 38849925 PMC: 11157891. DOI: 10.1186/s13690-024-01312-6.


References
1.
Anaf J, Baum F, Freeman T, Labonte R, Javanparast S, Jolley G . Factors shaping intersectoral action in primary health care services. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2014; 38(6):553-9. DOI: 10.1111/1753-6405.12284. View

2.
Franzen S, Chandler C, Lang T . Health research capacity development in low and middle income countries: reality or rhetoric? A systematic meta-narrative review of the qualitative literature. BMJ Open. 2017; 7(1):e012332. PMC: 5278257. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012332. View

3.
Pomeroy-Stevens A, Shrestha M, Biradavolu M, Hachhethu K, Houston R, Sharma I . Prioritizing and Funding Nepal's Multisector Nutrition Plan. Food Nutr Bull. 2016; 37(4 suppl):S151-S169. DOI: 10.1177/0379572116674555. View

4.
Delany T, Harris P, Williams C, Harris E, Baum F, Lawless A . Health Impact Assessment in New South Wales & Health in All Policies in South Australia: differences, similarities and connections. BMC Public Health. 2014; 14:699. PMC: 4227125. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-699. View

5.
Fear H, Barnett P . Holding fast: the experience of collaboration in a competitive environment. Health Promot Int. 2003; 18(1):5-14. DOI: 10.1093/heapro/18.1.5. View