LSTM Home > LSTM Research > LSTM Online Archive

The Cochrane Collaboration: institutional analysis of a knowledge commons

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Heywood, Peter, Stephani, Anne-Marie and Garner, Paul ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0607-6941 (2018) 'The Cochrane Collaboration: institutional analysis of a knowledge commons'. Evidence & Policy, Vol 14, Issue 1, pp. 121-142.

[img]
Preview
Text
Evid_Policy_In-Press_2017_Garner.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.

Download (885kB) | Preview

Abstract

Cochrane is an international network that produces and update new knowledge through systematic reviews for the health sector. Knowledge is a shared resource, and can be viewed as a commons. As Cochrane has been in existence for 25 years, we used Elinor Ostrom's theory of the commons and Institutional Analysis and Development Framework to appraise the organization. Our aim was to provide insight
into one particular knowledge commons, and to reflect on how this analysis may help Cochrane and its funders improve their strategy and development.
An assessment of Cochrane product showed extensive production of systematic reviews, although assuring consistent quality of these reviews is an enduring challenge; there is some restriction of access to the reviews, open access is not yet implemented; and, while permanence of the record is an emerging problem, it has not
yet been widely discussed. The assessment of the process showed that the resource, community, and rules-in-use are complex, vary between different groups within Cochrane, and are not well understood. Many of the rules have been informal, and the underlying ethos of
volunteerism where reviews get done are important features and constraints to the organization. Like all collective efforts, Cochrane is subject to collective action problems, particularly free-riding and variable commitment, and the under-production of public goods such as
internal processes, surveillance of product quality, and procedures for transparent resolution of conflicts.

Item Type: Article
Subjects: WA Public Health > WA 20.5 Research (General)
WA Public Health > Statistics. Surveys > WA 950 Theory or methods of medical statistics. Epidemiologic methods
Faculty: Department: Clinical Sciences & International Health > Clinical Sciences Department
Digital Object Identifer (DOI): https://doi.org/10.1332/174426417X15057479217899
Depositing User: Christianne Esparza
Date Deposited: 15 Sep 2017 09:04
Last Modified: 06 Sep 2019 10:16
URI: https://archive.lstmed.ac.uk/id/eprint/7565

Statistics

View details

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item