Suchergebnisse

Residential development restrictions among Southern California suburban jurisdictions are examined. The purpose of the analysis is to assess the relative importance of various measures of community status, partisanship, and growth as predictors of local policy to regulate residential development. Social status and growth rates appear to account for some of the interurisdictional variation in policy, although it is clear that excluded factors are also important. Several issues regarding the study of local development policy and what might affect findings from study to study are also addressed.

Background: The success of government-recommended mitigation measures during the COVID-19 pandemic depends largely on information uptake and implementation by individual citizens. Objective: Our aim was to assess citizens' knowledge and perceptions about COVID-19 recommendations in the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland. Methods: A cross-sectional electronic survey with open and closed questions was disseminated by community-based partners prior to the relaxation of government restrictions. Outcomes included citizen knowledge (9-question measure) and worry about the virus, perception of government measures, and recommendations for improvements. Comparisons used linear regression, controlling for age, sex, education, and health literacy. Free-text answers were analyzed thematically. Results: Of 807 people who accessed the survey, 684 (85%) completed all questions and 479 (60%) gave free-text recommendations. Overall, 75% were female, the mean age was 48 years, and 93% had high health literacy. Knowledge scores were high, with a median score of 8 out of 9. Mean levels of worry about the COVID-19 pandemic were higher in women than men (55/100 versus 44/100, P<.001), and in respondents with lower health literacy (57/100 versus 52/100, P=.03). Self-reported adherence to recommendations was high (85%) and increased with age and worry (both P<.001). Respondents rated their own adherence higher than others (85% versus 61%, P<.001). Moreover, 34% of respondents reported having self-quarantined; this rose to 52% for those aged ≥75 years. Those who had self-quarantined reported higher levels of fear. Nearly half (49%) of respondents felt the government response had been adequate, though younger age and higher levels of worry were associated with considering the response to be insufficient (both P<.001). Analysis of open-text answers revealed 4 major themes: access to and use of masks, gloves, and hand sanitizer; government messaging; lockdown and lockdown exit plan communication; and testing for COVID-19. Conclusions: Knowledge, adherence, and satisfaction regarding government recommendations and response were high in this sample, but many desired greater access to personal protective equipment. Those with lower health literacy and those who have been in self-isolation reported greater concerns about the pandemic.

AbstractGovernments have increasingly adopted laws restricting the activities of international non-governmental organizations INGOs within their borders. Such laws are often intended to curb the ability of critical INGOs to discover and communicate government failures and abuses to domestic and international audiences. They can also have the unintended effect of reducing the presence and activities of INGOs working on health issues, and depriving local health workers and organizations of access to resources, knowledge and other forms of support. This study assesses whether legislative restrictions on INGOs are associated with fewer health INGOs in a wide range of countries and with the ability of those countries to mitigate disability-adjusted life years lost because of twenty-one disease categories between 1993 and 2017. The findings indicate that restrictive legislation hampered efforts by civil society to lighten the global burden of disease and had adverse side effects on the health of citizens worldwide.

AbstractInternational 'naming and shaming' campaigns rely on domestic civil society organizations (CSOs) for information on local human rights conditions. To stop this flow of information, some governments restrict CSOs, for example by limiting their access to funding. Do such restrictions reduce international naming and shaming campaigns that rely on information from domestic CSOs? This article argues that on the one hand, restrictions may reduce CSOs' ability and motives to monitor local abuses. On the other hand, these organizations may mobilize against restrictions and find new ways of delivering information on human rights violations to international publics. Using a cross-national dataset and in-depth evidence from Egypt, the study finds that low numbers of restrictions trigger shaming by international non-governmental organizations. Yet once governments impose multiple types of restrictions, it becomes harder for CSOs to adapt, resulting in fewer international shaming campaigns.

The success of government-recommended mitigation measures during the COVID-19 pandemic depends largely on information uptake and implementation by individual citizens. Our aim was to assess citizens' knowledge and perceptions about COVID-19 recommendations in the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland. A cross-sectional electronic survey with open and closed questions was disseminated by community-based partners prior to the relaxation of government restrictions. Outcomes included citizen knowledge (9-question measure) and worry about the virus, perception of government measures, and recommendations for improvements. Comparisons used linear regression, controlling for age, sex, education, and health literacy. Free-text answers were analyzed thematically. Of 807 people who accessed the survey, 684 (85%) completed all questions and 479 (60%) gave free-text recommendations. Overall, 75% were female, the mean age was 48 years, and 93% had high health literacy. Knowledge scores were high, with a median score of 8 out of 9. Mean levels of worry about the COVID-19 pandemic were higher in women than men (55/100 versus 44/100, P<.001), and in respondents with lower health literacy (57/100 versus 52/100, P=.03). Self-reported adherence to recommendations was high (85%) and increased with age and worry (both P<.001). Respondents rated their own adherence higher than others (85% versus 61%, P<.001). Moreover, 34% of respondents reported having self-quarantined; this rose to 52% for those aged ≥75 years. Those who had self-quarantined reported higher levels of fear. Nearly half (49%) of respondents felt the government response had been adequate, though younger age and higher levels of worry were associated with considering the response to be insufficient (both P<.001). Analysis of open-text answers revealed 4 major themes: access to and use of masks, gloves, and hand sanitizer; government messaging; lockdown and lockdown exit plan communication; and testing for COVID-19. Knowledge, adherence, and satisfaction regarding ...