首页> 外文期刊>BMC Public Health >Public-private partnerships and the politics of alcohol policy in England: the Coalition Government’s Public Health ‘Responsibility Deal’
【24h】

Public-private partnerships and the politics of alcohol policy in England: the Coalition Government’s Public Health ‘Responsibility Deal’

机译:英国的公私伙伴关系和酒精政策的政治:联盟政府的公共卫生“责任交易”

获取原文
       

摘要

BACKGROUND:The 2010-2015 Conservative-led Coalition Government launched their flagship Public Health Responsibility Deal (PHRD) for England in 2011; a year before their alcohol strategy. This co-regulatory regime placed alcohol industry actors at the heart of policy-making, but was viewed with scepticism by public health actors. This article examines the ways in which the PHRD structured the alcohol policy environment throughout this period, which included the rejection of evidence-based policies such as minimum unit pricing.METHODS:This article draws on 26 semi-structured interviews with policy actors (parliamentarians, civil servants, civil society actors and academics) in 2018. Respondents were identified and recruited using purposive sampling. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic coding.RESULTS:The PHRD shaped the context of alcohol policy development at Westminster throughout this period. It circumscribed the policy space by taking evidence-based measures not amenable to industry partnership off the agenda. While the PHRD created important opportunities for industry engagement with policy-makers, it undermined public health actors' access to government, particularly following their withdrawal from the process. Moreover, the PHRD demonstrates the enduring appeal of partnership as a policy idea for governments, despite a lack of evidence of their effectiveness.CONCLUSIONS:This study of the PHRD demonstrates the ways in which industry actors are able to influence policy through long-term relationship building and partnership working on policy decision-making. Whilst such partnership approaches may appear to have the potential to mitigate some of alcohol harms, they create fundamental conflicts of interest, and may undermine the very causes they seek to further.
机译:背景:2010-2015保守党 - LED联盟政府于2011年推出了英格兰的旗舰公共卫生责任协议(PHRD);在他们的酒精战略前一年。该共同监管制度在政策制定的核心下放置了酒精行业行动者,但由公共卫生行动者怀疑被怀疑。本文介绍了普遍认为,该期间,该方法的方式包括拒绝拒绝最低单位定价等证据的政策。方法:本文涉及26个关于政策行为者的半结构化访谈(议员, 2018年公务员,民间社会行动者和学者)。使用目的采样确定并招募受访者。使用专题编码记录,转录和分析采访。结果:在此期间,威斯敏斯特在威斯敏斯特的酒精政策发展背景。它通过采取基于证据的措施,不适合行业伙伴关系的议程来限制政策空间。虽然“氢氯”为与政策制定者的行业参与创造了重要机会,而它会破坏公共卫生行动者的访问权限,特别是在退出过程之后。此外,除了缺乏其有效性的证据表明,PHRD展示了伙伴关系的持久上诉。结论:结论:这对PHRD的研究表明了行业行动者能够通过长期关系影响政策的方式建立和伙伴关系在政策决策中努力。虽然这种伙伴关系方法可能似乎有可能减轻一些酒精危害,但它们创造了对利益的根本冲突,并且可能破坏他们寻求进一步的原因。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号