Politics in all policies: how healthcare is shaped by political (in)action

Rocco Friebel,Iris Wallenburg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s1744133124000240

2024-11-29

Health Economics Policy and Law

Abstract://static.cambridge.org/content/id/urn%3Acambridge.org%3Aid%3Aarticle%3AS1744133124000240/resource/name/firstPage-pdf-S1744133124000240a.jpg

health policy & services

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

A health political science for health promotion

Evelyne de Leeuw,Patrick Harris,Jinhee Kim,Aryati Yashadhana

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17579759211034418

Abstract:If health promotion as a field of change for human and ecological health is to maintain its urgency, it needs to continue building its policy credentials. This paper charts the development of policy as a concern for IUHE/IUHPE (International Union for Health Education/International Union for Health Promotion and Education) from the mid-1970s when 'health education policies' were prominent issues, to the launch of Healthy Public Policy (in the 1980s) and Health in All Policy (in the 2000s). We argue that solid conceptual and theoretical foundations exist to frame and develop the relevance and connectedness of health promotion more prominently. We start off with a brief introduction into (health) political science, and then illustrate the urgency of the argument with three case studies. The first takes a critical realist perspective on 'closing the gap' in Australian Indigenous populations. With recent evidence it demonstrates that the core of the policymaking process needs to re-align itself with an Indigenous narrative. The second case study reviews the politics of healthy urban planning and health equity in cities. Taking a critical theory institutionalist view, the case describes how the political and narrative parallels between urban theory and health equity have gone underexplored. With an explicit gaze to connect the two, the field could become a large and influential driver of enhanced health promotion and public health policy. The third case describes the languages, policy frames, and distinctions, in four urban/health paradigms. It shows that unconscious policy and practice bias exists in policy priorities and processes. We conclude with observations and recommendations on the role of health promotion as a conceptual realm and field of activity. We show that all health promoters should be aware of the political nature of their enterprise. Tools and analyses exist to help further action.
Political Landmines in Healthcare Research: An Obstacle to Progress

Abdulqadir J Nashwan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.66707

2024-08-12

Cureus

Abstract:The quest for groundbreaking discoveries in healthcare research faces significant challenges, not just technical but also political. Political landmines, such as controversies, regulations, and policies influenced by political agendas, affect healthcare research. These landmines can derail studies, stifle innovation, and impede the advancement of medical knowledge and public health. Political agendas often impose narratives that contradict scientific evidence, influencing research areas like reproductive health, climate change, and vaccinations. Funding volatility due to political shifts creates uncertainty, discouraging long-term projects and slowing healthcare innovation. Ethical and regulatory barriers shaped by political considerations further limit research scope and delay breakthroughs. Political influences also result in censorship and misinformation, undermining informed decision-making and public trust. Geopolitical tensions hinder international collaboration, reducing the capacity to address global health challenges. To mitigate these effects, the scientific community must advocate for evidence-based policies, communicate transparently with policymakers, and build robust alliances to support research independence. Fostering resilience within the research community is crucial for adapting to changing political climates and ensuring the continuity of essential projects. Healthcare research can continue to advance and improve global health outcomes by addressing these political challenges.
Political Analysis for Health Policy Implementation

Paola Abril Campos,Michael R. Reich

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23288604.2019.1625251

2019-07-03

Abstract:Any effort to improve health system performance must address the challenges of policy implementation. This article examines one aspect of implementation-the politics of policy implementation for the health sector, particularly the management of stakeholders in order to help change teams improve the chances of achieving policy objectives. Based on a literature scan of political analyses and descriptions of health policy implementation in low- and middle-income countries, we propose six major categories of stakeholder groups that are likely to influence implementation: interest group politics, bureaucratic politics, budget politics, leadership politics, beneficiary politics, and external actor politics. The categories of stakeholders can be overlapping. We examine the politics of these different stakeholder categories, and then present selected examples of published case studies that show the types of implementation challenges that arise for each category and how implementers can use political strategies to manage specific stakeholder groups and related political processes. Understanding the political dimensions of implementation can help those responsible for implementation drive policy into practice more effectively. Understanding and addressing conflict, resistance and cooperation among stakeholders are key to managing the implementation process. Systematic and continuous political analysis can help decision makers and change teams improve the chances for successful implementation.

public, environmental & occupational health,health policy & services
Keeping It Political and Powerful: Defining the Structural Determinants of Health

