4.1 Article

A Decade of Lessons Learned from Integration Strategies in the Netherlands

期刊

出版社

UBIQUITY PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.5334/ijic.5703

关键词

system integration; integration strategies; governance; policy measures; Netherlands

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the Netherlands, multiple policy reforms were introduced to improve health and social care and decrease fragmentation. Five national improvement programs demonstrated a combination of policy, quality, and financial measures to stimulate coherence and integration. Sustainable integration in the Dutch context requires long-standing efforts of all relevant stakeholders.
Introduction: In the Netherlands multiple single, cross sector and cross governance level policy reforms were introduced to improve health and social care and decrease fragmentation. In addition to legislative and funding measures, the governmental strategy was to set up long-lasting improvement programs and supported by applied research. Description: Five national improvement programs on chronic disease management, maternity care, youth care, care for older people and dementia care were analysed. The Laws of integration of Leutz were used as an analytical framework. The programs demonstrated a mixture of employing policy, quality and financial measures to stimulate coherence and integration. Discussion: The Laws that Leutz formulated are to a large extent applicable in the Dutch context. However, the characteristics of the system of governance being corporatist in its structure and its culture imply that it is hard to distinguish single actors being in the lead. Integration is a more complex process and requires more dynamics, than the law 'keep it simple, stupid' suggests. Conclusions: In the Dutch context integration implies a permanent pursuit of aligning mechanisms for integration. Sustainable integration requires long-standing efforts of all relevant stakeholders and cannot be achieved quickly. It may take a decade of consistently applying a mix of policy instruments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据