IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v291y2021ics0277953621007905.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public understandings of potential policy responses to health inequalities: Evidence from a UK national survey and citizens’ juries in three UK cities

Author

Listed:
  • Smith, K.E.
  • Macintyre, A.K.
  • Weakley, S.
  • Hill, S.E.
  • Escobar, O.
  • Fergie, G.

Abstract

A substantial body of research describes the distribution, causes and potential reduction of health inequalities, yet little scholarship examines public understandings of these inequalities. Existing work is dominated by small-scale, qualitative studies of the experiences of specific communities. As a result, we know very little about what broader publics think about health inequalities; and even less about public views of potential policy responses. This is an important gap since previous research shows many researchers and policymakers believe proposals for ‘upstream’ policies are unlikely to attract sufficient public support to be viable. This mixed methods study combined a nationally representative survey with three two-day citizens' juries exploring public views of health inequalities and potential policy responses in three UK cities (Glasgow, Manchester and Liverpool) in July 2016. Comparing public opinion elicited via a survey to public reasoning generated through deliberative processes offers insight into the formation of public views. The results challenge perceptions that there is a lack of public support for upstream, macro-level policy proposals and instead demonstrate support for proposals aiming to tackle health inequalities via improvements to living and working conditions, with more limited support for proposals targeting individual behavioural change. At the same time, some macro-economic proposals, notably those involving tax increases, proved controversial among study participants and results varied markedly by data source. Our analysis suggests that this results from three intersecting factors: a resistance to ideas viewed as disempowering (which include, fundamentally, the idea that health inequalities exist); the prevalence of individualising and fatalistic discourses, which inform resistance to diverse policy proposals (but especially those that are more ‘upstream’, macro-level proposals); and a lack of trust in (local and national) government. This suggests that efforts to enhance public support for evidence-informed policy responses to health inequalities may struggle unless these broader challenges are also addressed.

Suggested Citation

  • Smith, K.E. & Macintyre, A.K. & Weakley, S. & Hill, S.E. & Escobar, O. & Fergie, G., 2021. "Public understandings of potential policy responses to health inequalities: Evidence from a UK national survey and citizens’ juries in three UK cities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:291:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621007905
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114458
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953621007905
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114458?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Street, Jackie & Duszynski, Katherine & Krawczyk, Stephanie & Braunack-Mayer, Annette, 2014. "The use of citizens' juries in health policy decision-making: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 1-9.
    2. Pickett, Kate E. & Wilkinson, Richard G., 2015. "Income inequality and health: A causal review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 316-326.
    3. Degeling, Chris & Carter, Stacy M. & Rychetnik, Lucie, 2015. "Which public and why deliberate? – A scoping review of public deliberation in public health and health policy research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 114-121.
    4. McCartney, Gerry & Collins, Chik & Mackenzie, Mhairi, 2013. "What (or who) causes health inequalities: Theories, evidence and implications?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(3), pages 221-227.
    5. Bolam, Bruce & Murphy, Simon & Gleeson, Kate, 2004. "Individualisation and inequalities in health: a qualitative study of class identity and health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(7), pages 1355-1365, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ghazala Aziz, 2023. "Impact of Green Innovation, Sustainable Economic Growth, and Carbon Emission on Public Health: New Evidence of Non-Linear ARDL Estimation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-20, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Degeling, Chris & Rychetnik, Lucie & Street, Jackie & Thomas, Rae & Carter, Stacy M., 2017. "Influencing health policy through public deliberation: Lessons learned from two decades of Citizens'/community juries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 166-171.
    2. Dale, Elina & Evans, David B. & Gopinathan, Unni & Kurowski, Christoph & Norheim, Ole F. & Ottersen, Trygve & Voorhoeve, Alex, 2023. "Open and inclusive: fair processes for financing universal health coverage," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119795, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Reckers-Droog, Vivian & Jansen, Maarten & Bijlmakers, Leon & Baltussen, Rob & Brouwer, Werner & van Exel, Job, 2020. "How does participating in a deliberative citizens panel on healthcare priority setting influence the views of participants?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 143-151.
    4. Richardson, Elizabeth & Fenton, Lynda & Parkinson, Jane & Pulford, Andrew & Taulbut, Martin & McCartney, Gerry & Robinson, Mark, 2020. "The effect of income-based policies on mortality inequalities in Scotland: a modelling study," EUROMOD Working Papers EM3/20, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    5. John R. Moodie & Viktor Salenius & Michael Kull, 2022. "From impact assessments towards proactive citizen engagement in EU cohesion policy," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 1113-1132, October.
    6. Vu, Trung V., 2020. "Economic complexity and health outcomes: A global perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    7. Garthwaite, Kayleigh & Bambra, Clare, 2017. "“How the other half live”: Lay perspectives on health inequalities in an age of austerity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 268-275.
    8. Balsam Ahmad & Fouad M. Fouad & Shahaduz Zaman & Peter Phillimore, 2019. "Women’s health and well-being in low-income formal and informal neighbourhoods on the eve of the armed conflict in Aleppo," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 64(1), pages 75-82, January.
    9. Ilaria Natali & Mathias Dewatripont & Victor Ginsburgh & Michel Goldman & Patrick Legros, 2023. "Prescription opioids and economic hardship in France," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(9), pages 1473-1504, December.
    10. Ofori, Isaac K. & Osei, Dennis B. & Alagidede, Imhotep P., 2022. "Inclusive growth in Sub-Saharan Africa: Exploring the interaction between ICT diffusion and financial development," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 46(7).
    11. Vonneilich, Nico & Lüdecke, Daniel & von dem Knesebeck, Olaf, 2020. "Educational inequalities in self-rated health and social relationships – analyses based on the European Social Survey 2002-2016," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).
    12. Isaac K. Ofori & Mark K. Armah & Emmanuel E. Asmah, 2021. "Towards the Reversal of Poverty and Income Inequality Setbacks Due to COVID-19: The Role of Globalisation and Resource Allocation," Working Papers 21/043, European Xtramile Centre of African Studies (EXCAS).
    13. Irakli Japaridze & Nagham Sayour, 2021. "Dying from envy: The role of inequality," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1374-1392, June.
    14. Rory Horner & David Hulme, 2019. "From International to Global Development: New Geographies of 21st Century Development," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 50(2), pages 347-378, March.
    15. Sinha, Kompal & Davillas, Apostolos & Jones, Andrew M. & Sharma, Anurag, 2021. "Do socioeconomic health gradients persist over time and beyond income? A distributional analysis using UK biomarker data," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    16. Michael Cauvel & Miguel Alejandro Sanchez, 2023. "Life Expectancy and the Labor Share in the U.S," Working Papers PKWP2308, Post Keynesian Economics Society (PKES).
    17. Anson Au, 2023. "Reassessing the econometric measurement of inequality and poverty: toward a cost-of-living approach," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    18. Chunshan Zhou & Jing Chen & Shaojian Wang, 2018. "Does Migrant Status and Household Registration Matter? Examining the Effects of City Size on Self-Rated Health," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-15, June.
    19. Davidson, Rosemary & Kitzinger, Jenny & Hunt, Kate, 2006. "The wealthy get healthy, the poor get poorly? Lay perceptions of health inequalities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(9), pages 2171-2182, May.
    20. Maria Alessandra Antonelli & Giorgia Marini, 2023. "Good health with good institutions. An empirical analysis for italian regions," Public Finance Research Papers 61, Istituto di Economia e Finanza, DSGE, Sapienza University of Rome.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:291:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621007905. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.