JONATHAN C. HELLER,MARJORY L. GIVENS,SHERI P. JOHNSON,DAVID A. KINDIG

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12695

2024-02-18

Milbank Quarterly

Abstract:Policy Points The structural determinants of health are 1) the written and unwritten rules that create, maintain, or eliminate durable and hierarchical patterns of advantage among socially constructed groups in the conditions that affect health, and 2) the manifestation of power relations in that people and groups with more power based on current social structures work—implicitly and explicitly—to maintain their advantage by reinforcing or modifying these rules. This theoretically grounded definition of structural determinants can support a shared analysis of the root causes of health inequities and an embrace of public health's role in shifting power relations and engaging politically, especially in its policy work. Shifting the balance of power relations between socially constructed groups differentiates interventions in the structural determinants of health from those in the social determinants of health.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Addressing the political determinants of health

Mavin Kashyap

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp24x738921

2024-07-26

British Journal of General Practice

Abstract:'Medicine is a social science, and politics nothing but medicine at a larger scale.' 1 The stage for a general election in the UK has been set for 4 July, yet the (political) fireworks will have been let off well beforehand. Among the heart of the upcoming debates will be health care, encompassing such topics as the waiting-list backlog and industrial action. This will now be against the backdrop of the threat of mass resignation by GPs following the UK local medical committee conference,2 which already lies in direct contrast with the pledge made by the Liberal Democrats to recruit 8000 more GPs if elected, as a central part of their election campaign.3 These headlines act as a stark reminder that health is a political choice and that politics determine the health status of a nation; a position made ...

primary health care,medicine, general & internal
Law and Policy as Tools in Healthy People 2030

Joel Teitelbaum,Angela K McGowan,Therese S Richmond,Dushanka V Kleinman,Nico Pronk,Emmeline Ochiai,Carter Blakey,Karen H Brewer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000001358

Abstract:Laws and policies are critical determinants of health and well-being. They can encourage positive behaviors and discourage harmful behaviors, and they can enhance or worsen health, health equity, health disparities, and health literacy. Recognizing their contribution to conditions in the environments in which people are born, live, learn, work, play, worship, and age, and people's experiences of these conditions, the US Department of Health and Human Services considered the roles of law and policy throughout its development of Healthy People 2030. Laws and policies often interrelate, but they have different purposes. A law is an established procedure, standard, or system of rules that members of a society must follow. A policy is a decision or set of decisions meant to address a long-term purpose or problem. Healthy People 2030 offers an opportunity for users in diverse sectors and at all levels to use laws and policies to support or inform the initiative's implementation, address health disparities and health inequities, and improve health and well-being in this decade. Introducing new laws and policies or rescinding existing ones to achieve Healthy People 2030 goals offers a chance to rigorously assess outcomes and weigh the balance of good outcomes against unintended consequences.
Power and the people's health

Sharon Friel,Belinda Townsend,Matthew Fisher,Patrick Harris,Toby Freeman,Fran Baum

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114173

Abstract:Public policy plays a central role in creating and distributing resources and conditions of daily life that matter for health equity. Policy agendas have tended to focus on health care delivery and individualised interventions. Asking why there is a lack of policy action on structural drivers of health inequities raises questions about power inequities in policy systems that maintain the status quo. In this paper we investigate the power dynamics shaping public policy and implications for health equity. Using a Health Equity Power Framework (HEPF), we examined data from 158 qualitative interviews with government, industry and civil society actors across seven policy case studies covering areas of macroeconomics, employment, social protection, welfare reform, health care, infrastructure and land use planning. The influence of structures of capitalism, neoliberalism, sexism, colonisation, racism and biomedicalism were widely evident, manifested through the ideologies, behaviours and discourses of state, market, and civil actors and the institutional spaces they occupied. Structurally less powerful public interest actors made creative use of existing or new institutional spaces, and used network, discursive and moral power to influence policy, with some success in moderating inequities in structural and institutional forms of power. Our hope is that the methodological advancement and empirical data presented here helps to illuminate how public interest actors can navigate structural power inequities in the policy system in order to disrupt the status quo and advance a comprehensive policy agenda on the social determinants of health equity. However, this analysis highlights the unrealistic expectation of turning health inequities around in a short time given the long-term embedded power dynamics and inequities within policy systems under late capitalism. Achieving health equity is a power-saturated long game.
Political Determinants of Health: Healthcare Privatization and Population Health in Europe

