Family Structure and Maternal Depressive Symptoms: A Cross-National Comparison of Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States

The purpose of this study is to understand the relationship between family structure and maternal depressive symptoms (MDS) in Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Family structures that involve transitions across life\u27s course, such as divorce, can alter access to resources and introduce new stressors into family systems. Using the stress process model, we examine the links between family structure, stress, resources, and MDS. Using nationally representative data from Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States and cross-sectional models for each country, we find that family structure may influence MDS differently in the UK than it does in Australia or, especially, the US. Specifically, mothers in the UK who either enter or leave a marriage after the birth of their child experience increased levels of MDS compared with mothers who do not experience a similar transition. These findings demonstrate that the effects of family structure transitions across life\u27s course may vary according to the country context as well as to the mother\u27s access to resources and exposure to stress. Considering that the effects of family structure transitions are not universal, this indicates that greater attention should be paid to the country contexts families exist in and the effects that public policies and social safety nets can have on MDS

Family Structure and Maternal Depressive Symptoms: A Cross-National Comparison of Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States

The purpose of this study is to understand the relationship between family structure and maternal depressive symptoms (MDS) in Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Family structures that involve transitions across life’s course, such as divorce, can alter access to resources and introduce new stressors into family systems. Using the stress process model, we examine the links between family structure, stress, resources, and MDS. Using nationally representative data from Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States and cross-sectional models for each country, we find that family structure may influence MDS differently in the UK than it does in Australia or, especially, the US. Specifically, mothers in the UK who either enter or leave a marriage after the birth of their child experience increased levels of MDS compared with mothers who do not experience a similar transition. These findings demonstrate that the effects of family structure transitions across life’s course may vary according to the country context as well as to the mother’s access to resources and exposure to stress. Considering that the effects of family structure transitions are not universal, this indicates that greater attention should be paid to the country contexts families exist in and the effects that public policies and social safety nets can have on MDS

The Intersection of Public Policy and Public Access: Digital Divides, Digital Literacy, Digital Inclusion, and Public Libraries

The terms digital divide, digital literacy, and digital inclusion have been widely used in discourse related to the Internet over the past two decades. Even though these terms are rarely defined and their meanings shift with changes in technology, these concepts have driven many Internet-related policy decisions in public libraries. This article examines what has happened in the gap between concepts and policies, as public libraries organize to provide Internet education, access, and assistance. Following an examination of the meanings assigned to these terms and policy efforts based on these concepts, this article examines the roles of public libraries related to the concepts and the ways in which these roles have been shaped by policies that impact access to information that is increasingly embedded within a range of technologies. The article then explores the ways in which policy could better support public libraries in these roles and the ways that these roles can contribute to public library advocacy and a voice in policy making

Advancing the scholarship and practice of stakeholder engagement in working landscapes: a co-produced research agenda

Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research-practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among 'on-the-ground' practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42532-022-00132-8

Advancing the scholarship and practice of stakeholder engagement in working landscapes: a co-produced research agenda

Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research–practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among ‘on-the-ground’ practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes