Suchergebnisse

The Belgian government program "Integreo" is a large policy plan that aims at implementing integrated care for patients with multiple chronic conditions. Integrated health services are defined by WHO as: "the management and delivery of health services so that people receive a continuum of preventive and curative services according to their needs over time and across different levels of the health system". In practice,14 pilot projects will implement integrated care programs in local settings, involving various healthcare professionals to change the organization of care provision in specific networks. "Evidence-based guidelines" in care provision is presented as a key component of the policy plan. Yet it remains somewhat under-defined and problematic. Integrated care calls for patient-centered multidisciplinary coordination, while many "evidences" emanate from monodisciplinary settings, focusing on one pathology. According to policy documents, evidence-based guidelines should be assessable by standardized indicators, but they should also be adapted to the context in order to be operational and clear. Thus, to generate guidelines and change practices, evidences have to go through multiple translations among different groups of stakeholders: scientists, government authorities, healthcare practitioners. Furthermore, once established, evidence-based guidelines might clash with other key components of integrated care such as patient involvement. As part of the scientific team evaluating the pilot projects, I will observe the implementation of the policy plan and the interactions between its stakeholders. I will investigate how "evidence-based guidelines" unfold in the policy plan, in different settings and groups, allowing me to draw insightful conclusions about the requalification of knoweldgeS. ; Peer reviewed

This article illuminates the potential role of technology assessment (TA) in knowl- edge-driven science, technology and inno- vation (STI) regimes by providing a compar- ative review of Flemish and Walloon TA. It draws critical attention to the ways in which TA actors and institutes in Flanders and Wal- lonia position themselves, or are positioned, in relation to dominant innovation policies and large-scale political transformations, notably the convergence of STI around the knowledge-based economy (KBE) and the regionalization of STI policy in Belgium. The article's findings shed light on the Flemish government's recent decision to close its parliamentary TA institute and the institution- al expansion of TA in Wallonia and elsewhere in Europe. It argues that TA has politics, as TA in Flanders and Wallonia aligns with the advent of strategic science and is also affil- iated to specific political parties. As these considerations run counter to the dominant representation of TA as a neutral governance tool that serves the needs of all STI decision makers, they draw into question the viability and utility of TA within contemporary KBEs.

It is widely acknowledged that scientific research and science, technology and innovation (STI) policies within the US and the EU have gone through deep changes for about 30 years. Many scholars from science and technology studies and innovation studies have investigated these policy changes, and the publication of "The New Production of Knowledge" (Gibbons et al., 1994) paved the way for vigorous debates on regimes of knowledge production (Hessels & Van Lente, 2008). While different general models were proposed to describe a transition (see, e.g. "mode 2 production of knowledge", "post normal science", "strategic science", "academic capitalism"), these models often posit a dichotomous history, stating that a new regime simply succeeded the previous one (Rip, 2000). In a nutshell, the old regime characterized by strong public intervention and a linear conception of innovation is replaced by a new regime where research and innovation are conceived in systemic terms, regarding their strategic interest for the economy and their societal relevance. This dichotomous conception of STI policy change has been criticized regarding its historical accuracy, e.g. with Pestre (2003), showing that the autonomy of research that characterizes the old regime, or "mode 1" is While the diagnosis of these various science and technology policy studies is not to be dispraised concerning the different effects they emphasize, These macro-perspectives are of little use when it comes to study a local situation they lack acuteness to properly describe and compare empirical observation of such policy changes. This issue is even more salient for empirical work to be conducted in states where multi-level policies are crafted on different, sometimes overlapping national and regional polities. In Belgium, the case in point in my PhD researches, the above-mentioned studies are of little use to characterize the actual state and interplay of Walloon and Flemish STI systems. Hence, there is a need to develop theoretical approaches paying greater attention to local specificities and nuances. My proposal builds on an analysis of STI policies based on coexisting, and sometimes competing "narratives". In the vein of Stone (1989) and Radaelli (2000), this paper aims at comparing the different policy narratives that circulates as rationale for STI policies in Wallonia, to identify their variants and to study their interplay. Policy narratives give meaning to complex realities, they help making sense of things, but they also contain a plot; they are articulating elements in a logical sequence (with, e.g., causalities, cf. Stone, 1989). As such, they are resources for action: they are descriptive and prescriptive. The broad literature of innovation studies, and its diffusion through the EU or the OECD already provides the Walloon STI stakeholders with different master-narratives (Sum & Jessop, 2013). So far, I could distinguish four different master-narratives in the literature as well as in Walloon stakeholders 'discourses: • "The Knowledge-based economy" (KBE). KBE seems to be the "dominant" master-narrative today. In a nutshell, this narrative runs as follow (see OECD, 1996): knowledge is the source of economic growth. Since innovation and market success are better encountered through network management and the intertwinement of industry and university, STI institutions must be organized accordingly, in order to achieve a sustained growth and a "better competitiveness" o Variants of this narrative are, e.g. the triple-helix model (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000), or National innovation system (Freeman, 1987, Lundvall, 1988). • Grand societal challenges: This recent master-narrative is being promoted by the OECD and the EU (see, e.g., Lund Declaration, 2009). It states that scientific research should benefit of high (public) funding in certain areas, or regarding certain issues. High means for strategic research should help to solve major problems such as climate change, ageing population, energy supply and consumption, cancer, etc. This narrative calls for mission oriented STI policy, so the concern here is not (solely/primarily) economic (Kallerud et al 2013). • "Science, the endless frontier" - continued: famously reported by V. Bush (1945), this master-narrative is still of common use among STI stakeholders. With this narrative, science is considered a public good, the state has to fund it because the linear conception of innovation and serendipity assure technological and economic progress in the end – the rationale is based on economic aspects (the state must fund research because it is a special kind of good and the market efficiency will not work, and basic research is the source of marketable innovation). • "Science for the sake of science": in this narrative, science is considered as common good regardless of the potential economic impacts (and usefulness to address other societal issues) – we can make a parallel with the idea that artistic creation is worth it: for the beauty, for the critique, science here is considered as a superior activity that brings rationality and knowledge to the society as long as it is independent from "external influences" (Bonneuil & Joly, 2013) – cf. "mertonian Ethos" of Communalism, Universalism, Disinterestedness, Originality and Skepticism. Other examples / variants of this narrative include the idea that science contributes to the greatness of Nation, that science fights obscurantism, and so on and so forth. (examples : peer review, excellence, Copernican revolution are compatible storylines with science for the sake of science : a self-supporting system) While these master-narratives are present in international, academic literature, this paper focuses on their local manifestations. This study compares three critical moments: in different situations, various STI stakeholders (government, researchers, administrative staff, journalists, academic authorities, etc.) publicly expressed their views on the organization and funding of scientific research and innovation activities, and the role of STI within the region. I analyzed the discourses in press articles, policy documents, public statements, allocutions and opinion paper, blogs, etc. I intentionally sampled for heterogeneity since I'm looking for variations and multiple use of narratives. The analysis of the Walloon case permits to overcome the double dichotomy of dominant vs. counter narrative and old vs. new regime. The different narratives, in context, are concurrent but they are not mutually exclusive: while the narratives purport different ideologies, different visions of the role of science and of the state intervention, one is not being erased by the advent of another. Rather, I could find out that narratives "overlap", and one narrative does not constitute the only resource of a (group of) actors. In situation, the actors use one or multiple narratives, regarding the context, the public, the goal of a policy, etc., in a dynamic of conflict or compromise. This description of the transition is more accurate than the one provided with a sequence of two regimes, since the flexible use of multiple narratives accounts for the continuity of certain institutions (justified by, e.g., a version of "science for the sake of science") as well as for certain reforms in STI policy (that are inspired by the KBE narrative, for example). ; Peer reviewed

Political discourses help to define the legitimate and mobilizable conceptions to justify a certain exercise of power: it is at the level of their pragmatic translations within the devices of government that a certain "theory of action" is read that proposes and legitimizes the political problem to be solved and the modalities of public intervention (Rose & Miller, 1992). This article mobilizes a constructivist perspective that integrates the transformations of the state and its modes of action in Belgium, in the field of science policy: since 1988, universities have followed very different paths in the two communities, Flemish and French-speaking, to the extent that the Belgian territory today presents two political regimes of higher education and research. By analyzing at the level of individual actors some recent mechanisms for the management of university quality and the regulation of public funding of research, this comparative approach helps to bring to light the specific dynamics of normativity at the heart of the evaluation mechanisms that constitute forms of governmentality (Foucault, 1978) based on the commitment of the actors concerned. ; Peer reviewed

