B. Hawkins, E. Brooks, Rob Ralston, K. Lauber, Nancy Karreman, Sarah Steele
{"title":"The law of diminishing returns? The challenge of using freedom of information legislation for health policy research","authors":"B. Hawkins, E. Brooks, Rob Ralston, K. Lauber, Nancy Karreman, Sarah Steele","doi":"10.1080/09581596.2023.2220134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Freedom of information (FOI) laws are designed to increase transparency and political accountability. Where designed and implemented effectively, they can serve to catalyse public interest and democratic participation in politics, as well as exposing instances of corruption in, and influence over, the policy process (Fowler et al., 2013). A number of recent studies in the area of public health have drawn on data accessed through FOI requests (see for example: Lauber et al., 2021; Maani Hessari et al., 2019; Mitchell & McCambridge, 2023; Ralston, 2021; Robertson & Steele, 2023) including those published in the current journal (Glover et al., 2023; Sacks et al., 2018). Yet FOI laws remain underutilised as a research tool. This is due in part to the increasingly stringent application of disclosure exemptions within these laws. Below, we highlight examples of some of the difficulties encountered by health-policy researchers in the United Kingdom (UK) seeking to use FOI requests to access information held by public bodies, and the issues these raise for both scholarship and democratic oversight. While focused on the UK, these experiences are likely more widespread and of relevance to health and public policy researchers facing similar barriers in other contexts.","PeriodicalId":51469,"journal":{"name":"Critical Public Health","volume":"33 1","pages":"383 - 386"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2023.2220134","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Freedom of information (FOI) laws are designed to increase transparency and political accountability. Where designed and implemented effectively, they can serve to catalyse public interest and democratic participation in politics, as well as exposing instances of corruption in, and influence over, the policy process (Fowler et al., 2013). A number of recent studies in the area of public health have drawn on data accessed through FOI requests (see for example: Lauber et al., 2021; Maani Hessari et al., 2019; Mitchell & McCambridge, 2023; Ralston, 2021; Robertson & Steele, 2023) including those published in the current journal (Glover et al., 2023; Sacks et al., 2018). Yet FOI laws remain underutilised as a research tool. This is due in part to the increasingly stringent application of disclosure exemptions within these laws. Below, we highlight examples of some of the difficulties encountered by health-policy researchers in the United Kingdom (UK) seeking to use FOI requests to access information held by public bodies, and the issues these raise for both scholarship and democratic oversight. While focused on the UK, these experiences are likely more widespread and of relevance to health and public policy researchers facing similar barriers in other contexts.
期刊介绍:
Critical Public Health (CPH) is a respected peer-review journal for researchers and practitioners working in public health, health promotion and related fields. It brings together international scholarship to provide critical analyses of theory and practice, reviews of literature and explorations of new ways of working. The journal publishes high quality work that is open and critical in perspective and which reports on current research and debates in the field. CPH encourages an interdisciplinary focus and features innovative analyses. It is committed to exploring and debating issues of equity and social justice; in particular, issues of sexism, racism and other forms of oppression.