Open Dialogue: Frequently Asked Questions

Open Dialogue is an approach to working with people and their families experiencing psychosocial distress. Interest in Open Dialogue in Australia has been growing recently, raising questions about its adaption and implementation to local contexts. This article is an attempt to answer some of the frequently asked questions we have encountered in training and discussions about Open Dialogue. We attempt to provide responses to questions of how Open Dialogue is different to what is done already, how it fits with current approaches, how you know if you are doing it, whether it is passive or just about doing reflections, issues about including the social network, and concerns about the evidence base. This article aims to present a variety of viewpoints in relation to these questions and to hopefully further discussions on how Open Dialogue can be implemented and adapted to Australian health care and social care contexts.     

Open Data on a Closed Shop? Assessing the potential of transparency initiatives with a focus on efforts to strengthen capacity development support

Despite strong political commitment, actual gains in improving accountability in development co‐operation have been limited. Main reasons for this include the low level of transparency and high number of actors, as well as the limitations of the self‐reported and input‐oriented OECD reporting system. Efforts through the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI) and related transparency initiatives are ill‐equipped to change this given their decision to adhere to the same system. This article uses the specific area of support to capacity development to illustrate this. While further disaggregation of reporting on technical co‐operation could respond to a transparency gap, overcoming the accountability gap requires moving beyond promoting ‘supply‐side’ reform and re‐engaging in efforts to promote collective action.     

Theory and Practice? A Comparative Analysis of Migration and Development Policies in Eleven European Countries and the European Commission

This article analyses international policy discussions on migration and development (M&D) and contrasts these with the actual M&D policies and practices of 11 European countries who were among the main proponents of this international discourse. Desk research of public documents and accompanying information sought from these 11 governments as well as in the European Commission (EC) provide the basis for a comparative analysis of their overall M&D policies and strategies, and institutional settings for formulating and implementing these. The comparison shows that M&D policy and practice remains in a tentative and experimental phase, and that countries experience difficulties reflecting their international positions in their own policies, as well as in learning from their own efforts and those of others. While stressing the developmental potential of migration in international discussions, most of the countries’ policies still reflect an understanding of migration as a problem and a preoccupation with short‐term domestic interests.