Suchergebnisse

Cet article pose les bases méthodologiques d'une étude sur les dispositifs de biosécurité en sciences sociales. Un examen de la réglementation édictée par le Ministère de l'Agriculture et de l'Environnement conduit à refuser l'hypothèse d'un pouvoir d'enfermement et de confinement, pour mettre en lumière des logiques plus attentives à la vie dans son caractère imprévisible. Une enquête de terrain dans une « zone humide » permet de voir comment les activités des vétérinaires et des ornithologues chargés du dépistage des oiseaux mettent en œuvre des logiques de soin et d'attachement.

Environmental conflicts are often framed by an assumption that there are clear divisions between interested parties. As a result, there is a tendency to polarise debates, simplify arguments and miss opportunities for constructive engagement. While these conflicts are rarely amenable to resolution through direct dialogue, diplomacy may offer a means to generate possible political settlements. In this paper, we seek to identify the scope for such diplomacy in the seemingly entrenched conflict that surrounds the case of bovine tuberculosis and badger culling in England. First, we use Q methodological techniques to map prevailing views among concerned publics about this highly contentious and apparently intractable issue. Second, we combine this method with diplomatic theory in order to identify areas in which diplomatic modes of engagement may be constructive. Our results show that there are predictable conflictual elements within two positions organised around opposition to, and support for, the culling of badgers. These positions, which we label 'ethical empiricist' and 'nostalgic autonomist', respectively, are not always straightforwardly oppositional. Their points of contact, as well as intersections with a third, alternative, subject position, which we label 'liberal pragmatist', suggest starting-points for diplomacy.

Discussion of sectarianism often focuses on evidence purporting to show discriminatory behaviour directed at Catholics or Protestants in Scotland. But attitudes also matter – in sustaining (or preventing) such discriminatory behaviours, and in understanding the nature of the 'problem of sectarianism' from the perspective of the Scottish public. This paper uses data from the Scottish Social Attitudes survey 2014. The survey fills a gap in the evidence base by providing robust evidence on what the public actually thinks about sectarianism in modern Scotland. It assesses public beliefs about the extent and nature of sectarianism and its perceived causes. Tensions in public opinion and differences in the attitudes of different sections of Scottish society are explored.

AbstractControl of bovine tuberculosis in cattle (bTB) in England and Wales is characterised by conversational and policy impasses, particularly in relation to badger culling. We created four online discussion groups comprising of badger cull supporters, cull‐opponents, aligned antagonists (mixing supporters and opponents affiliated with farming or an environmental/conservation group) and non‐aligned antagonists (mixing supporters and opponents who were not affiliated with a particular group). We held five different discussions with each grouping over the course of a week. We aimed to identify frames held by the opposing groupings within the bTB control controversy, which could either contribute to conflict and impasse, or alternatively could provide a potential conversational bridge between those who differed. Our analysis identified elements of the framings of the bTB control problem, which, particularly in the mixed groupings, lead to deadlock. We also identified some aspects of the framings which allowed those who differed to communicate together more effectively. We argue that these more transformative frames can be used to bridge conflict.

Food-producing animals throughout the world are likely to be exposed to antimicrobial (AM) treatment. The crossover in AM use between human and veterinary medicine raises concerns that antimicrobial resistance (AMR) may spread from food-producing animals to humans, driving the need for further understanding of how AMs are used in livestock practice as well as stakeholder beliefs relating to their use. A Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) was used to collate research on AM use published in peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2016. Forty-eight papers were identified and reviewed. The summary of findings highlights a number of issues regarding current knowledge of the use of AMs in food-producing animals and explores the attitudes of interested parties regarding the reduction of AM use in livestock. Variation between and within countries, production types and individual farms demonstrates the complexity of the challenge involved in monitoring and regulating AM use in animal agriculture. Many factors that could influence the prevalence of AMR in livestock are of concern across all sections of the livestock industry. This REA highlights the potential role not only of farmers and veterinarians but also of other advisors, public pressure and legislation to influence change in the use of AMs in livestock.

This study was carried out in two regions in Spain (Catalonia and Galicia) through eight focus groups; four for dairy farmers and four for veterinarians. The results showed that dairy farmers and veterinarians attributed responsibility to one another for not following biosecurity practices. The study brings to light contradictions among veterinarians and certain individual veterinary practices that participated in the study, which lead to doubt and confusion on the part of dairy farmers. Distinct perceptions were also identified of the role that government authorities should play in relation both to training and sanctions as a means of improving biosecurity on dairy farms. Additionally, the participants expressed varying opinions as to whether biosecurity measures ought to be made mandatory or remain voluntary. Results from this study highlight the need to promote initiatives through which distinct stakeholders such as veterinarians, government authorities, and dairy farmers can develop consensus-based messages on the implementation of biosecurity practices. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion

