scholarly journals Workshop: Bringing economics, health and migration together: a mutual learning experiment

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  

Abstract Acknowledging the role of economic arguments in political discourses and decision-making, researchers have begun to pay more attention to the fiscal implications of different health policy options for migrants. As yet, empirical evidence on economic effects of policy responses to migration and the societal costs or cost-effectiveness of competing strategies to address migrants’ health needs is scarce. Methodological challenges such as limited availability and accessibility of decent data often impede the generation of robust evidence. Further, little is known as to how evidence can effectively be moved into policy; e.g., the actual clout of economic arguments in migration policies debates, as opposed to other evidence- or value-based arguments, hitherto remains unclear. In other social policy domains such as educational and labour market integration, economic evaluations have become routine components of policy assessments. And under the title of, e.g., knowledge translation, strategies for the introduction of research evidence into political decision-making processes have been developed. The combination of similar goals and challenges suggests that there are opportunities to build bridges across sectors and disciplines - e.g., public health, social epidemiology, economics, social policy, data science - as well as across research-practice-divides, for the purposes of mutual learning and the joint improvement of research outcomes. The goal of this workshop is to start such learning processes by bringing together researchers and professionals from different fields, by sharing existing knowledge, and by jointly exploring the following questions: What are the thematic intersections, tensions and synergies between the different disciplines? What are common goals and questions? Which kinds of different knowledge complement each other towards those goals?Where are options for mutual learning, methodological transfer and/or synthesis? How can they help to overcome current challenges in estimating the costs of divergent migrant health policies?What can be learnt from existing knowledge translation strategies as regards the role of research for migrant health policy making?What challenges and open questions remain? The workshop will start with a brief introduction of key concepts and objectives. The first presentation will use three case studies to reflect on the potential of economic evaluation for improving health screening and assessment policies for asylum seekers in Germany. The second presentation will provide input from seminal research on public policy in migration contexts. A third presentation will summarize previous activities and insights of the work group “Economic arguments in migrant health policy making”. The following discussion will examine the above noted questions by tapping into the presenters’ expertise and the audience’s experience. The workshop will be closed with a summary of lessons learnt and directions for future research. Key messages Economic arguments play a central role in policy-making; but economic analyses of different migrant health policy options are hampered by various methodological challenges and tensions. Seminal research in other social policy domains offers potential for mutual learning, toward the end of generating valid economic evidence on the cost-benefits of migrants’ greater in-/exclusion.

Author(s):  
Louise Warwick-Booth ◽  
Simon Rowlands

Abstract This book chapter seeks to: (i) Comment on the state of academic health promotion; (ii) explain the differences between health policy, social policy and health in all policy; (iii) explore the policy process; (iv) introduce key ideas from the policy analysis literature; (v) show how ideology affects policy making; and (vi) discuss the role of advocacy within health promotion.


Author(s):  
Louise Warwick-Booth ◽  
Simon Rowlands

Abstract This book chapter seeks to: (i) Comment on the state of academic health promotion; (ii) explain the differences between health policy, social policy and health in all policy; (iii) explore the policy process; (iv) introduce key ideas from the policy analysis literature; (v) show how ideology affects policy making; and (vi) discuss the role of advocacy within health promotion.


2022 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Reza Majdzadeh ◽  
Haniye Sadat Sajadi ◽  
Bahareh Yazdizadeh ◽  
Leila Doshmangir ◽  
Elham Ehsani-Chimeh ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The institutionalization of evidence-informed health policy-making (EIHP) is complex and complicated. It is complex because it has many players and is complicated because its institutionalization will require many changes that will be challenging to make. Like many other issues, strengthening EIHP needs a road map, which should consider challenges and address them through effective, harmonized and contextualized strategies. This study aims to develop a road map for enhancing EIHP in Iran based on steps of planning. Methods This study consisted of three phases: (1) identifying barriers to EIHP, (2) recognizing interventions and (3) measuring the use of evidence in Iran's health policy-making. A set of activities was established for conducting these, including foresight, systematic review and policy dialogue, to identify the current and potential barriers for the first phase. For the second phase, an evidence synthesis was performed through a scoping review, by searching the websites of benchmark institutions which had good examples of EIHP practices in order to extract and identify interventions, and through eight policy dialogues and two broad opinion polls to contextualize the list of interventions. Simultaneously, two qualitative-quantitative studies were conducted to design and use a tool for assessing EIHP in the third phase. Results We identified 97 barriers to EIHP and categorized them into three groups, including 35 barriers on the “generation of evidence” (push side), 41 on the “use of evidence” (pull side) and 21 on the “interaction between these two” (exchange side). The list of 41 interventions identified through evidence synthesis and eight policy dialogues was reduced to 32 interventions after two expert opinion polling rounds. These interventions were classified into four main strategies for strengthening (1) the education and training system (6 interventions), (2) the incentives programmes (7 interventions), (3) the structure of policy support organizations (4 interventions) and (4) the enabling processes to support EIHP (15 interventions). Conclusion The policy options developed in the study provide a comprehensive framework to chart a path for strengthening the country’s EIHP considering both global practices and the context of Iran. It is recommended that operational plans be prepared for road map interventions, and the necessary resources provided for their implementation. The implementation of the road map will require attention to the principles of good governance, with a focus on transparency and accountability.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 71-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Attila Bartha ◽  
Zsolt Boda ◽  
Dorottya Szikra

