Cargando…

One Health stakeholder and institutional analysis in Kenya

INTRODUCTION: One Health (OH) can be considered a complex emerging policy to resolve health issues at the animal–human and environmental interface. It is expected to drive system changes in terms of new formal and informal institutional and organisational arrangements. This study, using Rift Valley...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kimani, Tabitha, Ngigi, Margaret, Schelling, Esther, Randolph, Tom
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Co-Action Publishing 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4916260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27330042
http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/iee.v6.31191
_version_ 1782438798709227520
author Kimani, Tabitha
Ngigi, Margaret
Schelling, Esther
Randolph, Tom
author_facet Kimani, Tabitha
Ngigi, Margaret
Schelling, Esther
Randolph, Tom
author_sort Kimani, Tabitha
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: One Health (OH) can be considered a complex emerging policy to resolve health issues at the animal–human and environmental interface. It is expected to drive system changes in terms of new formal and informal institutional and organisational arrangements. This study, using Rift Valley fever (RVF) as a zoonotic problem requiring an OH approach, sought to understand the institutionalisation process at national and subnational levels in an early adopting country, Kenya. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Social network analysis methodologies were used. Stakeholder roles and relational data were collected at national and subnational levels in 2012. Key informants from stakeholder organisations were interviewed, guided by a checklist. Public sector animal and public health organisations were interviewed first to identify other stakeholders with whom they had financial, information sharing and joint cooperation relationships. Visualisation of the OH social network and relationships were shown in sociograms and mathematical (degree and centrality) characteristics of the network summarised. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Thirty-two and 20 stakeholders relevant to OH were identified at national and subnational levels, respectively. Their roles spanned wildlife, livestock, and public health sectors as well as weather prediction. About 50% of national-level stakeholders had made significant progress on OH institutionalisation to an extent that formal coordination structures (zoonoses disease unit and a technical working group) had been created. However, the process had not trickled down to subnational levels although cross-sectoral and sectoral collaborations were identified. The overall binary social network density for the stakeholders showed that 35 and 21% of the possible ties between the RVF and OH stakeholders existed at national and subnational levels, respectively, while public health actors’ collaborations were identified at community/grassroots level. We recommend extending the OH network to include the other 50% stakeholders and fostering of the process at subnational-level building on available cross-sectoral platforms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4916260
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Co-Action Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49162602016-07-06 One Health stakeholder and institutional analysis in Kenya Kimani, Tabitha Ngigi, Margaret Schelling, Esther Randolph, Tom Infect Ecol Epidemiol Original Research Article INTRODUCTION: One Health (OH) can be considered a complex emerging policy to resolve health issues at the animal–human and environmental interface. It is expected to drive system changes in terms of new formal and informal institutional and organisational arrangements. This study, using Rift Valley fever (RVF) as a zoonotic problem requiring an OH approach, sought to understand the institutionalisation process at national and subnational levels in an early adopting country, Kenya. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Social network analysis methodologies were used. Stakeholder roles and relational data were collected at national and subnational levels in 2012. Key informants from stakeholder organisations were interviewed, guided by a checklist. Public sector animal and public health organisations were interviewed first to identify other stakeholders with whom they had financial, information sharing and joint cooperation relationships. Visualisation of the OH social network and relationships were shown in sociograms and mathematical (degree and centrality) characteristics of the network summarised. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Thirty-two and 20 stakeholders relevant to OH were identified at national and subnational levels, respectively. Their roles spanned wildlife, livestock, and public health sectors as well as weather prediction. About 50% of national-level stakeholders had made significant progress on OH institutionalisation to an extent that formal coordination structures (zoonoses disease unit and a technical working group) had been created. However, the process had not trickled down to subnational levels although cross-sectoral and sectoral collaborations were identified. The overall binary social network density for the stakeholders showed that 35 and 21% of the possible ties between the RVF and OH stakeholders existed at national and subnational levels, respectively, while public health actors’ collaborations were identified at community/grassroots level. We recommend extending the OH network to include the other 50% stakeholders and fostering of the process at subnational-level building on available cross-sectoral platforms. Co-Action Publishing 2016-06-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4916260/ /pubmed/27330042 http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/iee.v6.31191 Text en © 2016 Tabitha Kimani et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Kimani, Tabitha
Ngigi, Margaret
Schelling, Esther
Randolph, Tom
One Health stakeholder and institutional analysis in Kenya
title One Health stakeholder and institutional analysis in Kenya
title_full One Health stakeholder and institutional analysis in Kenya
title_fullStr One Health stakeholder and institutional analysis in Kenya
title_full_unstemmed One Health stakeholder and institutional analysis in Kenya
title_short One Health stakeholder and institutional analysis in Kenya
title_sort one health stakeholder and institutional analysis in kenya
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4916260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27330042
http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/iee.v6.31191
work_keys_str_mv AT kimanitabitha onehealthstakeholderandinstitutionalanalysisinkenya
AT ngigimargaret onehealthstakeholderandinstitutionalanalysisinkenya
AT schellingesther onehealthstakeholderandinstitutionalanalysisinkenya
AT randolphtom onehealthstakeholderandinstitutionalanalysisinkenya