Participatory governance in public health emergencies: A case study of Quanzhou from a legal perspective

During public health emergencies, the work of prevention and control must be normalised, and coordination between economic development and epidemic prevention is crucial. However, in China, there is a lack of research on participatory governance in public health emergencies, particularly from a legal perspective. Existing studies are insufficient in terms of using legal texts and exploring legal governance in a normative sense, and there is an inadequate in-depth exploration of issues such as the legitimacy, path, motivation, and other aspects of participation. This article addresses these gaps by analysing the issues of participatory governance in public health emergencies from a legal perspective, using practical cases as examples. The research has shown that there are significant differences among the three types of organisations regarding their internal motivation, external incentives, and legal basis, and therefore it is necessary to distinguish different participation paths. Finally, we propose several measures to promote the active and sustained participation of organisation in governance, including cultivating the ability of organisations, emphasising organizational demands, seeking consensus, strengthening the guiding role of legislation, and broadening the channels of engagement.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Participation in Health and Social Care Governance: Categories and Cross-Cutting Themes from a Survey of SHAPES Project Partners

Good governance-aligned with human rights and rights-based care, participation, inclusion, and person-centredness-of digital care systems is integral to their ability to meet their objectives. To gain insight into existing governance structures and processes and participation experiences across Europe and lay foundations for the SHAPES Project's network governance (a healthy and active ageing Innovation Action consortium), our objectives included: 1) expand the list of known stakeholders, 2) explore how the range of stakeholders participate in health and social care governance, 3) develop an inventory of barriers and facilitators. Using an empirical, survey method, we consulted SHAPES Project partner organisations, with respondents invited to suggest specific participation barriers and facilitators. 16 organisations responded. Numerous additional stakeholders were identified. Circa 150 unique barriers and facilitators were reported, rationalised into 20 superordinate categories. Six cross-cutting themes were assembled: dimensionality and flux; power; opportunity and environments; interest, motivation, and choice; valuing governance participation, and duality. This work allows consideration of a wide range of stakeholders for the SHAPES collaborative governance model and future research, and for system design with the benefit of a detailed inventory of barriers and facilitators, and thematic contextualisation. Participation is modifiable and we suggest intervention targets and mechanisms.

The Right or Wrong to the City? Understanding Citizen Participation in the Pre- and Post-COVID-19 Eras in Malaysia

The right to the city concept is widely debated in academic discourse yet ambiguously executed in public discourse. In much of the discussion, the right to the city is advocated as a right that humans should claim—i.e., participating in urban space living. Nonetheless, constraints and limits are imposed on such advocacy, resulting in a tokenized implementation state. With such a background surmounting the COVID-19 pandemic era, this study is aimed at understanding the right to the city propagation and revealing the possible wrongs of such civic advocacy. Multiple cases in Malaysia were selected for analysis and as the discussion context representing the state-of-the-art aspect of right to the city in the context of an emerging country. Two potential misconceptions through the action of right to the city were identified: first, the concept of right to the city has the potential to infringe the centrality of power, which both citizens and the authority have to make clear; second, the lack of a sign of contribution from citizens poses a severe challenge to build a co-created urban space for all. This paper contributes to removing a blind spot—the possible wrong to the right to the city—and provides ideas to achieve authentic citizen participation.

Toward Anticipatory Governance of Human Genome Editing: A Critical Review of Scholarly Governance Discourse

The rapid development of human genome editing (HGE) techniques evokes an urgent need for forward-looking deliberation regarding the aims, processes, and governance of research. The framework of anticipatory governance (AG) may serve this need. This article reviews scholarly discourse about HGE through an AG lens, aiming to identify gaps in discussion and practice and suggest how AG efforts may fill them. Discourse on HGE has insufficiently reckoned with the institutional and systemic contexts, inputs, and implications of HGE work, to the detriment of its ability to prepare for a variety of possible futures and pursue socially desirable ones. More broadly framed and inclusive efforts in foresight and public engagement, focused not only upon the in-principle permissibility of HGE activities but upon the contexts of such work, may permit improved identification of public values relevant to HGE and of actions by which researchers, funders, policymakers, and publics may promote them.

Institutionalising participatory health governance: lessons from nine years of the National Health Assembly model in Thailand

Improving health governance is increasingly recognised as a key pillar for achieving universal health coverage (UHC). One good practice example of a participatory health governance platform is the National Health Assembly (NHA) in Thailand. This review of 9 years of the Thai NHA process attempted to understand how it works, given the paucity of such mechanisms worldwide. In addition, an in-depth look at its strengths and weaknesses allowed for reflection on whether the lessons learnt from this participatory governance model can be relevant for other settings.

Overall, the power of stakeholder groups coming together has been impressively harnessed in the NHA process. The NHA has helped foster dialogue through understanding and respect for very differing takes on the same issue. The way in which different stakeholders discuss with each other in a real attempt at consensus thus represents a qualitatively improved policy dialogue.

Nevertheless, the biggest challenge facing the NHA is ensuring a sustainable link to decision-making and the highest political circles. Modalities are needed to make NHA resolutions high priorities for the health sector.

The NHA embodies many core features of a well-prepared deliberative process as defined in the literature (information provision, diverse views, opportunity to discuss freely) as well as key ingredients to enable the public to effectively participate (credibility, legitimacy and power). This offers important lessons for other countries for conducting similar processes. However, more research is necessary to understand how improvements in the deliberative process lead to concrete policy outcomes.

Participatory governance over research in an academic research network: the case of Diabetes Action Canada

Digital data generated in the course of clinical care are increasingly being leveraged for a wide range of secondary purposes. Researchers need to develop governance policies that can assure the public that their information is being used responsibly. Our aim was to develop a generalisable model for governance of research emanating from health data repositories that will invoke the trust of the patients and the healthcare professionals whose data are being accessed for health research. We developed our governance principles and processes through literature review and iterative consultation with key actors in the research network including: a data governance working group, the lead investigators and patient advisors. We then recruited persons to participate in the governing and advisory bodies. Our governance process is informed by eight principles: (1) transparency; (2) accountability; (3) follow rule of law; (4) integrity; (5) participation and inclusiveness; (6) impartiality and independence; (7) effectiveness, efficiency and responsiveness and (8) reflexivity and continuous quality improvement. We describe the rationale for these principles, as well as their connections to the subsequent policies and procedures we developed. We then describe the function of the Research Governing Committee, the majority of whom are either persons living with diabetes or physicians whose data are being used, and the patient and data provider advisory groups with whom they consult and communicate. In conclusion, we have developed a values-based information governance framework and process for Diabetes Action Canada that adds value over-and-above existing scientific and ethics review processes by adding a strong patient perspective and contextual integrity. This model is adaptable to other secure data repositories.

Governing through Prevent? Regulation and Contested Practice in State-Muslim Engagement

In this article, we consider the implications of the 'Prevent' strand of the government's counter-terrorism strategy for the UK state's engagement with Muslims. We argue that the logics of Prevent have been highly problematic for state-Muslim engagement. Nevertheless, we suggest that the characterisation of state approaches to engaging Muslims as a form of discipline is incomplete without an analysis of: first, differences in practices, habits and perspectives across governance domains; second, variations in approach and implementation between levels of governance; and third, the agency of Muslims who engage with the state. Through this approach we show how attention to the situated practices of governance reveals the contested nature of governing through Prevent.