The rise of populist governance throughout the world offers a novel opportunity to study the way in which populist leaders and parties rule. This article conceptualises populist policy making by theoretically addressing the substantive and discursive components of populist policies and the decision-making processes of populist governments. It first reconstructs the implicit ideal type of policy making in liberal democracies based on the mainstream governance and policy making scholarship. Then, taking stock of the recent populism literature, the article elaborates an ideal type of populist policy making along the dimensions of content, procedures and discourses. As an empirical illustration we apply a qualitative congruence analysis to assess the conformity of a genuine case of populist governance, social policy in post-2010 Hungary with the populist policy making ideal type. Concerning the policy content, the article argues that policy heterodoxy, strong willingness to adopt paradigmatic reforms and an excessive responsiveness to majoritarian preferences are distinguishing features of any type of populist policies. Regarding the procedural features populist leaders tend to downplay the role of technocratic expertise, sideline veto-players and implement fast and unpredictable policy changes. Discursively, populist leaders tend to extensively use crisis frames and discursive governance instruments in a Manichean language and a saliently emotional manner that reinforces polarisation in policy positions. Finally, the article suggests that policy making patterns in Hungarian social policy between 2010 and 2018 have been largely congruent with the ideal type of populist policy making.


Author(s):  
Augustine Nduka Eneanya

Over the past three decades, the relationship between ecology and public policy has changed because of the increasing role of scientific uncertainty in environmental policy making. While earlier policy questions might have been solved simply by looking at the scientific technicalities of the issues, the increased role of scientific uncertainty in environmental policy making requires that we re-examine the methods used in decision-making. Previously, policymakers use scientific data to support their decision-making disciplinary boundaries are less useful because uncertain environmental policy problems span the natural sciences, engineering, economics, politics, and ethics. The chapter serves as a bridge integrating environmental ecosystem, media, and justice into policy for public health and safety. The chapter attempts to demonstrate the linkage between the environmental policy from a holistic perspective with the interaction of air, water, land, and human on public health and safety.


Author(s):  
Augustine Nduka Eneanya

Over the past three decades, the relationship between ecology and public policy has changed because of the increasing role of scientific uncertainty in environmental policy making. While earlier policy questions might have been solved simply by looking at the scientific technicalities of the issues, the increased role of scientific uncertainty in environmental policy making requires that we re-examine the methods used in decision-making. Previously, policymakers use scientific data to support their decision-making disciplinary boundaries are less useful because uncertain environmental policy problems span the natural sciences, engineering, economics, politics, and ethics. The chapter serves as a bridge integrating environmental ecosystem, media, and justice into policy for public health and safety. The chapter attempts to demonstrate the linkage between the environmental policy from a holistic perspective with the interaction of air, water, land, and human on public health and safety.


Author(s):  
Anne-Marie D'Aoust

Foreign policy analysis (FPA) deals with the decision-making processes involved in foreign policy-making. As a field of study, FPA overlaps international relations (IR) theory and comparative politics. Studies that take into account either sex, women, or gender contribute to the development of knowledge on and about women in IR, which is in itself one of the goals of feminist scholarship. There are two main spheres of feminist inquiries when it comes to foreign policy: the role of women as sexed power holders involved in decision-making processes and power-sharing in the realm of foreign policy-making, and the role of gendered norms in the conduct and adoption of foreign policies. Many observers insist that feminism and foreign policy are linked only by a marriage of convenience, designed to either acknowledge the political accomplishments of women in the sphere of foreign policy such as Margaret Thatcher and Indira Ghandi, or bring attention to so-called “women’s issues,” such as reproduction rights and population control. Scholarship on women and/or gender in relation to foreign policy covers a wide range of themes, such as the role of women as political actors in decision-making processes and organizational structures; women’s human rights and gender mainstreaming; the impact of various foreign policies on women’s lives; and the concept of human security and the idea of women’s rights as a valid foreign policy objective. Three paradigms that have been explored as part of the study of women in comparative politics and IR are behavioralism, functionalism, and rational choice theory.


2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 168
Author(s):  
Jafar Toroghi ◽  
Mahbubeh Arefi ◽  
Hadi Marjaee

University organizational development is a strategic effort for continuous and organized university performance, which can provide an ability to internally and environmentally meet the requirements in the academic settings. It needs some measures such as domestic capacities and competences in university, as well as collecting and analyzing the required information to support the decision making of university management, which are defined as the responsibilities of Office of Institutional Research (OIR). The present research aims to determine the strategic role of OIR in university organizational development, investigating its features and dimensions in the selected universities. The findings highlight the most important strategies of OIR as follow: 1.collection, analysis, and publication of information, 2.studying on the process, planning, performance, resources, and effectiveness of decision making units in universities, 3.supporting the decision making of university management in planning and policy making, and improving the quality. The results of the current research depict a conceptual pattern involving the strategic elements of institutional research.


2016 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 45-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia KORKEA-AHO

AbstractThe EU’s openness towards stakeholders is central to the legitimacy of its law-making. With the rapid globalisation of EU legislative activities, openness towards actors from third countries requires analysis. With reference to the notion of ‘lobbying’, this article outlines a framework for identifying the role of third country actors in EU policy processes. The two arguments brought forward suggest that third country lobbying is facilitated by the openness of Union law- and policy-making, and that third country actors contribute to EU decision-making at all stages. The article concludes with a set of questions that third country lobbying raises concerning the EU’s legitimate law-making authority in Europe and beyond.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document