工作场所健康促进计划的共同制作:预期收益,有争议的边界。

IF 1.3 4区 社会学 Q4 SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL
Paolo Rossi, Francesco Miele, Enrico Maria Piras
{"title":"工作场所健康促进计划的共同制作:预期收益,有争议的边界。","authors":"Paolo Rossi, Francesco Miele, Enrico Maria Piras","doi":"10.1057/s41285-022-00186-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Workplace health promotion (WHP) are often depicted as an opportunity for pursuing a better and broader well-being condition under the assumption that working environments affect the physical, mental, and social well-being of individuals who spend large proportion of waking hours at work. While most empirical studies provided medical evidence to the effectiveness of WHP programs, scholars question the instrumental purposes of these programs founded on the belief that \"healthy workers are better workers\". Little is known, for instance, about the design of WHP programs and their acceptance by workers. Our study addresses this gap, analyzing the co-production of a WHP program in an Italian research institute promoted by the healthcare authority, the local government and the national center for prevention and security in the workplaces. To this aim, we adopt the notion of boundary object investigate how different stakeholders reclaim to take part and being involved in this process, re-shaping their goals and their boundaries and why a WHP program or parts of it may be rejected or re-negotiated by its recipients. Our analysis reveals how each stakeholder contributes to re-shape the WHP program which emerges as the modular product of the composition of each matter of concern. Most notably, the strong rooting in a clinical perspective and the original focus on only workers at risk is gradually flanked by initiatives to involve all employees. Moreover, workers draw a line as for the legitimacy of employers' intervention in the personal sphere of health promotion, embracing interventions addressing diet and physical activity while rejecting measures targeting smoking and alcohol consumption.</p>","PeriodicalId":46551,"journal":{"name":"Social Theory & Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9385082/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The co-production of a workplace health promotion program: expected benefits, contested boundaries.\",\"authors\":\"Paolo Rossi, Francesco Miele, Enrico Maria Piras\",\"doi\":\"10.1057/s41285-022-00186-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Workplace health promotion (WHP) are often depicted as an opportunity for pursuing a better and broader well-being condition under the assumption that working environments affect the physical, mental, and social well-being of individuals who spend large proportion of waking hours at work. While most empirical studies provided medical evidence to the effectiveness of WHP programs, scholars question the instrumental purposes of these programs founded on the belief that \\\"healthy workers are better workers\\\". Little is known, for instance, about the design of WHP programs and their acceptance by workers. Our study addresses this gap, analyzing the co-production of a WHP program in an Italian research institute promoted by the healthcare authority, the local government and the national center for prevention and security in the workplaces. To this aim, we adopt the notion of boundary object investigate how different stakeholders reclaim to take part and being involved in this process, re-shaping their goals and their boundaries and why a WHP program or parts of it may be rejected or re-negotiated by its recipients. Our analysis reveals how each stakeholder contributes to re-shape the WHP program which emerges as the modular product of the composition of each matter of concern. Most notably, the strong rooting in a clinical perspective and the original focus on only workers at risk is gradually flanked by initiatives to involve all employees. Moreover, workers draw a line as for the legitimacy of employers' intervention in the personal sphere of health promotion, embracing interventions addressing diet and physical activity while rejecting measures targeting smoking and alcohol consumption.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46551,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Theory & Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9385082/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Theory & Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41285-022-00186-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Theory & Health","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41285-022-00186-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

工作场所健康促进(WHP)通常被认为是追求更好、更广泛的福利条件的一个机会,其假设是,工作环境会影响大部分醒着时间都在工作的人的身体、精神和社会福利。虽然大多数实证研究都为 WHP 计划的有效性提供了医学证据,但学者们对这些计划建立在 "健康的工人是更好的工人 "这一信念上的工具性目的提出了质疑。例如,人们对 WHP 计划的设计及其被工人接受的程度知之甚少。我们的研究针对这一空白,分析了由医疗保健机构、地方政府和国家工作场所预防与安全中心共同推动的意大利一家研究所的 WHP 计划。为此,我们采用了 "边界对象 "的概念,研究不同的利益相关者是如何要求参与和介入这一过程的,如何重新塑造他们的目标和边界,以及为什么 WHP 计划或其部分内容可能会被接受者拒绝或重新协商。我们的分析揭示了每一个利益相关者是如何为重新塑造世界卫生大会计划做出贡献的,而世界卫生大会计划则是每一个利益相关者组成的模块化产物。最值得注意的是,原本扎根于临床的观点和原本只关注高危工人的做法逐渐被让所有员工参与其中的举措所取代。此外,工人们对雇主在个人健康促进领域进行干预的合法性进行了界定,他们接受针对饮食和体育活动的干预措施,但反对针对吸烟和饮酒的措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The co-production of a workplace health promotion program: expected benefits, contested boundaries.

Workplace health promotion (WHP) are often depicted as an opportunity for pursuing a better and broader well-being condition under the assumption that working environments affect the physical, mental, and social well-being of individuals who spend large proportion of waking hours at work. While most empirical studies provided medical evidence to the effectiveness of WHP programs, scholars question the instrumental purposes of these programs founded on the belief that "healthy workers are better workers". Little is known, for instance, about the design of WHP programs and their acceptance by workers. Our study addresses this gap, analyzing the co-production of a WHP program in an Italian research institute promoted by the healthcare authority, the local government and the national center for prevention and security in the workplaces. To this aim, we adopt the notion of boundary object investigate how different stakeholders reclaim to take part and being involved in this process, re-shaping their goals and their boundaries and why a WHP program or parts of it may be rejected or re-negotiated by its recipients. Our analysis reveals how each stakeholder contributes to re-shape the WHP program which emerges as the modular product of the composition of each matter of concern. Most notably, the strong rooting in a clinical perspective and the original focus on only workers at risk is gradually flanked by initiatives to involve all employees. Moreover, workers draw a line as for the legitimacy of employers' intervention in the personal sphere of health promotion, embracing interventions addressing diet and physical activity while rejecting measures targeting smoking and alcohol consumption.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Theory & Health
Social Theory & Health SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: Social Theory & Health provides an international scholarly forum for theoretical reflection and debate on contemporary health issues, many of which bear directly on the planning and delivery of services. The journal aims to consolidate, refine and extend theoretically informed work on the role of health in modern societies. Interest in issues of theory and health now informs many academic and practice-oriented disciplines and crosses discipline boundaries. The Editors encourage contributions from all relevant disciplines, as well as from those involved directly in front-line treatment and care. Contributions from the developing world are particularly welcome. The journal aims to include contributions from all theoretical perspectives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信