The Populist Radical Right in Government: The Effect of the Populist Radical Right on Health Policies in Western Europe

Health policy research tends to focus on medical care practices and disease prevention while the emphasis on political determinants of health is thin at best. Past performance can oft be used as a predictor for future political decisions. Politicians, the electorate and healthcare professionals stand to benefit from such analysis as it improves decision making for policy delivery, election outcomes and healthcare distribution. By expanding the research relating to the political determinants of health our understanding stands to improve. When thinking of health, who is in government and how the health policies might change because of the ideologies associated with that party in power is exceptionally pertinent. The motivation of this research for the health field is to uncover what populist radical right (PRR) parties do when they are in government with regards to health policy. The motivation for the political science realm is to uncover whether parties actually matter, specifically in areas (such as health) that lay far from their programmatic focus. Populist Radical Right (PRR) parties are a relevant force in Western Europe as they enter governmental coalitions thereby having the ability to change policies; of which health policies, have escaped the keen eye of researchers. Being able to anticipate what these parties will do is fundamental not only to health and political science research, but also to countries’ on the verge of elections. This dissertation uses an in-depth case study approach to understand what the PRR in Austrian and Italian national and subnational governments actually accomplish with respect to health policies over time. Manifesto research is of little interest in this case, because the focus is on implementation, not promises. Seeing as there is generally very little crossover between political science and health research, this research will add to the small literature available in the hopes of advancing the understanding of how PRR parties impact the development of a countries health systems thereby increasing the predictability of future policies and outcomes as well as generally inspiring more thought and action in this area. Who is in government matters immensely as the health policies parties implement, cut or change have serious consequences for the health of entire nations, especially given the current COVID-19 pandemic. This dissertation argues that, when in government with a conservative coalition partner, PRR parties impact health in four distinct ways: 1) they implement welfare chauvinist policies implying that health policies for natives are expanded while those for non-natives are decreased. 2) they implement neoliberal policies. This suggests that they decrease the generosity of health policies across the board, but specifically for the non-native population. 3) They implement Conservative health policies. This would involve decreasing health sending and investment for all. 4) Finally, PRR parties in government tend to be anti-scientific in their decision making thereby going against expert opinions. This research finds that on a national level all four of the above-mentioned arguments are valid, although dependent on the cooperation of the coalition partner, while on a subnational level, the impact is very country specific. In Austria, healthcare at a subnational level was of an area controlled by the Social Democrats and therefore difficult to influence. In Italy, on the other hand, the impact the PRR had on healthcare depended very much on the culture, geography and history of the region.PHDHealth Services Organization & PolicyUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/169888/1/michfalk_1.pd

A Hollow Victory: Understanding the Anti-Immigration Shift of Denmark's Social Democrats

The Social Democratic victory in the 2019 Danish general election was a surprising and notable event. The election stands out as an important win for Social Democrats as this party family has experienced a significant decline in voter support across Europe in recent decades. At the same time, the election was marked by controversy as Denmark’s Social Democrats not only doubled-down on their traditional support for the welfare state but also took a sharp turn to the right on immigration policies. This article analyses the effects of political systems, ideology and polarisation, as well as issue salience and framing on party strategies. These variables help to account for the abrupt policy shift adopted by the Social Democrats in Denmark and why similar anti-immigration platforms were not embraced by Social Democratic parties in other Nordic countries. Further examination of voter survey data suggests that the adoption of stronger anti-immigration policies is likely to be an ineffective strategy for Social Democrats going forward

How can intersectoral collaboration and action help improve the education, recruitment, and retention of the health and care workforce? A scoping review

Inadequate numbers, maldistribution, attrition, and inadequate skill‐mix are widespread health and care workforce (HCWF) challenges. Intersectoral—inclusive of different government sectors, non‐state actors, and the private sector—collaboration and action are foundational to the development of a responsive and sustainable HCWF. This review presents evidence on how to work across sectors to educate, recruit, and retain a sustainable HCWF, highlighting examples of the benefits and challenges of intersectoral collaboration. We carried out a scoping review of scientific and grey literature with inclusion criteria around intersectoral governance and mechanisms for the HCWF. A framework analysis to identify and collate factors linked to the education, recruitment, and retention of the HCWF was carried out. Fifty‐six documents were included. We identified a wide array of recommendations for intersectoral activity to support the education, recruitment, and retention of the HCWF. For HCWF education: formalise intersectoral decision‐making bodies; align HCWF education with population health needs; expand training capacity; engage and regulate private sector training; seek international training opportunities and support; and innovate in training by leveraging digital technologies. For HCWF recruitment: ensure there is intersectoral clarity and cooperation; ensure bilateral agreements are ethical; carry out data‐informed recruitment; and learn from COVID‐19 about mobilising the domestic workforce. For HCWF retention: innovate around available staff, especially where staff are scarce; improve working and employment conditions; and engage the private sector. Political will and commensurate investment must underscore any intersectoral collaboration for the HCWF