Alexandru D. Moise,Tamara Popic

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-11257024

2024-04-03

Abstract:Abstract The extent to which healthcare reforms affect health remains understudied. Healthcare reforms result in policy outputs that determine provision of medical services, which have consequences for the health of the population. We scrutinize this relationship between health policy outputs and population health, using an original dataset of healthcare reforms passed in 36 European countries from 1989 to 2019. Focusing more specifically on legislative changes implying privatization of healthcare delivery and finance, we ask the following question: What is the relationship between reforms that privatize healthcare provision and population health in terms of health outcomes and inequalities? We answer this question by relying on fixed effects time-series cross-section models. Health outcomes are operationalized using measures of subjective health status, unmet health needs and resulting health inequalities. Our results show that privatization of healthcare is associated with higher rates of bad subjective health and unmet health needs several years after the passing of reforms. These effects are stronger for individuals in the lower tiers of income and education, resulting in higher socio-economic inequalities. The article contributes to conceptualization of the political determinants of health as health policy outputs and a better understanding of the relationship between policy outputs and population health outcomes.

social sciences, biomedical,health care sciences & services,health policy & services,social issues
The politics of health systems policies during COVID-19: reflections on experiences from Latin America and the Caribbean

Walter Flores,Alexis Sullivan,Fernando Jerez,Daniela C. Rodríguez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-024-02306-0

2024-11-09

International Journal for Equity in Health

Abstract:Politics as the exercise of power always influence public policies–which reflects the multifaceted nature of decision-making–but "using politics" as a motivation for self-serving interests of government leaders and their allies poses problems. This article reviews the impacts of COVID-19 on health systems of the Latin American and Caribbean region from a political lens. We highlight the overriding influence of politics in health policies, weak governance structures that became compromised, exacerbation of corruption, and breakdowns in the communication and trust between governments and their citizens. There are many factors that did not work well-or as expected. For instance, the poor predictive ability of the Global Health Security Index, which showed that pre-pandemic assessments were deeply naive to how health systems evidence and expertise are uniquely vulnerable to politics. We argue that there is an urgent need to rethink health policy and systems frameworks-including metrics-at national and global level. There is also a need for new global health governance arrangements. The expected solidarity and collaboration among countries was trumped by the rich countries practice of gauging essential resources and vaccines and applying health diplomacy to the rest of the world, and the unchecked power of commercial corporations producing essential medical supplies and vaccines.

public, environmental & occupational health
Translating clinical practice into health policy: an example from China

John W. Peabody,Thérèse M. Hesketh,Paul S. Steinberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(95)00782-2

IF: 3.255

1996-01-01

Health Policy

Abstract:Understanding a health problem and even having the technological capability to solve it are often not enough to lead to changes in health policy. To help accomplish such policy changes, we propose a five-step approach that involves (1) specifying the disciplines; (2) developing multidisciplinary hypotheses; (3) investigating the hypotheses; (4) developing a policy ‘story’; and (5) advocating these solutions to policy makers. We use the example of neonatal hypothermia in Eastern China to illustrate this approach. We found that the approach both better informed policy and better motivated policy change. Using the approach extended our involvement from the hospital to a wider population; in addition our initial solution expanded from clinical interventions to broader public health approaches that proved to be quite different from our original recommendations.
Race, Politics, and the Affordable Care Act

Jamila Michener

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-8255481

2020-08-01

Abstract:The political processes surrounding the Affordable Care Act (ACA) offer valuable lessons about race and politics in the United States. In particular, the ACA underscores a critical tension between politics and policy in a racialized polity: even when policies are intended to target and address racial disparities, politics can undermine the steps necessary to do so. Close scrutiny of the ACA during its first decade reveals how race intersects with politics to render public policy less equitable and more vulnerable to erosion. Ultimately, this analysis points to the ways that racialized political processes are formidable barriers to equitable material outcomes. By examining such processes and making them visible, this article elucidates the possibilities, limits, and contours of public policy as a mechanism for achieving racial justice.
Consolidating political leadership in healthcare: a mediating institution for priority-setting as a political strategy in a local health system

