an article by Katherine E Smith (University of Edinburgh, UK) and Heide Weishaar (Hertie School of Governance, Berlin, Germany) published in Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice Volume 14 Number 3 (August 2018)
Abstract
The past two decades witnessed the international consensus around the idea that health policy decisions should be 'evidence-based'. These efforts have stimulated a wealth of studies explicitly concerned with understanding the use of research evidence in policy. The majority of such studies suggest there are few examples of public health policy outcomes that might reasonably be labelled 'evidence-based'.
Only a small number of these studies seek to explore how political dynamics interacted with evidence to shape policy outcomes. Here, we draw on two empirical case studies of efforts to promote public health evidence to decision makers (protection from secondhand smoke in Europe and tackling health inequalities in England), to highlight the primacy of 'policy networks' and 'advocacy' for understanding the role of evidence in achieving policy change.
Reflecting on our empirical findings, we argue that the policy networks literature usefully foregrounds the roles that diverse 'policy actors' can play in connecting research and policy.
However, our case studies also suggest that popular accounts of policy networks, such as Haas' 'epistemic communities' and Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith's Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), overstate the role of core values in driving policy network efforts, while underplaying the role of advocacy, leadership, network communication and trust, scientific consensus, political context and strategic policy trade-offs in network success.
We conclude by arguing for further efforts to connect analyses of policy networks and evidence use. We also reflect on the implications of our findings for those seeking to employ evidence to effect policy change.
Full text (PDF 28pp)
Showing posts with label health_inequalities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health_inequalities. Show all posts
Thursday, 11 October 2018
Saturday, 28 October 2017
Is empowerment a route to improving mental health and wellbeing in an urban regeneration (UR) context?
an article by Camilla Baba, Ade Kearns, Emma McIntosh, and james Lewsey (Glasgow University, UK) and
Carol Tannahill,
(Glasgow Centre for Population Health)
published in Urban Studies Volume 54 Issue 7 (2017)
Abstract
Urban regeneration (UR) programmes are recognised as a type of Population Health Intervention (PHI), addressing social and health inequalities. Policy recommends programmes involve communities through engagement and empowerment.
Whilst the literature has started to link empowerment with health improvement, this has not been within an UR context. As part of broader research on the economic evaluation of community empowerment activities, this paper examines how health gains can be generated through promoting empowerment as well as identifying whether feelings of empowerment are associated with residents personal characteristics or perceptions of their neighbourhood.
Using 2011 Community Health and Wellbeing Survey (GoWell) cross-sectional data, ordinal logistic regression and simple linear regression analysis of 15 Glasgow neighbourhoods undergoing regeneration with 4,302 adult householders (≥16 years old) was completed. Analyses identified strong associations (P≥ 0.05) between empowerment and the mental health subscale of the SF12v2 and with several items of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) scale.
Furthermore, residents’ who felt more empowered reported more positive attitudes towards their surroundings and housing providers. This concurs with recent evidence of the importance of residents’ psychological investments in their neighbourhood influencing their sense of place attachment.
Such analyses present initial evidence of the value of investing resources within UR programmes to activities geared towards increasing residents’ empowerment as a means of producing those health gains often sought by more costly aspects of the programmes.
Abstract
Urban regeneration (UR) programmes are recognised as a type of Population Health Intervention (PHI), addressing social and health inequalities. Policy recommends programmes involve communities through engagement and empowerment.
Whilst the literature has started to link empowerment with health improvement, this has not been within an UR context. As part of broader research on the economic evaluation of community empowerment activities, this paper examines how health gains can be generated through promoting empowerment as well as identifying whether feelings of empowerment are associated with residents personal characteristics or perceptions of their neighbourhood.
Using 2011 Community Health and Wellbeing Survey (GoWell) cross-sectional data, ordinal logistic regression and simple linear regression analysis of 15 Glasgow neighbourhoods undergoing regeneration with 4,302 adult householders (≥16 years old) was completed. Analyses identified strong associations (P≥ 0.05) between empowerment and the mental health subscale of the SF12v2 and with several items of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) scale.
Furthermore, residents’ who felt more empowered reported more positive attitudes towards their surroundings and housing providers. This concurs with recent evidence of the importance of residents’ psychological investments in their neighbourhood influencing their sense of place attachment.
Such analyses present initial evidence of the value of investing resources within UR programmes to activities geared towards increasing residents’ empowerment as a means of producing those health gains often sought by more costly aspects of the programmes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