Ageing and Health

Ageing societies can be healthy and productive- if they get the politics right. This book argues that the population ageing crisis can be solved through policies that reduce inequalities between and within generations. It then explores the political coalitions needed to support policymaking that avoids pitting generations against each other

Post-COVID health policy responses to healthcare workforce capacities:A comparative analysis of health system resilience in six European countries

A cross countries in Europe, health policy is seeking to adapt to the post-pandemic ‘permacrisis’, where high demands on the healthcare workforce and shortages continue and combine with climate change, and war. The success of these efforts depends on the capacities of the healthcare workforce. This study aims to compare health policy responses to strengthen the capacities of the healthcare workforce and to explore the underpinning dynamics between health systems, policy actors and health policies. The study draws on a qualitative, comparative analysis of Austria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. The findings suggest that policy responses at the national level focused on hospitals and absorptive capacities, while policy responses at local/regional levels also included general practice and adaptive capacities. There were only few examples of policies directed at transformative capacities. The underling dynamics were shaped by health systems, where individual parts are closely connected, by embeddedness in specific service delivery and areas, and by power dynamics. In conclusion, sub-national health policy responses emerge as key to effective responses to the post-pandemic permacrisis, where health professions are central policy actors. Sub-national health policy responses build on existing power relations, but also have the potential to transcend these power relations.</p

Perspective: Lessons from COVID-19 of countries in the European region in light of findings from the health system response monitor

IntroductionDecision-makers initially had limited data to inform their policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. The research community developed several online databases to track cases, deaths, and hospitalizations; however, a major deficiency was the lack of detailed information on how health systems were responding to the pandemic and how they would need to be transformed going forward.ApproachIn an effort to fill this information gap, in March 2020, the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, the WHO European Regional Office and the European Commission created the COVID-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM) to collect and organise up-to-date information on how health systems, mainly in the WHO European Region, were responding to the COVID-19 pandemic.FindingsThe HSRM analysis and broader Observatory work on COVID-19 shone light on a range of health system challenges and weaknesses and catalogued policy options countries put in place during the pandemic to address these. Countries prioritised policies on investing in public health, supporting the workforce, maintaining financial stability, and strengthening governance in their response to COVID-19.OutlookCOVID-19 is likely to continue to impact health systems for the foreseeable future; the ability to cope with this pressure, and other shocks, depends on having good information on what other countries have done so that health systems develop adequate policy options. In support of this, the country information on the COVID-19 HSRM will remain available as a repository to inform decision makers on options for actions and possible measures against COVID-19 and other public health emergencies. Building on its previous work on health systems resilience, the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies will sustain its focus on analysing key issues related to the recovery from the pandemic and making health systems more resilient. This includes policy knowledge transfer between countries and systematic resilience testing, aiming at contributing to an improved understanding of health system response, recovery, and preparedness.Contribution to the literature in non-technical languageThe COVID-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM) was the first database in the WHO European Region to collect and organise up-to-date information on how health systems were responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. The HSRM provides a repository of policies which can be used to inform decision makers in health and other policy domains on options for action and possible measures against COVID-19 and other public health emergencies. This initiative proved particularly valuable, especially during the early phases of the pandemic, when there was limited information for countries to draw on as they formulated their own policy response to the pandemic. Our perspectives paper highlights some key challenges within health systems that the HSRM was able to identify during the pandemic and considers policy options countries put in place in response. Our research contributes to literature on emergency responses and recovery, health systems performance assessment, particularly health system resilience, and showcases the Observatory experience on how to design such a data collection tool, as well as how to leverage its findings to support cross-country learning

Perspective: lessons from COVID-19 of countries in the European region in light of findings from the health system response monitor