Emma Bergstedt,Lars Sandman,Ann-Charlotte Nedlund

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s1744133124000021

2024-03-09

Health Economics Policy and Law

Abstract:The allocation of resources is a crucial part of political decision-making in healthcare, but explicit priorities are rarely set when resources are distributed. Two areas that have received some attention in research about legitimacy and priority-setting decisions in healthcare are the role of technical expert agencies as mediating institutions and the role of elected politicians. This paper investigates a political priority-setting advisory committee within a regional authority in Sweden. The aim is to explore how a political body can serve as a mediating institution for priority-setting in healthcare by disentangling the arrangements of its work in terms of what role it performs in the organisation and what it should do. The findings illustrate that promoting the notion of explicit priority-setting and the political aspects inherent in priority-setting in political healthcare management can contribute to consolidating political governance and leadership. There is, however, a complex tension between stability and conflicting values which has implications for the role of politicians as citizens' democratic representatives. This paper enhances our understanding of the role of mediating institutions and political properties of healthcare priority-setting, as well as our understanding of political and democratic healthcare governance in local self-government.

health policy & services
Recognizing rhetoric in health care policy analysis

Jill Russell,Trisha Greenhalgh,Emma Byrne,Janet McDonnell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1258/jhsrp.2007.006029

Abstract:Critiques of the 'naïve rationalist' model of policy-making abound in the sociological and political science literature. Yet academic debate on health care policy-making continues to be couched in the dominant discourse of evidence-based medicine, whose underlying assumptions--that policies are driven by facts rather than values and these can be clearly separated; that 'evidence' is context-free, can be objectively weighed up and placed unproblematically in a 'hierarchy'; and that policy-making is essentially an exercise in decision science--have constrained both thinking and practice. In this paper, drawing on theoretical work from political science and philosophy, and innovative empirical work in the health care sector, we argue that health care is well overdue for a re-defining of what policy-making is. Policy-making is the formal struggle over ideas and values, played out by the rhetorical use of language and the enactment of social situations. While the selection, evaluation and implementation of research evidence are important in the policy-making process, they do not equate to that process. The study of argument in the construction of policy has the potential to illuminate dimensions of the process that are systematically occluded when policy-making is studied through a naïve rationalist lens. In particular, a rhetorical perspective highlights the struggle over ideas, the 'naming and framing' of policy problems, the centrality of audience and the rhetorical use of language in discussion to increase the audience's adherence to particular framings and proposals. Rhetorical theory requires us to redefine what counts as 'rationality'--which must extend from what is provably true (by logic) and probably true (by Bayesian reasoning) to embrace, in addition, that which is plausibly true (i.e. can convince a reasonable audience). Future research into health care policy-making needs to move beyond the study of 'getting evidence into practice' and address the language, arguments and discourse through which policy is constructed and enacted.
The doctor vote: Interactions between political ideological preferences and healthcare reform strategies among U.S. physicians

Maitri Patel,Genevieve Lyons,Kara Fitzgibbon,B Cameron Webb

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpopen.2024.100123

2024-07-20

Health Policy OPEN

Abstract:Intro: Improving the American healthcare system has consistently predominated the domestic policy agenda in the United States for decades. However, physicians have traditionally played a small role in the U.S. legislative process despite their direct observations of the obstacles that cost, access, and quality can have on their patients and their care. The goal of this study was to examine the relationship between physician political ideological preferences and health policy reform options. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 3,001 currently practicing U.S. physicians to predict how self-identification as liberal, moderate, or conservative impacted a physician's policy preferences under the domains of cost, access, and quality. Results: A total of 536 (18.8%) out of 3,001 physicians responded to the survey. Overall, 32% of physicians identified as liberal, 43% as moderate, and 22% as conservative. Conclusion: Liberal-identifying physicians favored traditionally liberal reform ideas (a national health plan or public option), while conservative physicians preferred conservative policies (free market optimization). However, variation within political groups and domains of healthcare suggest that no single reform policy will be unanimously supported by every physician within a political group. Nonetheless, physicians are unanimously dissatisfied with the state of our current system, and physician-supported healthcare reform should be a national priority.
Health care frames - from Virchow to Obama and beyond: the changing frames in health care and their implications for patient care

Joachim P Sturmberg,Di O'Halloran,Ruth Colagiuri,Ana Fernandez,Sue Lukersmith,Ghazal Torkfar,Luis Salvador-Carulla

