首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Health Expectations : An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy >Social participation in health in Brazil and England: inclusion representation and authority
【2h】

Social participation in health in Brazil and England: inclusion representation and authority

机译:巴西和英格兰的社会参与卫生保健:包容代表性和权威

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Aim  This article offers a brief description and analysis of public participation in health in Brazil and England in order to highlight different motivators and tensions within an acceptance of participation as official policy. >Sources/methods  The article draws on a range of research in both countries and an analysis of official documents relating to participation. It is based on collaboration between researchers deriving from broad programmes of work on public participation in which the authors are involved. >Argument  There is a tension between different principles underpinning collective public involvement in health both within and between countries. Different aspirations or claims have been made about what such participation will achieve and there are trade‐offs between design principles that have consequences for issues such as who takes part and thus also for what can be achieved. The democratic origins of public participation are more evident in the Brazilian situation than in England, but there are still questions about the inclusivity of the practices through which this is achieved. The English picture is both more diverse and dynamic, but formal decision‐making power of participatory forums is less than in Brazil. Whilst social justice claims for participation have been made in both countries, there is as yet limited evidence that these have been realized.
机译:>目标本文简要介绍和分析了巴西和英格兰的公众参与健康状况,以强调在接受参与作为官方政策时的不同动机和紧张关系。 >来源/方法本文借鉴了两国的一系列研究成果,并对与参与有关的官方文件进行了分析。它基于研究人员之间的合作,这些研究人员来自涉及作者的广泛公众参与工作计划。 >论点:在支持国家内部和国家之间公共集体参与卫生的不同原则之间存在紧张关系。人们对实现这种参与有不同的期望或主张,并且在设计原则之间存在权衡取舍,这些原则对诸如谁参与以及由此实现的目标等问题产生了影响。在巴西,比起英国,公众参与的民主根源更为明显,但对于实现这一目标的做法的包容性仍然存在疑问。英文画面既多样化,又充满活力,但参与性论坛的正式决策权不及巴西。两国都提出了社会正义的参与主张,但迄今仅有有限的证据表明已经实现了参与。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号