Suchergebnisse

'PolitologInnen sind in der gegenwärtigen kontroversen Debatte zur Biomedizinpolitik sowohl mit wissenschaftlichen Analysen als auch als ExpertInnen in einschlägigen Beratungsgremien erstaunlich abwesend. Dabei könnte die Politikwissenschaft mit ihren unterschiedlichen Teildisziplinen wichtige Beiträge zur Erforschung von Biomedizinpolitik leisten. Für das Fehlen kann ein Bündel von Faktoren identifiziert werden, von der Spezifik des Politikfeldes über methodologische und theoretische Orientierungen der Politikwissenschaft bis hin zu wissenschaftspolitischen Motiven. Ein zentraler Grund ist die Überschneidung dreier Themen- und Problemfelder, die im politikwissenschaftlichen Mainstream tendenziell als außerpolitisch gelten und/ oder in unzureichender Weise theoretisch erfasst sind: Körper, Ethik und Naturwissenschaften/ Technologie. Feministische Politikwissenschaft ist in verschiedener Hinsicht für die Analyse von Biomedizinpolitik besser gerüstet, da sie mit der Analyse von Körperpolitik und mit normativen Fragen Erfahrungen hat.' (Autorenreferat)

Objective To analyze public policies regarding zoonoses in Colombia, in terms of responsiveness, decision-making, processes and results, approaching their impact in the period between 1975 and 2014. Methods An analysis and assessment of public policies were carried out using a mixed design. Some zoonoses were selected based on their importance for public health, epidemiology, policy and availability of consecutive information. Secondary documentary sources and primary sources were used through an annotated survey. An interpretive, historical and structural framework was built from an economic, epidemiological and political point of view. For policy analysis, the sequential approach was used and, in a complementary manner, the institutional development approach. A trend analysis of selected zoonoses was carried out. Results The interpretive framework addressed the macro context and the key processes in two periods: 1975-1990 and 1990-2014. The analysis of public policies in zoonoses was conducted according to their decision level and the vertical and horizontal relationships between them. A trend analysis of zoonoses in the long term, as well as an assessment of the impact of the policies, was obtained. Conclusions Policy diversification and instrumental depth suggest that they have approached the understanding and management capacity of the complex problems of zoonoses. However, the trend analysis suggests that the impact of public policies on zoonoses is still limited.

Quantitative social science (QSS) has the potential to make an important contribution to public policy. However it also has a number of limitations. The aim of this paper is to explain these limitations to a non-specialist audience and to identify a number of ways in which QSS research could be improved to better inform public policy.

I am delighted to be here and am greatly honored by your award. All the more honored because of my distinguished predecessors who have received it: Ernest Griffith, Francis Wilcox, Alan (Scotty) Campbell, and Donna Shalala. I always have believed that the knowledge we gain as scholars should provide a basis for others or for ourselves to play an active, effective and sound role in government and politics.This belief is exemplified in a statement that for years I have included in the printed program of our Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association:"There is the statesmanship of thought and there is the statesmanship of action … the man who has the time, the discrimination, and the sagacity to collect and comprehend the principal facts and the man who must act upon them must draw near to one another and feel that they are engaged in a common enterprise."

I am delighted to be here and am greatly honored by your award. All the more honored because of my distinguished predecessors who have received it: Ernest Griffith, Francis Wilcox, Alan (Scotty) Campbell, and Donna Shalala. I always have believed that the knowledge we gain as scholars should provide a basis for others or for ourselves to play an active, effective and sound role in government and politics.This belief is exemplified in a statement that for years I have included in the printed program of our Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association:"There is the statesmanship of thought and there is the statesmanship of action … the man who has the time, the discrimination, and the sagacity to collect and comprehend the principal facts and the man who must act upon them must draw near to one another and feel that they are engaged in a common enterprise."

THIS ARTICLE IS ENTITLED "LITTLE SCIENCE POLICY: THE STUDY OF APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY AND DECENTRALIZATION." IT HIGHLIGHTS AN ALTERNATIVE ORIENTATION TOWARD PUBLIC POLICY. THIS ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVE MIGHT BE CALLED "LITTLE SCIENCE POLICY" WITH ITS OWN SENSE OF ISSUE PRIORITIES AND MORE EXPLICIT POLITICAL AGENDA THAN THAT CHARACTERISTIC OF THE MAINSTREAM.

The establishment of policy is key to the implementation of actions for health. We review the nature of policy and the definition and directions of health policy. In doing so, we explicitly cast a health political science gaze on setting parameters for researching policy change for health. A brief overview of core theories of the policy process for health promotion is presented, and illustrated with empirical evidence.The key arguments are that (a) policy is not an intervention, but drives intervention development and implementation; (b) understanding policy processes and their pertinent theories is pivotal for the potential to influence policy change ; (c) those theories and associated empirical work need to recognise the wicked, multi-level, and incremental nature of elements in the process; and, therefore, (d) the public health, health promotion, and education research toolbox should more explicitly embrace health political science insights.The rigorous application of insights from and theories of the policy process will enhance our understanding of not just how, but also why health policy is structured and implemented the way it is.

This book presents an academically rigorous yet practical guide to efforts to understand how knowledge, policy and power interact to promote or prevent change.It offers a power analysis perspective on the knowledge-policy process, illustrated with rich empirical examples from the field of international development, combined with practical guidance on the implications of such an approach. It provides ways to identify and address problems that have hampered previous attempts to improve the space between knowledge and policy; such as difficulties in analysing political context, persistent asymmetric relationships between actors, ignorance of the contributions of different types of knowledge, and misconceptions of the roles played by intermediary organisations. Most importantly, the book gives readers the ability to develop strategies for negotiating the complexity of the knowledge-policy interface more effectively, so as to contribute to policy dialogues, influence policy change, and implement policies and programmes more effectively.The authors focus on the dynamics of the knowledge-policy interface in international development; offering novel theoretical insights and methodological approaches that are applicable to a broader array of policy arenas and their audiences, including academics, practitioners and students