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12266

Abstract:Rationale, aims, objectives and methods: Framing allows us to highlight some aspects of an issue, thereby bringing them to the forefront of our thinking, talking and acting. As a consequence, framing also distracts our attention away from other issues. Over time, health care has used various frames to explain its activities. This paper traces the emergence of various health care frames since the 1850s to better understand how we reached current ways of thinking and practicing. Results and conclusions: The succession of the most prominent frames can be summarized as: medicine as a social science; the germ theory of disease; health care as a battleground (or the war metaphor); managing health care resources (or the market metaphor); Health for All (the social justice model); evidence-based medicine; and Obama Care. The focus of these frames is causal, instrumental, political/economic or social in nature. All remain relevant; however, recycling individual past frames in response to current problems will not achieve the outcomes we seek. Placing the individual and his/her needs at the centre (the attractor for the health system) of our thinking, as emphasized by the World Health Organization's International Classification of Function framework and the European Society of Person Centered Health Care, may provide the frame to refocus health and health care as interdependent experiences across individual, community and societal domains. Shifting beyond the entrenched instrumental and economic thinking will be challenging but necessary for the sake of patients, health professionals, society and the economy.
Politics in affordable housing provision: How partisan control of local councils influences planning choices

Yonah Slifkin Freemark

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980241267246

2024-09-02

Urban Studies

Abstract:Urban Studies, Ahead of Print. Investment in publicly subsidised social housing units – designed to ensure long-term access to dwellings for households with low and moderate incomes – is a strategy that cities around the world leverage to increase housing affordability. But the availability of such affordable units varies tremendously between cities, even within the same country. To what degree is this variation the product of local politics expressed through voter or policymaker preferences? To answer this question, I examine the inclusion of social housing in major development projects planned in hundreds of municipalities across the Paris, France, metropolitan region. Through a series of multiple regression analyses, I demonstrate that in cities with left-wing councils, shares of social housing units in new projects are an average of 7–11 percentage points higher than in cities with right-wing or centrist councils, after controlling for the ideologies of local residents, preexisting levels of social housing and community demographics. Though voters' political preferences are closely associated with city-level social housing shares, elected officials' partisan affiliations explain variations in the provision of social housing in newly approved projects. I reaffirm these findings by using a series of regression discontinuity tests to examine differences between communities with close elections. These results show how the partisan affiliations of local leaders affect urban planning choices in their communities.

environmental studies,urban studies
[Politics: which contribution can ethical expertise give biopolitical decisions?]

Kristiane Weber-Hassemer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-008-0611-9

Abstract:Research in the life sciences is developing at a rapid pace, has profound implications in terms of its effects on human nature and touches upon the self-conceptions of both the individual and society. In order to determine how this research and its application in all phases of human life should be assessed on the moral level, and whether it should be subject to regulation, the involvement of all disciplines--in the natural sciences, medicine, philosophy, law and the social sciences--that can contribute knowledge for the purpose of guidance is indispensable. Political decisions should be preceded by a wide-ranging debate within society encompassing all relevant groups and the media. Alongside discourse confined to specialists and their forums, a particular part can be played by the institution of ethics committees with an interdisciplinary, pluralistic membership. Their work can contribute to the stimulation of social debate and to ensuring that it is conducted on a suitably high level. In our knowledge society, Government and Parliament lack the information necessary to guide their decisions, and therefore require external expertise to provide a solid foundation for them. In the field of bioethics, however, the relationship between advisory activity and parliamentary decision-making proves is not without problems, because, in addition to rational criteria and party-political considerations, personal moral judgements are not only unavoidable but also legitimate, though they are not always made transparent.
Reframing the public/private debate on healthcare services: Tracking boundaries in the National Health Service

Hannah Cowan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13758

2024-02-25

Sociology of Health & Illness

Abstract:This paper intervenes in the dichotomous debate on the 'privatisation' of the UK's National Health Service (NHS). Whilst research suggests that involving private‐sector actors and principles deviates from the founding aims of the NHS to deliver equitable healthcare for all, the opposing argument to 'keep our NHS public' also limits understanding and alternative possibilities. Through focusing on maintaining overarching structures, these campaigns fail to address everyday medical practices that have long been critiqued by those allied with the sociology of health and illness. This paper draws on feminist critiques of public/private to expand the structural economic lens of mainstream political debates and explore how multiple forms of economic, social, cultural, and symbolic capital, operate in everyday healthcare practices. Through an historically‐informed ethnographic exploration of routine hip replacements, I find that capital itself emerges through relations between people and things, and that public/private boundaries play an integral role in forming these relations to instil value on particular patients and forms of labour, demarcating what kind of healthcare is given to whom. I therefore suggest future action should focus on assembling healthcare relations beyond the dualism of public/private categories, to create multiple safe places and relations for all.