Les transformations de la structure de l'État et des modalités d'intervention de l'action publique appellent à renouveler les cadres d'analyse. Comment analyser la « recomposition de l'État » pour mettre en évidence le maintien de son autonomie d'action face à l'éclatement des centres de décision entre acteurs privés / publics et entre niveaux de territoire selon des échelles enchevêtrées et imprévisibles? Cet article propose une perspective constructiviste qui intègre les transformations de « l'être de l'État » et le « faire de l'État » dans le secteur de la politique universitaire : depuis 1988, les universités ont suivi des trajectoires très différentes dans les deux communautés, flamande et francophone, au point que le territoire belge présente aujourd'hui deux régimes politiques d'enseignement supérieur et de recherche (ESR). L'État est une structure cognitive qui s'inscrit dans des dispositifs concrets : si les discours politiques contribuent à définir les conceptions légitimes et mobilisables pour justifier un certain exercice du pouvoir, c'est au niveau de leurs traductions pragmatiques au sein des dispositifs de gouvernement que se donne à lire une certaine « théorie de l'action » qui propose et légitime le problème politique à résoudre et les modalités d' intervention publique [Rose & Miller, 1992]. Les dispositifs de régulation et d'évaluation des universités sont des instruments d'action publique [Lascoumes et Le Galès 2004] : au-delà des dimensions instrumentales et techniques, ils contribuent à structurer le champ politique suivant une logique propre. Dans ces formes de coopération, les acteurs participent au processus de « normativité » [Macherey, 2009] et se réapprorient ces dispositifs, tantôt en résistant, tantôt en les reformulant. En analysant au plus près des acteurs quelques dispositifs récents en matière de gestion de la qualité universitaire et de régulation du financement public de la recherche, cette approche comparée contribue à mettre au jour les dynamiques spécifiques de normativité au cœur des dispositifs d'évaluation qui constituent des formes de gouvernementalité [Foucault, 1994] prenant appui sur l'engagement des acteurs concernés. Notre intervention propose une analyse comparée de ces transformations des régimes de la politique universitaire, dans une approche sociohistorique mettant en évidence à la fois la stabilité et la plasticité des instruments et des institutions face à l'accélération de l'internationalisation du secteur et à la mise en place de nouveaux projets politiques régionaux.

