Public policies in building a healthy community
Ben Y.F. Fong, Martin C.S. Wong in The Routledge Handbook of Public Health and the Community, 2021
Public policy is a system of government control. It may be expressed as a law, an order, a legislation, or a regulation (Sapru, 2017). Policy intent can be realised via community education and micro policies (Lin & Carter, 2013). The public policy making process can be viewed as a succession of stages which include agenda setting, policy formulation, policy implementation, policy evaluation, policy termination, and policy change (Stewart et al., 2008). During various stages of the policy making process, government plays important and determining roles and is one of the major stakeholders of public policy. Since public policy involves various stakeholders in a dynamic manner, shaping policy is a complex process which requires collaboration among various policy stakeholders (Khare et al., 2015).
Theories and models for future regulation
Melanie Latham, Jean V. McHale in The Regulation of Cosmetic Procedures, 2020
As Beck has argued, as societies modernise they become increasingly concerned with risk, and the very reduction or removal of risk can be seen as a goal of public policy.43 Major threats to society in the modern age are self-produced and man-made, rather than being external or natural hazards, though unintended.44 One major example of this phenomenon was climate change; another might be plastic pollution, animal species’ extinction or antibiotic resistance. Beck has argued, moreover, that the modern reaction of establishing institutions to manage these risks was contributing to the problem itself if the institutions were wedded to their own frames of reference and solutions. This was compounded by the global nature of these risks, which national governments and institutions could not adequately resolve. At the same time, the public were increasingly distrustful of experts, corporations and government regulators to resolve crises effectively.45 As Beck highlights, governments have attempted to correct public misconceptions about risk by informing and educating them about accepted expertise and scientific paradigms while at the same time avoiding any reorganisation of institutions or public relations.46 Scientists have been able to dismiss any public concerns by emphasising the lack of sufficient scientific evidence for cause and effect of any substance or technology.
Public Policy on Alcohol and Illicit Drugs
Edith S. Lisansky Gomberg in Current Issues in Alcohol/Drug Studies, 2019
“Public policy” can have several meanings. It can mean the established laws or regulations concerning an issue, or it can mean the popular consensus on an issue, or it can mean the rules or principles which ought to prevail in an ideal world. This ambiguity is well-suited to issues concerning alcohol and other mood-altering drugs because of popular ambivalence about their use and control. On the one hand, drugs are much in demand because they are so immediately reinforcing in generating euphoria or blotting out pain and anxiety. On the other hand, their use results in heavy costs for treatment of addiction and in mortality, reduced productivity and lost employment, accidents, crime, and remedial welfare programs, estimated at more than $116 billion dollars for alcohol and about 60 billion dollars for other mood-altering drugs for 1983 (Harwood and others, 1984, p. G-16). While social and economic damage due to excessive use of alcohol has been a prominent public issue during much of our nation’s history, and heavy criminal penalties apply for any use of most of the other mood-altering drugs, and while hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent within the last generation on treatment of alcoholism and billions are now being spent to combat the sale and use of other drugs, there are proportionately even more alcoholics now than a generation ago; and many authorities are lamenting that we are losing the war on drugs.
Changes in attitudes toward alcohol control policies in Lithuania. Findings from two representative surveys in 2015 and 2020
Published in The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 2023
Daumantas Stumbrys, Ilona Tamutienė, Jacek Moskalewicz, Janusz Sieroslawski
A strong link between public attitudes and public policy is one of the key goals of democratic governance. Results of the previous studies show that there is a strong positive relationship and substantial degree of coincidence between public attitudes and public policy (1,2). Scientific evidence has supported effective alcohol control measures in previous decades (3,4). Nevertheless, it is also very important that the public understands their benefits and supports evidence-based alcohol control policies. The previous study (5) on public support for alcohol control policies showed that the level either fluctuates or tends slowly to decline parallel with progressing economic liberalization in the few past decades. Results of Kilian’s study (6) show that the highest support for alcohol control policies was recorded in Northern countries, which was in contrast to the Eastern countries, where the lowest support for control policies was found.
The Socio-Political Roles of Neuroethics and the Case of Klotho
Published in AJOB Neuroscience, 2022
Veljko Dubljević, Katharina Trettenbach, Robert Ranisch
By addressing that question, it is also crucial for socio-political neuroethics to explicate the limits of its own approach. As Parens and Johnston (2007) state: “We need to distinguish between the questions that we can answer for policy-makers and those that we cannot resolve.” Otherwise, neuroethicists would be guilty of becoming accomplices of media hyperbole. Therefore, we propose these four additional questions to ensure that the discussion of any particular neurotechnology is realistic and not merely hype:What are the criteria for assessing the relevance of cases to be discussed?What are the relevant policy options for targeted regulation (e.g. of research, manufacture, use?)What are the relevant external considerations for policy options (e.g. international treaties)?What are the foreseeable future challenges that public policy might have to tackle with?
Policies and Interventions to Reduce Familial Mental Illness Stigma: A Scoping Review of Empirical Literature
Published in Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 2021
Joseph Adu,, Abram Oudshoorn,, Kelly Anderson,, Carrie Anne Marshall,, Heather Stuart,, Meagan Stanley,
Eventually, there is a need for findings ways to address familial mental illness stigma, such as enacting appropriate policies and interventions that reduce stigmatizing attitudes to safeguard the welfare of persons with mental illnesses within their families. This paper examines such policies and interventions aimed at reducing familial mental illness stigma, with a focus on four comparator countries in the developed world (Canada, the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Australia). A scoping review methodology focused on empirical studies is used herein. Multiple databases were searched to identify relevant studies to achieve the aim of the study. The review synthesizes peer-reviewed literature to highlight existing policies and interventions targeting familial mental illness stigma, and to identify evidence gaps to inform further research. Policy herein implies public policy which is a system of laws, regulatory measures, courses of action, and funding priorities regarding programs propagated by governmental entities (Kilpatrick & Ross, 2001). Policy is more of an idea or a plan of what to do in particular situations that have been agreed upon by a group of people, an organization, or a government. Intervention, on the other hand, is the planned actions that are designed to prevent a disease or injury or to promote health in a given population (McKenzie et al., 2012). Interventions often involve educational programs that aim to bring improvement in the environment, or a health promotion campaign.
Related Knowledge Centers
- Drug Rehabilitation
- Statistical Inference
- Substance Abuse
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
- Qualitative Research
- Case Study
- Unintended Consequences
- Heroin
- Public Health
- Physician