Institutional boundaries and the challenges of aligning science advice and policy dynamics: the UK and Canada in the time of COVID-19.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Economics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-13 DOI:10.1017/S1744133123000221
Carolyn Hughes Tuohy, Gwyn Bevan, Adalsteinn D Brown
{"title":"Institutional boundaries and the challenges of aligning science advice and policy dynamics: the UK and Canada in the time of COVID-19.","authors":"Carolyn Hughes Tuohy, Gwyn Bevan, Adalsteinn D Brown","doi":"10.1017/S1744133123000221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This comparison of institutions of science advice during COVID-19 between the Westminster systems of England/UK and Ontario/Canada focuses on the role of science in informing public policy in two central components of the response to the pandemic: the adoption of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and the procuring of vaccines. It compares and contrasts established and purpose-built bodies with varying degrees of independence from the political executive, and shows how each attempted to manage the tensions between scientific and governmental logics of accountability as they negotiated the boundary between science and policy. It uses the comparison to suggest potential lessons about the relative merits and drawbacks of different institutional arrangements for science advice to governments in an emergency.</p>","PeriodicalId":46836,"journal":{"name":"Health Economics Policy and Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Economics Policy and Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744133123000221","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This comparison of institutions of science advice during COVID-19 between the Westminster systems of England/UK and Ontario/Canada focuses on the role of science in informing public policy in two central components of the response to the pandemic: the adoption of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and the procuring of vaccines. It compares and contrasts established and purpose-built bodies with varying degrees of independence from the political executive, and shows how each attempted to manage the tensions between scientific and governmental logics of accountability as they negotiated the boundary between science and policy. It uses the comparison to suggest potential lessons about the relative merits and drawbacks of different institutional arrangements for science advice to governments in an emergency.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
机构边界和调整科学建议和政策动态的挑战:新冠肺炎时期的英国和加拿大。
新冠肺炎期间,英国威斯敏斯特系统和加拿大安大略省威斯敏斯特系统之间的科学咨询机构的比较侧重于科学在应对疫情的两个核心组成部分(非药物干预措施(NPI)和疫苗采购)中为公共政策提供信息的作用。它比较和对比了不同程度独立于政治执行机构的既定机构和专门建立的机构,并展示了它们在协商科学和政策之间的边界时,如何试图管理科学和政府问责逻辑之间的紧张关系。它利用这一比较,就在紧急情况下向政府提供科学咨询的不同制度安排的相对优缺点提出了潜在的教训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Economics Policy and Law
Health Economics Policy and Law HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: International trends highlight the confluence of economics, politics and legal considerations in the health policy process. Health Economics, Policy and Law serves as a forum for scholarship on health policy issues from these perspectives, and is of use to academics, policy makers and health care managers and professionals. HEPL is international in scope, publishes both theoretical and applied work, and contains articles on all aspects of health policy. Considerable emphasis is placed on rigorous conceptual development and analysis, and on the presentation of empirical evidence that is relevant to the policy process.
期刊最新文献
Private equity involvement in primary care: the case of Ireland. Procedural fairness to recalibrate the power imbalance in health decision-making: comment on the report: 'Open and inclusive: Fair processes for financing universal health coverage'. Navigating conflicting expectations in addressing healthcare scarcity: a q-methodology study on the Dutch National Health Care Institute. Including carer health-related quality of life in NICE health technology assessments in the United Kingdom. The inefficient effects of non-clinical factors on health care costs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1