1
|
Evans MV, Bhatnagar S, Drake JM, Murdock CC, Rice JL, Mukherjee S. The mismatch of narratives and local ecologies in the everyday governance of water access and mosquito control in an urbanizing community. Health Place 2023; 80:102989. [PMID: 36804681 DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2023.102989] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2022] [Revised: 01/05/2023] [Accepted: 02/06/2023] [Indexed: 02/18/2023]
Abstract
Mosquito-borne disease presents a significant threat to urban populations, but risk can be uneven across a city due to underlying environmental patterns. Urban residents rely on social and economic processes to control the environment and mediate disease risk, a phenomenon known as everyday governance. We studied how households employed everyday governance of urban infrastructure relevant to mosquito-borne disease in Bengaluru, India to examine if and how inequalities in everyday governance manifest in differences in mosquito control. We found that governance mechanisms differed for water access and mosquitoes. Economic and social capital served different roles for each, influenced by global narratives of water and vector control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M V Evans
- MIVEGEC, Univ. Montpellier, CNRS, IRD, Montpellier, France; Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA; Center for Ecology of Infectious Diseases, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
| | - S Bhatnagar
- Observatoire de Genève, Université de Genève, Sauverny, Switzerland; School of Arts and Sciences, Azim Premji University, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
| | - J M Drake
- Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA; Center for Ecology of Infectious Diseases, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA
| | - C C Murdock
- Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA; Center for Ecology of Infectious Diseases, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA; Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA; Cornell Institute of Host-Microbe Interactions and Disease, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA; Northeast Regional Center for Excellence in Vector-borne Diseases, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
| | - J L Rice
- Department of Geography, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA
| | - S Mukherjee
- School of Arts and Sciences, Azim Premji University, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India; Biological and Life Sciences Division, School of Arts and Sciences, Ahmedabad University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Shiffman J, Shawar YR. Framing and the formation of global health priorities. Lancet 2022; 399:1977-1990. [PMID: 35594874 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00584-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2021] [Revised: 10/18/2021] [Accepted: 03/23/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Health issues vary in the amount of attention and resources they receive from global health organisations and national governments. How issues are framed could shape differences in levels of priority. We reviewed scholarship on global health policy making to examine the role of framing in shaping global health priorities. The review provides evidence of the influence of three framing processes-securitisation, moralisation, and technification. Securitisation refers to an issue's framing as an existential threat, moralisation as an ethical imperative, and technification as a wise investment that science can solve. These framing processes concern more than how issues are portrayed publicly. They are socio-political processes, characterised by contestation among actors in civil society, government, international organisations, foundations, and research institutions. These actors deploy various forms of power to advance particular frames as a means of securing attention and resources for the issues that concern them. The ascription of an issue as a security concern, an ethical imperative, or a wise investment is historically contingent: it is not inevitable that any given issue will be framed in one or more of these ways. A health issue's inherent characteristics-such as the lethality of a pathogen that causes it-also shape these ascriptions, but do not fully determine them. Although commonly facing resistance, global health elites often determine which frames prevail, raising questions about the legitimacy of priority-setting processes. We draw on the review to offer ideas on how to make these processes fairer than they are at present, including a call for democratic representation even as necessary space is preserved for elite expertise.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeremy Shiffman
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| | - Yusra Ribhi Shawar
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Recio-Román A, Recio-Menéndez M, Román-González MV. Political Populism, Institutional Distrust and Vaccination Uptake: A Mediation Analysis. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:ijerph19063265. [PMID: 35328952 PMCID: PMC8955402 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19063265] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2021] [Revised: 03/04/2022] [Accepted: 03/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Politics is ubiquitous in public health, but vaccines had never been weaponized to instill distrust to gain political advantage. In pandemic and post-pandemic scenarios, populist political parties could use vaccine-related issues to generate distrust in evidence-based knowledge. Therefore, some questions arise. What impact could populist political parties impinge on vaccination uptake rates through sowing political discontent? What could the medical institutions do to avoid the adverse effects that these political strategies could infringe? For answering these research questions, we first hypothesized that vaccine uptake was negatively associated with distrust in the institutions. Furthermore, we analyzed whether populism mediates this relationship. In doing so, we hypothesized a positive association between distrust and populism, because populists, mainly fueled by politically discontent citizens, offer hope of a better future, blaming their misfortune on the actions of the elite. Additionally, we hypothesized that those citizens with a higher level of political dissatisfaction, following the claims of the populist political parties, will have lower vaccine uptake results, because they will be discouraged from making the efforts to counter the pandemic. Based on a survey carried out by the European Commission that covered 27 E.U. + U.K. countries (totaling 27,524 respondents), this paper proves that an individual’s political discontent fully mediates the relationship between distrust in institutions and vaccine uptake. Targeting the vaccine-hesitant population is quite convenient for populists because they only need to convince a minority of citizens not to be vaccinated to achieve their destabilizing goals. New outbreaks will appear if the minimum herd immunity coverage is not reached, reinforcing a vicious circle of distrust in elites, in consequence. For tackling this matter, recommendations are given to institutional managers from a social marketing standpoint.
Collapse
|