Suchergebnisse

Why have metropolitan area voters been so reluctant to approve reorg proposals? What kinds of voter att's underlie opposition & support? To answer these questions the focus is on voter att's for & against reorg. The outcome in Nashville, Tenn, was not the usual one & so att's underlying support for reorg are the most important findings; the interview data suggest that such support is associated with (i) voter dissatisfaction with services; (ii) the nonanticipation by voters of higher taxes stemming from reorg; (iii) voter educ levels higher than grade Sch's; (iv) voter understanding of 'metropolitan problems.' IPSA.

Antisuburban orthodoxy permeates much of the literature on US urban life & the status of suburbia, & presents suburbanites as affluent conformists trying to avoid responsibility for the problems of the central city. Here, biases of antisuburban scholars in their discussion of urban & suburban economics, classes, races, & politics are identified, & it is argued that "suburb-bashing" serves the political values of nonacademics & academics alike. In What, Me Hate the Suburbs? The Irrelevance of Anti-Suburban Orthodoxy, Max Neiman (U of California, Riverside) agrees that some scholars remain antisuburban, but insists that more contemporary treatments are more balanced, recognizing that the diversity of current suburbs renders blanket criticism of suburbia antiquated. In Blaming the Suburbs?, John R. Logan (State U of New York, Albany) contends that Hawkins & Perry have not presented any evidence to support their accusations that suburb-bashing is the predominant theme of urban research, nor any criteria by which others could evaluate urban researchers for their alleged biases against suburbs. The affluent, white, middle-class suburb is a myth that no one believes in anymore. In Rejoinder to Neiman and Logan Hawkins & Percy contend that the effects of antisuburban orthodoxy still persist, & central cities have yet to be examined under the same scrutiny applied to suburbs. 66 References. M. Pflum

: Product reformulation- the process of altering a food or beverage product's recipe or composition to improve the product's health profile - is a prominent response to the obesity and noncommunicable disease epidemics in the U.S. To date, reformulation in the U.S. has been largely voluntary and initiated by actors within the food and beverage industry. Similar voluntary efforts by the tobacco and alcohol industry have been considered to be a mechanism of corporate political strategy to shape public health policies and decisions to suit commercial needs. We propose a taxonomy of food and beverage industry corporate political strategies that builds on the existing literature. We then analyzed the industry's responses to a 2014 U.S. government consultation on product reformulation, run as part of the process to define the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. We qualitatively coded the industry's responses for predominant narratives and framings around reformulation using a purposely-designed coding framework, and compared the results to the taxonomy. The food and beverage industry in the United States used a highly similar narrative around voluntary product reformulation in their consultation responses: that reformulation is "part of the solution" to obesity and NCDs, even though their products or industry are not large contributors to the problem, and that progress has been made despite reformulation posing significant technical challenges. This narrative and the frames used in the submissions illustrate the four categories of the taxonomy: participation in the policy process, influencing the framing of the nutrition policy debate, creating partnerships, and influencing the interpretation of evidence. These strategic uses of reformulation align with previous research on food and beverage corporate political strategy.

Product reformulation- the process of altering a food or beverage product's recipe or composition to improve the product's health profile - is a prominent response to the obesity and noncommunicable disease epidemics in the U.S. To date, reformulation in the U.S. has been largely voluntary and initiated by actors within the food and beverage industry. Similar voluntary efforts by the tobacco and alcohol industry have been considered to be a mechanism of corporate political strategy to shape public health policies and decisions to suit commercial needs. We propose a taxonomy of food and beverage industry corporate political strategies that builds on the existing literature. We then analyzed the industry's responses to a 2014 U.S. government consultation on product reformulation, run as part of the process to define the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. We qualitatively coded the industry's responses for predominant narratives and framings around reformulation using a purposely-designed coding framework, and compared the results to the taxonomy. The food and beverage industry in the United States used a highly similar narrative around voluntary product reformulation in their consultation responses: that reformulation is "part of the solution" to obesity and NCDs, even though their products or industry are not large contributors to the problem, and that progress has been made despite reformulation posing significant technical challenges. This narrative and the frames used in the submissions illustrate the four categories of the taxonomy: participation in the policy process, influencing the framing of the nutrition policy debate, creating partnerships, and influencing the interpretation of evidence. These strategic uses of reformulation align with previous research on food and beverage corporate political strategy.

There has been a growing global concern for improving the use of evidence to inform health policy in recent years. Increasingly there is recognition that individual projects or programmes building evidence synthesis skills, may be limited in their effect without a broader consideration of the systems in place which 'embed' or 'institutionalise' evidence informed policy making practices (Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research and WHO 2007). The GRIP-Health programme is a five year project supported by the European Research Council which studies the political nature of health policy to understand how to best improve the use of evidence. This explicitly political lens enables us to focus on the contested nature of health issues as well as the institutions that shape the use of evidence in health policy making. We understand institutions as including both formal structures and rules, as well as informal norms and practices (Lowndes and Roberts 2013). The GRIP-Health programme follows the World Health Organization's view that Ministries of Health remain the ultimate stewards of a nation's health, and further play a key role in providing information to guide health decisions (World Health Organization 2000, Alvarez-Rosette, Hawkins, and Parkhurst 2013). As such, GRIP-Health is particularly concerned with the structures and rules created by government to gather, synthesise, or otherwise provide evidence to inform policy making. This working paper is one of a series of six briefs covering a set of countries in which the GRIP-Health programme is undertaking research. This brief presents an overview of what is termed the 'Evidence Advisory System' (EAS) for health policy making within the country of interest, which is taken to encompass the key entry points through which research evidence can make its way into relevant health policy decisions. This can include both formal (government mandated) and informal structures, rules, and norms in place. Individual reports in this series can be useful for those considering how to improve evidence use in specific country settings, while taken together the reports identify the differences that can be seen across contexts, permitting reflection or comparison across countries about how evidence advisory systems are structured – including which responsibilities are given to different types of bodies, and how well evidence advice aligns with decision making authority structures.