Introduction: Decision-makers initially had limited data to inform their policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. The research community developed several online databases to track cases, deaths, and hospitalizations; however, a major deficiency was the lack of detailed information on how health systems were responding to the pandemic and how they would need to be transformed going forward. Approach: In an eort to fill this information gap, in March 2020, the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, the WHO European Regional Oce and the European Commission created the COVID-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM) to collect and organise up-to-date information on how health systems, mainly in the WHO European Region, were responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings: The HSRM analysis and broader Observatory work on COVID-19 shone light on a range of health system challenges and weaknesses and catalogued policy options countries put in place during the pandemic to address these. Countries prioritised policies on investing in public health, supporting the workforce, maintaining financial stability, and strengthening governance in their response to COVID-19. Outlook: COVID-19 is likely to continue to impact health systems for the foreseeable future; the ability to cope with this pressure, and other shocks, depends on having good information on what other countries have done so that health systems develop adequate policy options. In support of this, the country information on the COVID-19 HSRM will remain available as a repository to inform decision makers on options for actions and possible measures against COVID-19 and other public health emergencies. Building on its previous work on health systems resilience, the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies will sustain its focus on analysing key issues relate to the recovery from the pandemic and making health systems more resilient. This includes policy knowledge transfer between countries and systematic resilience testing, aiming at contributing to an improved understanding of health system response, recovery, and preparedness. Contribution to the literature in non-technical language: The COVID-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM) was the first database in the WHO European Region to collect and organise up-to-date information on how health systems were responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. The HSRM provides a repository of policies which can be used to inform decision makers in health and other policy domains on options for action and possible measures against COVID-19 and other public health emergencies. This initiative proved particularly valuable, especially during the early phases of the pandemic, when there was limited information for countries to draw on as they formulated their own policy response to the pandemic. Our perspectives paper highlights some key challenges within health systems that the HSRM was able to identify during the pandemic and considers policy options countries put in place in response. Our research contributes to literature on emergency responses and recovery, health systems performance assessment, particularly health system resilience, and showcases the Observatory experience on how to design such a data collection tool, as well as how to leverage its findings to support cross-country learning

Health system resilience and health workforce capacities: Comparing health system responses during the COVID-19 pandemic in six European countries

Background: The health workforce is a key component of any health system and the present crisis offers a unique opportunity to better understand its specific contribution to health system resilience. The literature acknowledges the importance of the health workforce, but there is little systematic knowledge about how the health workforce matters across different countries. Aims: We aim to analyse the adaptive, absorptive and transformative capacities of the health workforce during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe (January-May/June 2020), and to assess how health systems prerequisites influence these capacities. Materials and Methods: We selected countries according to different types of health systems and pandemic burdens. The analysis is based on short, descriptive country case studies, using written secondary and primary sources and expert information. Results and Discussion: Our analysis shows that in our countries, the health workforce drew on a wide range of capacities during the first wave of the pandemic. However, health systems prerequisites seemed to have little influence on the health workforce's specific combinations of capacities. Conclusion: This calls for a reconceptualisation of the institutional perquisites of health system resilience to fully grasp the health workforce contribution. Here, strengthening governance emerges as key to effective health system responses to the COVID-19 crisis, as it integrates health professions as frontline workers and collective actors

Gender differences in the correlates of reactive aggression

The main aim of the present study was to examine the relationships between four psychopathy dimensions (Interpersonal Manipulation, Callous Affect, Erratic Lifestyle, and Antisocial Behaviour) as well as childhood exposure to violence and reactive aggression in men and women. Participants were a sample of working adults (N = 319) recruited from the University of Security in Poznan. Results indicated that reactive aggression among males formed significant associations with Erratic Lifestyle, Interpersonal Manipulation, and childhood exposure to violence. Only one variable, Erratic Lifestyle, was a significant correlate of reactive aggression in females. These findings are discussed in light of theory and previous research findings. © 2015 Polish Academy of Sciences, Committee for Psychological Sciences

Do parties make a difference? A review of partisan effects on health and the welfare state

BackgroundDo political parties matter to health? Do they affect population health either directly or through welfare states’ social policies and the eligibility, affordability and quality of health systems? And if they do, how? These are crucial questions if we are to understand health politics or shape public health policy, particularly given the changing landscape of political parties, party dominance in the executive and the mediating influence of the legislature.MethodsUsing a systematic approach, this review examines 107 peer-reviewed articles and books published after 1978 focusing on high-income countries asking the overarching question: Do political parties matter to health and the welfare state?ResultsThe literature relating parties to health directly was surprisingly thin, thus, the welfare state was used as a ‘proxy’ variable. An overwhelming majority of the literature sample suggests that Left parties are inclined to expand the welfare state without cutting benefits, while the Right does not expand and tends to reduce benefits. There was an inflection in the 1980s when Left parties shifted from expansion to maintaining the status quo.ConclusionConsidering current health trends in the form of measles outbreaks, the ‘Deaths of Despair’, the rise of previous eradicated infectious diseases and the declining health expectancy rates in some Western countries as well as the rise of Populist Radical Right parties in office we question the current partisanship thesis that political parties matter less and less