Abstract Drawing on a documentary analysis of two socio-economic policy programs, one Flemish ("Vlaanderen In Actie"; VIA), the other Walloon ("Marshall Plans"; MPs), and a discourse analysis of how these programs are received in one Flemish and one Francophone quality newspaper, this paper illustrates how Flanders and Wallonia both seek to become top-performing knowledge-based economies (KBEs). The paper discerns a number of discursive repertoires, such as "Catching up," which Flemish and Walloon policy actors draw on to legitimize or question the transformation of Flanders and Wallonia into KBEs. The "Catching up" repertoire places Flanders resolutely ahead of Wallonia in the global race towards knowledge, excellence, and science-driven innovation, but suggests that Wallonia may, in due course overtake Flanders as a top-competitive region. Given the expectations and/or fears that "Catching up" evokes among Flemish and Walloon policy actors, the repertoire serves these actors as a flexible discursive resource to make sense of, and shape, their collective futures, and thus their identities. By rendering explicit how Flanders and Wallonia each acquire a distinct identity through the global KBE, the paper underlines the simultaneity of, and the interplay between, globalizing forces and particularizing tendencies and illuminates the political, nation-building and identity-building functions of science, technology, and innovation. The paper starts from the following preliminary observations. While both the VIA plan and the MPs emphasize the need of transforming Flanders and Wallonia into KBEs in order meet the demands of globalization (OECD 1996), the plans adopt a different tone and stance. The Flemish plan repeatedly states the need of transforming Flanders into "a top region, not only in Europe, but in the world, particularly in the social and economic field" (VIA, 2006: 4). It also states that Flanders is already prosperous and already has many strengths, but that the welfare and prosperity of Flanders are "under threat" in a "challenging global economic environment" (2). The message is thus that Flanders is doing relatively well in the global economy, but that it must do even better if it is to maintain its competitive edge and its welfare. By contrast, the MP is framed from the perspective of Walloon recovery and "redressement." Although the term "Marshall Plan" evidently brings to mind the European Recovery Program for rebuilding Western Europe after World War II, recovery also refers to the period of prosperity before the World Wars, when Wallonia was one of the most economically advanced industrial regions in Europe. The MP suggests that Wallonia's glorious past ("le passé glorieux") can be rewon, if the Walloons deploy every tool they can muster and work together to "relaunch" the Walloon economy (3). To incite joint action, the MP urges the Walloons to become the architects of their own fate. This aspiration is clearly expressed in the opening sentence of the first MP plan: "The federalization [of Belgium; by which is meant the regionalization of policy and competences] bestows the Walloons with political autonomy, which renders them responsible for their own destiny." At the same time, this statement reads as a call to independence, as the Walloons are bestowed with political autonomy (by the Flemings, who have repeatedly pushed for the dismantling of Belgium as a unitary state). As the above excerpts from the Flemish and Walloon policy plans indicate, VIA and the MPs characterize a state of political and economic affairs, take position in relation to these affairs, and, most importantly, envision a prosperous future for the Flemish and Walloon region, respectively. The plans are thus driven by expectations, visions and values, as well as fears. They mobilize arguments, explanations, evaluations, descriptions and prescriptions, sometimes by drawing on tropes or stereotypes, anecdotes, and illustrations. As the plans also indicate, transforming Flanders and Wallonia into top KBE regions does not happen by itself. For instance, while the VIA plan describes Flemings as entrepreneurs, it also states that "we must dare to be entrepreneurial" (3). Similary, the MP urges Walloon citizens to change their "état d'esprit" or mindset, if economic growth is to ensue (3). Thus, identity construction and transformation are in order both in Flanders and in Wallonia. The above observations serve as starting points for our media analysis. As we want to know whether, and how, these particular conceptions of the nation/region are picked up in press reporting on STI policies, we ask the following interrelated questions: How are the Flemish (VIA) and Walloon STI policies (MPs) received in the Flemish and Francophone press? Do we discern in the press the same notions of identity as in the policy programs? Are these notions reproduced, problematized or transformed? If so, in what ways? What does this mean for Flemish and Walloon identity construction, and for the construction of "Belgium" at large? Recognizing the role of "institutions of power" (e.g. language, media, technologies) in articulating nationalism (Anderson 1991: 163; Billig 1995: 11), our analysis conceives of journalists and the press as potential policy agenda setters and opinion makers, as the press potentially reproduces and redefines political identities. As this paper will illustrate, the Flemish and Francophone press speak out on issues of collective identity and also offer various policymakers a platform to express their views on regional economic development, STI, and the state. Thus, from our perspective, policymaking is not only the prerogative of mandated policymakers, but of journalists and other opinion leaders (e.g. captains of industry) as well (Lenschow & Sprungk 2010). To enable analysis, we draw on a range of literatures, including science and technology studies, discourse analysis, and media analyses. Our approach is interpretive and interactionist, as it assumes that realities (e.g. identities, nations, as well as practices and materialities) are socially constructed rather than exist as objective phenomenon that can be discovered through empirical testing (Fischer 2003: 118). Hence, we ask how identity is created, structured, maintained, or conversely deconstructed, resisted, and challenged. Our aim is thus not to uncover an objective reality behind identity, but to understand how identities are collectively made and remade on a continuous basis. To this end, we draw on the notion of "coproduction" (Jasanoff 2006: 2) to empirically demonstrate how STI and nationalism are "coproduced" through technoscientific practices (Felt 2013). In what follows, we first present, discuss, and situate Flemish and Walloon STI policies in time and place, as a means of contextualizing the "nationalisms" inscribed in the VIA plan and MPs. Next, we present our methodological framework for discourse and media analysis, our data, and key findings. Upon drawing together these findings, we single out the storyline of "Catching up" as an important discursive backdrop against which processes of collective identity construction play out through STI policymaking and press reporting. We conclude by tying our findings into a broader discussion about the place of Belgium in Europe and the world, as nation states are constantly (re)defined in terms of their constituent segments and overarching structures, including the KBE. The paper's topics resonate with the overall conference theme and specifically tie into the following conference strands: • Policy emergence, implementation, diffusion and transfer • National science policies and the global scientific enterprise • The multi-level governance of research and innovation and the challenge of co-ordination Keywords: Flanders, Identity, Knowledge-based economy, Science and technology policy, Wallonia. References Anderson, B. (1991), Imagined Communities. Reflection on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London, Verso. Billig, M. (1995), Banal Nationalism. London, Sage. Felt, U. (2013), "Keeping Technologies Out: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the formation of a national technopolitical identity," Pre-print; Published by the Department of Social Studies of Science, University of Vienna, February 2013; http://sciencestudies.univie.ac.at/publications Fischer, F. (2003), Reframing Public Policy. Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press. Flanders in Action (VIA); www.vlaandereninactie.be Jasanoff, S. 2006. The idiom of co-production. In: Jasanoff, S., Ed., States of Knowledge. The Coproduction of Science and Social Order. New York, Routledge, 1-12. Lenschow, A. & Sprungk, C. (2010), "The Myth of a Green Europe," Journal of Common Market Studies, 48(1), 133-154. OECD (1996), The Knowledge Based Economy, OECD/GD, (96)102. Plan Marshall (MP); http://www.wallonie.be/fr/actualites/plan-marshall-2022 ; Peer reviewed

