Holly Jarman, Michelle Falkenbach, Sarah Rozenblum, Olivia Rockwell, Scott L Greer
{"title":"法国、德国和英国从证据到建议：透明度、问责制和参与大流行科学建议。","authors":"Holly Jarman, Michelle Falkenbach, Sarah Rozenblum, Olivia Rockwell, Scott L Greer","doi":"10.1057/s41271-024-00544-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Politicians often claim to be \"following science\" but their claims are, reasonably, disputed. To claim to be following the science can mean that scientific evidence affects or legitimates decisions. The evidence that politicians are following science often comes from formal systems of advice that translate science into advice. We study the systems that informed policy in France, Germany, and the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that while in all three countries politicians had incentive to prefer private advice tailored to their needs, more transparent and independent advice appeared to contribute more to good policymaking and implementation, including by enhancing government's current and future accountability for their decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":50070,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From evidence to advice in France, Germany, and the UK: transparency, accountability, and participation in pandemic science advice.\",\"authors\":\"Holly Jarman, Michelle Falkenbach, Sarah Rozenblum, Olivia Rockwell, Scott L Greer\",\"doi\":\"10.1057/s41271-024-00544-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Politicians often claim to be \\\"following science\\\" but their claims are, reasonably, disputed. To claim to be following the science can mean that scientific evidence affects or legitimates decisions. The evidence that politicians are following science often comes from formal systems of advice that translate science into advice. We study the systems that informed policy in France, Germany, and the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that while in all three countries politicians had incentive to prefer private advice tailored to their needs, more transparent and independent advice appeared to contribute more to good policymaking and implementation, including by enhancing government's current and future accountability for their decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50070,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Public Health Policy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Public Health Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-024-00544-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-024-00544-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
From evidence to advice in France, Germany, and the UK: transparency, accountability, and participation in pandemic science advice.
Politicians often claim to be "following science" but their claims are, reasonably, disputed. To claim to be following the science can mean that scientific evidence affects or legitimates decisions. The evidence that politicians are following science often comes from formal systems of advice that translate science into advice. We study the systems that informed policy in France, Germany, and the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that while in all three countries politicians had incentive to prefer private advice tailored to their needs, more transparent and independent advice appeared to contribute more to good policymaking and implementation, including by enhancing government's current and future accountability for their decisions.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Public Health Policy (JPHP) will continue its 35 year tradition: an accessible source of scholarly articles on the epidemiologic and social foundations of public health policy, rigorously edited, and progressive.
JPHP aims to create a more inclusive public health policy dialogue, within nations and among them. It broadens public health policy debates beyond the ''health system'' to examine all forces and environments that impinge on the health of populations. It provides an exciting platform for airing controversy and framing policy debates - honing policies to solve new problems and unresolved old ones.
JPHP welcomes unsolicited original scientific and policy contributions on all public health topics. New authors are particularly encouraged to enter debates about how to improve the health of populations and reduce health disparities.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
