SOCIAL TRUST,IMPARTIAL ADMINISTRATION AND PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN EU CRISIS MANAGEMENT INSTITUTIONS

In this article, we investigate whether differences in social trust and impartial public administration have an impact on public confidence in EU crisis management institutions. Our assessment is based on a cross‐country comparison using aggregate country‐level data of the member states in the European Union. Earlier studies on the EU as a crisis manager have not carefully studied to what extent differences in social trust and administrative culture may or may not matter. Our analysis shows that in countries where citizens are treated impartially by their own national public administration institutions, people are less likely to support EU‐coordinated civil protection efforts. In contrast, in places where citizens perceive their government's treatment of them as partial and unfair, citizens will tend to support EU‐coordinated civil protection.     

Extending the realm of health policy with a “new public health” approach: A comparative look at the Canadian and Swedish national experiences

Abstract: Modern health‐care systems in OECD countries were built around hospitals and the preferences of organized medicine and are largely focused on acute‐care services and services provided by doctors. Starting in the early 1980s, however, the professionalization in several countries of trades traditionally involved in health promotion, together with the constitution of a group of researchers in social epidemiology and the corresponding development of specialized schools and research centres, brought new actors into health policy‐making worldwide. This led to the extension of contemporary health policy beyond the post‐war bio‐medical model into population health promotion and social policy. This article describes and analyses the means (and limitations) used by Canada and Sweden for extending the action radius of health policies. Results show that national policies in health promotion beyond the health sector contributed above all to developing and legitimizing an official discourse that presents social problems as factors affecting social inequalities in health. Health promotion represented a tool for maintaining central social norms, as national governments were re‐defining their role in social policy. Sommaire: Les systèmes modernes de soins de santé dans les pays de l'OCDE ont été construits autour d'hôpitaux et des préférences de la médecine organisée et sont essentiellement axés sur les services de soins intensifs de courte durée et les services médicaux. Cependant, depuis le début des années 1980, la professionnalisation des métiers traditionnellement impliqués dans la promotion de la santé survenue dans plusieurs pays, associée à la constitution d'un groupe de chercheurs en épidémiologie sociale et le développement d'écoles et de centres de recherche spécialisés ont introduit de nouveaux acteurs dans l'élaboration de politiques en matière de santéà l'échelle mondiale. Cela a entraîné une transformation de la politique de la santé contemporaine, qui a dépassé le modèle biomédical d'après‐guerre pour s'étendre à la promotion de la santé de la population et à la politique sociale. Le présent article décrit et analyse les moyens utilisés par le Canada et la Suède pour étendre le rayon d'action des politiques de la santé et les limites auxquelles ils font face. Les résultats indiquent que les politiques nationales visant la promotion de la santé au‐delà du secteur de la santé ont contribué avant tout à développer un discours officiel qui présente les problèmes sociaux comme des facteurs ayant une incidence sur les inégalités sociales de la santé. La promotion de la santé a représenté un outil pour maintenir des normes sociales nationales, alors que les gouvernements centraux redéfinissaient leur rôle en matière de politique sociale.     

To be continued . . . Syntheses and trends in follow-up of quality assurance in West European higher education

The authors report on West European trends in follow-up arrangements of national quality assurance procedures. They argue that external quality assurance ought to adopt a broader conception of quality than is now often the case. Next, the general public ought to have a guarantee that external quality assurance is valid (through meta-evaluation) and has consequences (through follow-up arrangements). Follow-up currently is not well developed in many European countries in a formal sense, but is receiving more attention as external quality assurance is maturing. Finally, the authors link national quality assurance to the European dimension; an international network could fulfil important functions in making quality assurance transparent and credible across Europe. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.