Cargando…

Comparative institutional analysis for public health: governing voluntary collaborative agreements for public health in England and the Netherlands

Democratic institutions and state-society relations shape governance arrangements and expectations between public and private stakeholders about public health impact. We illustrate this with a comparison between the English Public Health Responsibility Deal (RD) and the Dutch ‘All About Health…’ (Aa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bekker, Marleen P M, Mays, Nicholas, Kees Helderman, Jan, Petticrew, Mark, Jansen, Maria W J, Knai, Cecile, Ruwaard, Dirk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6209813/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30383254
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cky158
_version_ 1783366975398871040
author Bekker, Marleen P M
Mays, Nicholas
Kees Helderman, Jan
Petticrew, Mark
Jansen, Maria W J
Knai, Cecile
Ruwaard, Dirk
author_facet Bekker, Marleen P M
Mays, Nicholas
Kees Helderman, Jan
Petticrew, Mark
Jansen, Maria W J
Knai, Cecile
Ruwaard, Dirk
author_sort Bekker, Marleen P M
collection PubMed
description Democratic institutions and state-society relations shape governance arrangements and expectations between public and private stakeholders about public health impact. We illustrate this with a comparison between the English Public Health Responsibility Deal (RD) and the Dutch ‘All About Health…’ (AaH) programme. As manifestations of a Whole-of-Society approach, in which governments, civil society and business take responsibility for the co-production of economic utility and good health, these programmes are two recent collaborative platforms based on voluntary agreements to improve public health. Using a ‘most similar cases’ design, we conducted a comparative secondary analysis of data from the evaluations of the two programmes. The underlying rationale of both programmes was that voluntary agreements would be better suited than regulation to encourage business and civil society to take more responsibility for improving health. Differences between the two included: expectations of an enforcing versus facilitative role for government; hierarchical versus horizontal coordination; big business versus civil society participants; top-down versus bottom-up formulation of voluntary pledges and progress monitoring for accountability versus for learning and adaptation. Despite the attempt in both programmes to base voluntary commitments on trust, the English ‘shadow of hierarchy’ and adversarial state-society relationships conditioned non-governmental parties to see the pledges as controlling, quasi-contractual agreements that were only partially lived up to. The Dutch consensual political tradition enabled a civil society-based understanding and gradual acceptance of the pledges as the internalization by partner organizations of public health values within their operations. We conclude that there are institutional limitations to the implementation of generic trust-building and learning-based models of change ‘Whole-of-Society’ approaches.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6209813
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62098132018-11-05 Comparative institutional analysis for public health: governing voluntary collaborative agreements for public health in England and the Netherlands Bekker, Marleen P M Mays, Nicholas Kees Helderman, Jan Petticrew, Mark Jansen, Maria W J Knai, Cecile Ruwaard, Dirk Eur J Public Health Articles Democratic institutions and state-society relations shape governance arrangements and expectations between public and private stakeholders about public health impact. We illustrate this with a comparison between the English Public Health Responsibility Deal (RD) and the Dutch ‘All About Health…’ (AaH) programme. As manifestations of a Whole-of-Society approach, in which governments, civil society and business take responsibility for the co-production of economic utility and good health, these programmes are two recent collaborative platforms based on voluntary agreements to improve public health. Using a ‘most similar cases’ design, we conducted a comparative secondary analysis of data from the evaluations of the two programmes. The underlying rationale of both programmes was that voluntary agreements would be better suited than regulation to encourage business and civil society to take more responsibility for improving health. Differences between the two included: expectations of an enforcing versus facilitative role for government; hierarchical versus horizontal coordination; big business versus civil society participants; top-down versus bottom-up formulation of voluntary pledges and progress monitoring for accountability versus for learning and adaptation. Despite the attempt in both programmes to base voluntary commitments on trust, the English ‘shadow of hierarchy’ and adversarial state-society relationships conditioned non-governmental parties to see the pledges as controlling, quasi-contractual agreements that were only partially lived up to. The Dutch consensual political tradition enabled a civil society-based understanding and gradual acceptance of the pledges as the internalization by partner organizations of public health values within their operations. We conclude that there are institutional limitations to the implementation of generic trust-building and learning-based models of change ‘Whole-of-Society’ approaches. Oxford University Press 2018-11 2018-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6209813/ /pubmed/30383254 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cky158 Text en © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Articles
Bekker, Marleen P M
Mays, Nicholas
Kees Helderman, Jan
Petticrew, Mark
Jansen, Maria W J
Knai, Cecile
Ruwaard, Dirk
Comparative institutional analysis for public health: governing voluntary collaborative agreements for public health in England and the Netherlands
title Comparative institutional analysis for public health: governing voluntary collaborative agreements for public health in England and the Netherlands
title_full Comparative institutional analysis for public health: governing voluntary collaborative agreements for public health in England and the Netherlands
title_fullStr Comparative institutional analysis for public health: governing voluntary collaborative agreements for public health in England and the Netherlands
title_full_unstemmed Comparative institutional analysis for public health: governing voluntary collaborative agreements for public health in England and the Netherlands
title_short Comparative institutional analysis for public health: governing voluntary collaborative agreements for public health in England and the Netherlands
title_sort comparative institutional analysis for public health: governing voluntary collaborative agreements for public health in england and the netherlands
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6209813/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30383254
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cky158
work_keys_str_mv AT bekkermarleenpm comparativeinstitutionalanalysisforpublichealthgoverningvoluntarycollaborativeagreementsforpublichealthinenglandandthenetherlands
AT maysnicholas comparativeinstitutionalanalysisforpublichealthgoverningvoluntarycollaborativeagreementsforpublichealthinenglandandthenetherlands
AT keesheldermanjan comparativeinstitutionalanalysisforpublichealthgoverningvoluntarycollaborativeagreementsforpublichealthinenglandandthenetherlands
AT petticrewmark comparativeinstitutionalanalysisforpublichealthgoverningvoluntarycollaborativeagreementsforpublichealthinenglandandthenetherlands
AT jansenmariawj comparativeinstitutionalanalysisforpublichealthgoverningvoluntarycollaborativeagreementsforpublichealthinenglandandthenetherlands
AT knaicecile comparativeinstitutionalanalysisforpublichealthgoverningvoluntarycollaborativeagreementsforpublichealthinenglandandthenetherlands
AT ruwaarddirk comparativeinstitutionalanalysisforpublichealthgoverningvoluntarycollaborativeagreementsforpublichealthinenglandandthenetherlands