Search

Infrastructure governance has emerged as a subject of critical interest in the current ‘infrastructure turn’ whereby fragmented governance approaches sit in tension with complex demands for infrastructure transformations within contexts of multiple intersecting crises. To understand the state of the literature and inform ongoing debates, a systematic review method is used to interrogate a large body of infrastructure governance literature across sectoral boundaries. This review identifies a range of literature gaps prevailing in the areas of infrastructure governance on unceded First Nations land, the societal end goals of infrastructure, and understandings and applications of integrated governance.

This paper demonstrates how the national urban hierarchies can be understood through the lens of connectivity within globally scaled economic networks. We first examine the global city network structure using ak‐core decomposition method. Values ofk‐coreness are then used to understand the distribution of global connectivity within national urban systems. This is observed through a measure of statistical dispersion applied to a novel global dataset of 68,602 weighted headquarter‐subsidiary relations of 31,371 firms linking 4181 cities collected in 2019. Our results confirm the existence of a hierarchical core–periphery structure at a global scale, yet reveal varying degrees of hierarchy at a national scale. At a national scale, single‐core, double‐core or multi‐core network structures characterize the way in which national and global city networks intersect, indicating that there is a distinction between global cities as the core and urban‐systems‐as‐networks that connect nations to the global economy.

UNLABELLED: To use experience-based co-design to identify the key design requirements of a peer support model for critical care survivors; understand the use of the experience-based co-design method from clinician, patients, and family perspectives. DESIGN: Using experience-based co-design, qualitative data about participants' preferences for a peer support model were generated via workshops. Participants' perspectives of experience-based co-design were evaluated with focus groups. SETTING: University-affiliated hospital in Melbourne, Australia. SUBJECTS: Snowball sampling was used to recruit clinicians from across the care spectrum (ICU-community); critical care survivors and nominated family members were recruited using convenience sampling. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Consensus on a peer support model was reached through the experience-based co-design process, with the following key themes: 1) socialization and group cohesion; 2) management of potential risks; and 3) individualized needs of patients and families. Evaluation of participants' perspectives of the experience-based co-design method identified five key themes: 1) participation as a positive experience; 2) emotional engagement in the process; 3) learning from patients and family members; 4) feeling heard; and 5) practical challenges of experience-based co-design and readiness to participate. CONCLUSIONS: Experience-based co-design was a feasible approach to developing a peer support model for use with critical care survivors and was well received by participants. Future testing of the co-designed peer support model in a pilot randomized controlled trial will enhance understanding of peer support in critical care and the use of experience-based co-design as a design methodology.