public good
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

3243
(FIVE YEARS 753)

H-INDEX

72
(FIVE YEARS 6)

Author(s):  
Johannes M. Schumacher ◽  
Puduru Viswanadha Reddy ◽  
Jacob C. Engwerda

2022 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hang Wu Tang

Abstract Singapore, with a five million population, has a vibrant charitable sector with over 2000 registered charities attracting approximately USD$2.18 billion in annual donations. How did Singapore’s charitable sector achieve its current level when it has been, in the past, segregated along mainly religious, race and clan-based communities? This paper explores this question by piecing together the current ecosystem, regulatory and tax infrastructure which facilitates the charitable sector in Singapore. Central to the development of the charitable sector has been the Singapore government’s role of being a gatekeeper, regulator and enabler of charities. In analysing the government’s role in the charitable sector, this paper locates Singapore’s charitable sector within the literature on government and nonprofit organization relations which has been described at times being cooperative, complementary, confrontational, and co-optive. These astute observations ring true with respect to the Singapore government’s relationship with the charitable sector. For organizations which pursue purposes consistent with state’s vision of public good, the state’s relationship with these charities has been largely cooperative and complementary. However, even within charities considered by the state to further public good, there is a strong element of co-optation where the state wields significant direct and indirect power over the charitable sector by way of provision of funding and board composition. In contrast, nonprofit organizations which engage in aims inconsistent with the state’s perceived public interest are, by law, unable to register itself as charities and enjoy corresponding fiscal benefits. Such nonprofit organizations also typically do not receive state funding. This demonstrates the confrontational nature of the state’s relationship with these nonprofit organizations. Through a close analysis of the laws, codes, media reports and academic literature on the charitable sector, the central thesis of this paper is that the charitable sector in Singapore is essentially a state facilitated endeavor.


2022 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e007407
Author(s):  
Kari Pahlman ◽  
Anson Fehross ◽  
Greg J Fox ◽  
Diego S Silva

ObjectiveOwing to its potential human, social and economic costs, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is frequently referred to as a threat to health security. Simultaneously, health security and the preservation of antimicrobials are often described as a global public good. However, how the term ‘public good’ is used in the context of health security, and the values that underpin it, remains ambiguous. Policymaking is never value-free, and a better examination of such values is critical to understanding how issues such as AMR are problematised and how policy decisions are informed.DesignWe used McDougall’s version of critical interpretive synthesis to capture the recurring concepts and arguments within public policy, political science and applied ethics literature on AMR. Articles were analysed by identifying recurring ideas and developing themes across the literature.ResultsA total of 77 papers were included in our review. In the context of health security and AMR, the concept of ‘public good’ appears to be used interchangeably with ‘common good’, reflecting confusion, but sometimes meaningful differences, regarding how antimicrobials, as a good, are conceived. Main approaches to addressing AMR are statism, globalism and regionalism, which appeal to different values in guiding policymakers. Common justificatory values underpinning preservation of antimicrobials as a public good were prevention of harm, solidarity, justice and rights.ConclusionThe findings suggest that within the literature there is a lack of conceptual clarity as to whether antimicrobials constitute a public good or a common good. Moreover, the way in which antimicrobials are conceived and the approaches through which AMR as a threat to health security is addressed appear to be grounded in values that are often implicit. Being explicit about the values that underpin AMR and health security is not simply an intellectual exercise but has very real policy and programmatic implications.


2022 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Diane M. Janosek

Governments in liberal democracies, such as the U.S. and in Europe, derive their authority from the consent of the people and exist for the “public good.” This chapter explores the proper role of government in communicating information and in enacting public health measures to prevent the spread of infection during a pandemic. This chapter includes historical context and exemplars of government policy makers' dissemination of COVID-19 health information, both accurate and inaccurate ones. Government officials have a responsibility to promote and support public policy initiatives that balance public safety with individual rights and self-determination. In some cases, citizens did not trust the government initiatives nor the associated misinformation or lockdowns. People reacted by exercising their right to protest. This chapter highlights government actions that were not based on accurate information and contributed to its spread and an increase of cyberchondria across the population, demonstrating the public good may not have been well served.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document