Drawing on a documentary analysis of two socio-economic policy programs, one Flemish ("Vlaanderen In Actie"), the other Walloon ("Marshall Plans"), and a discourse analysis of how these programs are received in one Flemish and one Francophone quality newspaper, this article illustrates how Flanders and Wallonia both seek to become top- performing knowledge-based economies (KBEs). The paper discerns a number of discursive repertoires, such as "Catching up," which policy actors draw on to legitimize or question the transformation of Flanders and Wallonia into KBEs. The "Catching up" repertoire places Flanders resolutely ahead of Wallonia in the global race towards knowledge, excellence, and growth, but suggests that Wallonia may, in due course, overtake Flanders as a top competitive region. Given the expectations and fears that "Catching up" evokes among Flemish and Walloon policy actors, the repertoire serves these actors as a flexible discursive resource to make sense of, and shape, their collective futures and their regional identities. The article's findings underline the simultaneity of, and the interplay between, globalizing forces and particularizing tendencies, as Flanders and Wallonia develop with a global KBE in region-specific ways. ; Peer reviewed

Drawing on a documentary analysis of two socioeconomic policy programs, one Flemish ("Vlaanderen in Actie"), the other Walloon ("Marshall Plans"), and a discourse analysis of how these programs are received in one Flemish and one Francophone quality newspaper, this article illustrates how Flanders and Wallonia both seek to become top-performing knowledge-based economies (KBEs). The article discerns a number of discursive repertoires, such as "Catching up," which policy actors draw on to legitimize or question the transformation of Flanders and Wallonia into KBEs. The "Catching up" repertoire places Flanders resolutely ahead of Wallonia in the global race toward knowledge, excellence, and growth, but suggests that Wallonia may, in due course, overtake Flanders as a top competitive region. Given the expectations and fears that "Catching up" evokes among Flemish and Walloon policy actors, the repertoire serves these actors as a flexible discursive resource to make sense of, and shape, their collective futures and their regional identities. The article's findings underline the simultaneity of, and the interplay between, globalizing forces and particularizing tendencies, as Flanders and Wallonia develop with a global KBE in region-specific ways.

This article illuminates the potential role of technology assessment (TA) in knowl- edge-driven science, technology and inno- vation (STI) regimes by providing a compar- ative review of Flemish and Walloon TA. It draws critical attention to the ways in which TA actors and institutes in Flanders and Wal- lonia position themselves, or are positioned, in relation to dominant innovation policies and large-scale political transformations, notably the convergence of STI around the knowledge-based economy (KBE) and the regionalization of STI policy in Belgium. The article's findings shed light on the Flemish government's recent decision to close its parliamentary TA institute and the institution- al expansion of TA in Wallonia and elsewhere in Europe. It argues that TA has politics, as TA in Flanders and Wallonia aligns with the advent of strategic science and is also affil- iated to specific political parties. As these considerations run counter to the dominant representation of TA as a neutral governance tool that serves the needs of all STI decision makers, they draw into question the viability and utility of TA within contemporary KBEs. ; Peer reviewed

This article examines the socio-political dynamics in the evolution and development of Flemish technology assessment (TA). Broadly defined, TA encompasses activities and programs that expand and deepen the knowledge base of contemporary knowledge-based economies (KBEs), typically by including new actors (e.g. trade unions), ideas (e.g. science in society), and rationales (e.g. participatory techniques) in science, technology, and innovation (STI) processes. Starting from the regionalization of STI policy in Belgium and the convergence of Flemish STI around global KBE principles, the article exemplifies how since the 1980s successive Flemish TA waves (early-warning, bottom-up, and interactive TA) have co-evolved with successive generations of Flemish innovation policy. Building on these findings, it argues that Flemish TA has counteracted and accommodated dominant STI paradigms. By providing a historical and socio-political perspective on TA and innovation policy, the article draws critical attention to the institutional settings and societal contexts in which TA is embedded, and questions TA's strategic utility within contemporary KBEs. This perspective sheds light on the Flemish government's recent decision to close its parliamentary TA institute and the institutional expansion of TA elsewhere in Europe.