AbstractDespite extraordinary advances in biomedicine and associated gains in human health and well-being, a growing number of health and well-being related challenges have remained or emerged in recent years. These challenges are often 'more than biomedical' in complexion, being social, cultural and environmental in terms of their key drivers and determinants, and underline the necessity of a concerted policy focus on generating healthy societies. Despite the apparent agreement on this diagnosis, the means to produce change are seldom clear, even when the turn to health and well-being requires sizable shifts in our understandings of public health and research practices. This paper sets out a platform from which research approaches, methods and translational pathways for enabling health and well-being can be built. The term 'healthy publics' allows us to shift the focus of public health away from 'the public' or individuals as targets for intervention, and away from the view that culture acts as a barrier to efficient biomedical intervention, towards a greater recognition of the public struggles that are involved in raising health issues, questioning what counts as healthy and unhealthy and assembling the evidence and experience to change practices and outcomes. Creating the conditions for health and well-being, we argue, requires an engaged research process in which public experiments in building and repairing social and material relations are staged and sustained even if, and especially when, the fates of those publics remain fragile and buffeted by competing and often more powerful public formations.

There is increasing concern globally about the enormity of the threats posed by antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to human, animal, plant and environmental health. A proliferation of international, national and institutional reports on the problems posed by AMR and the need for antibiotic stewardship have galvanised attention on the global stage. However, the AMR community increasingly laments a lack of action, often identified as an 'implementation gap'. At a policy level, the design of internationally salient solutions that are able to address AMR's interconnected biological and social (historical, political, economic and cultural) dimensions is not straightforward. This multidisciplinary paper responds by asking two basic questions: (A) Is a universal approach to AMR policy and antibiotic stewardship possible? (B) If yes, what hallmarks characterise 'good' antibiotic policy? Our multistage analysis revealed four central challenges facing current international antibiotic policy: metrics, prioritisation, implementation and inequality. In response to this diagnosis, we propose three hallmarks that can support robust international antibiotic policy. Emerging hallmarks for good antibiotic policies are: Structural, Equitable and Tracked. We describe these hallmarks and propose their consideration should aid the design and evaluation of international antibiotic policies with maximal benefit at both local and international scales

There is increasing concern globally about the enormity of the threats posed by antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to human, animal, plant and environmental health. A proliferation of international, national and institutional reports on the problems posed by AMR and the need for antibiotic stewardship have galvanised attention on the global stage. However, the AMR community increasingly laments a lack of action, often identified as an 'implementation gap'. At a policy level, the design of internationally salient solutions that are able to address AMR's interconnected biological and social (historical, political, economic and cultural) dimensions is not straightforward. This multidisciplinary paper responds by asking two basic questions: (A) Is a universal approach to AMR policy and antibiotic stewardship possible? (B) If yes, what hallmarks characterise 'good' antibiotic policy? Our multistage analysis revealed four central challenges facing current international antibiotic policy: metrics, prioritisation, implementation and inequality. In response to this diagnosis, we propose three hallmarks that can support robust international antibiotic policy. Emerging hallmarks for good antibiotic policies are: Structural, Equitable and Tracked. We describe these hallmarks and propose their consideration should aid the design and evaluation of international antibiotic policies with maximal benefit at both local and international scales.

There is increasing concern globally about the enormity of the threats posed by antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to human, animal, plant and environmental health. A proliferation of international, national and institutional reports on the problems posed by AMR and the need for antibiotic stewardship have galvanised attention on the global stage. However, the AMR community increasingly laments a lack of action, often identified as an 'implementation gap'. At a policy level, the design of internationally salient solutions that are able to address AMR's interconnected biological and social (historical, political, economic and cultural) dimensions is not straightforward. This multidisciplinary paper responds by asking two basic questions: (A) Is a universal approach to AMR policy and antibiotic stewardship possible? (B) If yes, what hallmarks characterise 'good' antibiotic policy? Our multistage analysis revealed four central challenges facing current international antibiotic policy: metrics, prioritisation, implementation and inequality. In response to this diagnosis, we propose three hallmarks that can support robust international antibiotic policy. Emerging hallmarks for good antibiotic policies are: Structural, Equitable and Tracked. We describe these hallmarks and propose their consideration should aid the design and evaluation of international antibiotic policies with maximal benefit at both local and international scales.

There is increasing concern globally about the enormity of the threats posed by antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to human, animal, plant and environmental health. A proliferation of international, national and institutional reports on the problems posed by AMR and the need for antibiotic stewardship have galvanised attention on the global stage. However, the AMR community increasingly laments a lack of action, often identified as an 'implementation gap'. At a policy level, the design of internationally salient solutions that are able to address AMR's interconnected biological and social (historical, political, economic and cultural) dimensions is not straightforward. This multidisciplinary paper responds by asking two basic questions: (A) Is a universal approach to AMR policy and antibiotic stewardship possible? (B) If yes, what hallmarks characterise 'good' antibiotic policy? Our multistage analysis revealed four central challenges facing current international antibiotic policy: metrics, prioritisation, implementation and inequality. In response to this diagnosis, we propose three hallmarks that can support robust international antibiotic policy. Emerging hallmarks for good antibiotic policies are: Structural, Equitable and Tracked. We describe these hallmarks and propose their consideration should aid the design and evaluation of international antibiotic policies with maximal benefit at both local and international scales.