ABSTRACT This study investigates how perceptions of radicalisation and co-occurring mental health issues differ between mental health care and the security domain, and how these perceptions affect intersectoral collaboration. It is generally thought that intersectoral collaboration is a useful strategy for preventing radicalisation and terrorism, especially when it concerns radicalised persons with mental health issues. It is not clear, however, what perceptions professionals have of radicalisation and collaboration with other disciplines. Data was obtained from focus groups and individual interviews with practitioners and trainers from mental health care and the security domain in the Netherlands. The results show a lack of knowledge about radicalisation in mental health care, whereas in the security domain, there is little understanding of mental health issues. This leads to a mad-bad dichotomy which has a negative effect on collaboration and risk management. Improvement of the intersectoral collaboration by cross-domain familiarization, and strengthening of trust and mutual understanding, should begin with the basic training of professionals in both domains. The Care and Safety Houses in the Netherlands offer a sound base for intersectoral collaboration. Future professionals from different domains ought to be familiarized with each other’s possibilities, limitations, tasks, and roles.
BackgroundTackling challenges related to health, environmental sustainability and equity requires many sectors to work together. This “intersectoral co-operation” can pose a challenge on its own. Research commonly focuses on one field or is conducted within one region or country. The aim of this study was to investigate facilitators and barriers regarding intersectoral co-operative behaviour as experienced in twelve distinct case studies in ten European countries. The COM-B behavioural system was applied to investigate which capabilities, opportunities and motivational elements appear necessary for co-operative behaviour.MethodTwelve focus groups were conducted between October 2018 and March 2019, with a total of 76 participants (policymakers, case study coordinators, governmental institutes and/or non-governmental organisations representing citizens or citizens). Focus groups were organised locally and held in the native language using a common protocol and handbook. One central organisation coordinated the focus groups and analysed the results. Translated data were analysed using deductive thematic analysis, applying previous intersectoral co-operation frameworks and the COM-B behavioural system.ResultsAmongst the main facilitators experienced were having highly motivated partners who find common goals and see mutual benefits, with good personal relationships and trust (Motivation). In addition, having supportive environments that provide opportunities to co-operate in terms of support and resources facilitated co-operation (Opportunity), along with motivated co-operation partners who have long-term visions, create good external visibility and who have clear agreements and clarity on roles from early on (Capability). Barriers included not having necessary and/or structural resources or enough time, and negative attitudes from specific stakeholders.ConclusionsThis study on facilitators and barriers to intersectoral co-operation in ten European countries confirms findings of earlier studies. This study also demonstrates that the COM-B model can serve as a relatively simple tool to understand co-operative behaviour in terms of the capability, opportunity and motivation required amongst co-operation partners from different sectors. Results can support co-operators’ and policymakers’ understanding of necessary elements of intersectoral co-operation. It can help them in developing more successful intersectoral co-operation when dealing with challenges of health, environmental sustainability and equity.
Summary Project objectives This study fits into a larger research project on logistics collaboration and outsourcing decisions. The final objective of this larger project is to analyze the logistics collaboration decision in more detail to identify thresholds in these decisions. To reach the overall objectives, the first step is to get a clearer picture on the chemical and logistics service providers industry, sectors of our study, and on logistics collaboration in these sectors. The results of this first phase are presented in this report. Project Approach The study consists of two parts: literature review and five case studies within the chemical industry. The literature covers three topics: logistics collaboration, logistics outsourcing and purchasing of logistics services. The five case studies are used to refine the theoretical findings of the literature review. Conclusions Main observations during the case studies can be summarized as follows: Most analyzed collaborative relationships between shippers and logistics service providers in the chemical industry are still focused on operational execution of logistics activities with a short term horizon. Supply management design and control are often retained by the shippers. Despite the time and cost intensive character of a logistics service buying process, shippers tendering on a very regular basis. The decision to start a new tender project should more often be based on an integral approach that includes all tender related costs. A lower frequency of tendering could create more stability in supply chains. Beside, it will give both, shippers and LSPs, the possibility to improve the quality of the remaining projects. Price is still a dominating decision criterion in selecting a LSP. This is not an issue as long as the comparison of costs is based on an integral approach, and when shippers balance the cost criterion within their total set of criteria for sourcing logistics services. At the shippers' side there is an increased awareness of the need of more solid collaboration with logistics service providers. Nevertheless, in many cases this increased awareness does not actually result in the required actions to establish more intensive collaboration. Over the last years the logistics service providers industry was characterized by low profit margins, strong fragmentation and price competition. Nowadays, the market for LSPs is changing, because of an increasing demand for logistics services. To benefit from this situation a more pro-active role of the service providers is required in building stronger relationships with their customers. They should pay more attention on mid and long term possibilities in a collaborative relation, in stead of only be focused on running the daily operation.