Drawing on a documentary analysis of two socio-economic policy programs, one Flemish ("Vlaanderen In Actie"), the other Walloon ("Marshall Plans"), and a discourse analysis of how these programs are received in one Flemish and one Francophone quality newspaper, this paper illustrates how Flanders and Wallonia both seek to become top-performing knowledge-based economies (KBEs). The paper discerns a number of discursive repertoires, such as "Catching up," which policy actors draw on to legitimize or question the transformation of Flanders and Wallonia into KBEs. The "Catching up" repertoire places Flanders resolutely ahead of Wallonia in the global race towards knowledge, excellence, and growth, but suggests that Wallonia may, in due course, overtake Flanders as a top competitive region. Given the expectations and/or fears that "Catching up" evokes among Flemish and Walloon policy actors, the repertoire serves these actors as a flexible discursive resource to make sense of, and shape, their collective futures, and thus their identities. The primary aim of the paper is to underline the simultaneity of, and the interplay between, globalizing forces and particularizing tendencies, as Flanders and Wallonia develop with a global KBE in nation- or region-specific ways.

A video of the presentation can be seen here: http://slideslive.com/38893131/ta-working-lunches ; Peer reviewed

INTRODUCTION The Belgian government Integreo program (www.integreo.be) aims at a nationwide whole-system change in health and social care towards more Integrated Care (IC), by means of geographically defined integrated care projects (ICPs). Starting in early 2018, the twelve ICPs are implementing their action plan to change the organization of their regional network, covering up to 150.000 inhabitants, towards more IC. They receive limited financing: one FTE coordinator. As the final goal of the national plan is to anchor successful changes and scale-up best practices, FAITH.be (Federated consortium for Appraisal of Integrated care Teams in Health in Belgium) developed a mixed methods realist evaluation framework which aims at responding to the questions if, how, for whom and why the implementation of the ICP is successful or not so far, and learn lessons to help the ICPs to adjust their governance to support successful implementation of a whole-system change in their region. We will present preliminary insights of the implementation analysis, describing the main difficulties ICPs struggle with and how they address them. THEORY/METHODS We use participative action and realist methods following RAMESES II standards (http://www.ramesesproject.org/). Data collection tools are chosen in consultation with stakeholders: coordinators, partners of and policy makers. Intermediate results are fed back and discussed with the stakeholders. Two methods are combined: qualitative enquiry for all ICPs and case study methods for three selected ICPs. Normalization Process Theory (NPT) (1) is chosen to guide the analysis. RESULTS First observations show that ICPs struggle with divergence in vision about priorities and timelines between ICPs, Governmental agencies at both federal and regional level. After postponement of crucial policy decisions and delivery of promised ICT-tools, ICPs are forced to adapt their action plan, which impedes their coherence. Moreover, due to the limited financing, ICPs are expected to pre-finance their actions towards IC, which impedes the involvement of key stakeholders, such as GPs' and social care workers' organisations and raises tensions between care providers, e.g. working in a fee-for service system versus those working in bundled payment systems. Hence, this hinders collective action and participation. DISCUSSION These preliminary results will be further discussed and extended with the stakeholders. By the time of the conference, we will present the main issues for each social mechanism as described by NPT and explain why, how and for whom these difficulties occur and describe observed strategies to cope with them. CONCLUSIONS First results show how the divergence of visions between policy makers and stakeholders in ICPs, hinder ICPs to implement innovative actions towards IC. LESSONS LEARNED Even though co-creation is considered an important pillar of the Integreo Plan, the lack of convergence of visions between policy agencies and ICPs hinders the implementation of innovative actions towards IC. LIMITATIONS The results only reflect the views of ICPs, not the policy makers. SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH The results of the implementation analysis will be linked to the outcome and cost analysis of the ICPs (see: https://interfaithbel.blog/methodological-information/). 1. Murray E, Treweek S, Pope C, MacFarlane A, Ballini L, Dowrick C, et al. Normalisation process theory: a framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions. BMC medicine. 2010;8:63.