Examines the sociospatial distribution of advantages & disadvantages offered by urban governments at the county level to determine whether metropolitan counties that overlap central cities allocate their services in ways that advantage the more affluent, suburban residents. Empirical data on the amount of county services allocated to city & suburban residents in Milwaukee County, WI, & on the amount of county taxes paid by the urban & suburban residents of the county, reveal that most county benefits go to city residents & that most of the tax revenue to support these benefits comes from suburban residents. The implications of these findings for public choice perspectives on metropolitan governance & for claims about suburbanites burdening city residents are also discussed. 2 Tables, 3 Figures, 44 References. Adapted from the source document.

Argues that an anti-suburban orthodoxy underlies much of the research and writing about urban politics and metropolitan governance. Challenges this orthodoxy by illustrating and criticizing the arguments which together form it. Addresses arguments about suburban affluence, class bias, racism, fiscal exploitation, and exclusivity. (Abstract amended)

Aims: Minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol was introduced in Scotland on 1 May 2018, and is now on the policy agenda in other devolved administrations and at Westminster. Previous research has explored the arguments deployed for and against MUP, but the congruence between actors in the MUP debate has not been sufficiently examined. This study identified and mapped the discourse coalitions that emerged in the UK MUP debate through an analysis of actors' use of arguments in media coverage of the policy debates. Design: A sample of print media coverage of MUP was obtained from the LexisNexis newspaper database. The resulting sample was imported into discourse network analysis (DNA) software for coding and subsequent visualization of actor networks. Setting: United Kingdom. Observations: A total of 348 articles from eight UK-wide and three Scottish newspapers from an 18-month period, ending in November 2012, were analysed. Measurements: Actors' arguments were coded to generate structured data for conversion into a weighted actor network where ties represent similarities among actors in terms of arguments in support of or opposition to MUP. Findings: Two polarized discourse coalitions, Opponents and Proponents of MUP, emerged in media coverage. The Proponents coalition consisted mainly of health advocacy groups, charities, political parties and academic institutions. In the Opponents coalition, the networks were formed of key alcohol manufacturers and economic think-tanks. While producer organizations were central to the Opponents coalition, some commercial actors were more favourable to MUP, highlighting divisions within the industry overall. Conclusions: Media coverage of minimum unit pricing (MUP) in Scotland from June 2011 to November 2012 showed alignment between the policy positions of (1) alcohol producers and think-tanks opposed to MUP; and (2) public health advocates and health charities in favour of the policy. Some alcohol industry actors were supportive of MUP indicating divisions among the industry. Discourse network analysis may be usefully applied to study other highly contested policy issues in health and beyond.

Policy Points: • Worldwide, more than 70% of all deaths are attributable to noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), nearly half of which are premature and apply to individuals of working age. Although such deaths are largely preventable, effective solutions continue to elude the public health community. • One reason is the considerable influence of the "commercial determinants of health": NCDs are the product of a system that includes powerful corporate actors, who are often involved in public health policymaking. • This article shows how a complex systems perspective may be used to analyze the commercial determinants of NCDs, and it explains how this can help with (1) conceptualizing the problem of NCDs and (2) developing effective policy interventions. Context: The high burden of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) is politically salient and eminently preventable. However, effective solutions largely continue to elude the public health community. Two pressing issues heighten this challenge: the first is the public health community's narrow approach to addressing NCDs, and the second is the involvement of corporate actors in policymaking. While NCDs are often conceptualized in terms of individual‐level risk factors, we argue that they should be reframed as products of a complex system. This article explores the value of a systems approach to understanding NCDs as an emergent property of a complex system, with a focus on commercial actors. Methods: Drawing on Donella Meadows's systems thinking framework, this article examines how a systems perspective may be used to analyze the commercial determinants of NCDs and, specifically, how unhealthy commodity industries influence public health policy. Findings: Unhealthy commodity industries actively design and shape the NCD policy system, intervene at different levels of the system to gain agency over policy and politics, and legitimize their presence in public health policy decisions. Conclusions: It should be possible to apply the principles of systems thinking to other complex public health issues, not just NCDs. Such an approach should be tested and refined for other complex public health challenges.

: Gender-based violence (GBV) has been addressed as a policy issue in Nepal since the mid 1990s, yet it was only in 2010 that Nepal developed a legal and policy framework to combat GBV. This article draws on the concepts of agenda setting and framing to analyse the historical processes by which GBV became legitimized as a health policy issue in Nepal and explored factors that facilitated and constrained the opening and closing of windows of opportunity. The results presented are based on a document analysis of the policy and regulatory framework around GBV in Nepal. A content analysis was undertaken. Agenda setting for GBV policies in Nepal evolved over many years and was characterized by the interplay of political context factors, actors and multiple frames. The way the issue was depicted at different times and by different actors played a key role in the delay in bringing health onto the policy agenda. Women's groups and less powerful Ministries developed gender equity and development frames, but it was only when the more powerful human rights frame was promoted by the country's new Constitution and the Office of the Prime Minister that legislation on GBV was achieved and a domestic violence bill was adopted, followed by a National Plan of Action. This eventually enabled the health frame to converge around the development of implementation policies that incorporated health service responses. Our explicit incorporation of framing within the Kindgon model has illustrated how important it is for understanding the emergence of policy issues, and the subsequent debates about their resolution. The framing of a policy problem by certain policy actors, affects the development of each of the three policy streams, and may facilitate or constrain their convergence. The concept of framing therefore lends an additional depth of understanding to the Kindgon agenda setting model.