public, environmental & occupational health,social sciences, biomedical,sociology
'Kontra-partido': untangling oppositional local politics and healthcare devolution in the Philippines

Vincen Gregory Yu,Gideon Lasco,Clarissa C David,Ivyrose S Baysic

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czad039

2023-08-02

Abstract:A long-recognized problem of healthcare devolution in many developing countries is its inextricability from the influences of local politics. This has been particularly self-evident in the Philippines, where, since the adoption of the Local Government Code of 1991, the devolution of health governance, planning, administration and service delivery has placed the health system largely under the control of individual provinces, cities, municipalities and villages or barangays. In this article, we utilize the notion of 'kontra-partido' (the Filipino term connoting 'oppositional politics') to concretize local, oppositional politics as a lived experience of health workers, government officials and ordinary citizens in the country. Through multi-sited qualitative fieldwork, we demonstrate how 'kontra-partido' politics ultimately worsens health outcomes in any locality. We show how such politics figures in the relational dynamics of health governance, often resulting in petty infighting and strained relationships among local health authorities; how it leads to the politicization of appointments and prevents the local workforce, especially those at the grassroots, from doing their jobs efficiently amid environments rife with hostile patronage; and how it impedes service delivery as politicians prioritize 'visible' projects (over sustainable ones) and selectively deliver health care to their known supporters. In turn, health workers and ordinary citizens alike have been actively negotiating their roles within this political milieu, either by joining the so-called political frontlines or by engaging in the transactional relationships that develop between politicians and their constituents during perennial election seasons. We conclude with a reflection on the vulnerability of health to politicization and the visceral consequences of 'kontra-partido' politics to health workers, as well as an identification of possible areas of intervention for future policy reform, given the deepening political polarization in the country and the upcoming implementation of the recently passed Universal Health Care Law.
Politics and policy of Artificial Intelligence

Inga Ulnicane,Tero Erkkilä

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12574

IF: 2.328

2023-09-06

Review of Policy Research

Abstract:Abstract While recent discussions about Artificial Intelligence (AI) as one of the most powerful technologies of our times tend to portray it as a predominantly technical issue, it also has major social, political and cultural implications. So far these have been mostly studied from ethical, legal and economic perspectives, while politics and policy have received less attention. To address this gap, this special issue brings together nine research articles to advance the studies of politics and policy of AI by identifying emerging themes and setting out future research agenda. Diverse but complementary contributions in this special issue speak to five overarching themes: understanding the AI as co‐shaped by technology and politics; highlighting the role of ideas in AI politics and policy; examining the distribution of power; interrogating the relationship between novel technology and continuity in politics and policy; and exploring interactions among developments at local, national, regional and global levels. This special issue demonstrates that AI policy is not an apolitical field that can be dealt with just by relying on knowledge and expertise but requires an open debate among alternative views, ideas, values and interests.

political science,public administration

Politics in all policies: how healthcare is shaped by political (in)action

A health political science for health promotion

Political Landmines in Healthcare Research: An Obstacle to Progress

Political Analysis for Health Policy Implementation

Keeping It Political and Powerful: Defining the Structural Determinants of Health

Addressing the political determinants of health

Law and Policy as Tools in Healthy People 2030

Power and the people's health

Political Determinants of Health: Healthcare Privatization and Population Health in Europe

The politics of health systems policies during COVID-19: reflections on experiences from Latin America and the Caribbean

Translating clinical practice into health policy: an example from China

Race, Politics, and the Affordable Care Act

Consolidating political leadership in healthcare: a mediating institution for priority-setting as a political strategy in a local health system

Recognizing rhetoric in health care policy analysis

The doctor vote: Interactions between political ideological preferences and healthcare reform strategies among U.S. physicians

Health care frames - from Virchow to Obama and beyond: the changing frames in health care and their implications for patient care

Politics in affordable housing provision: How partisan control of local councils influences planning choices

[Politics: which contribution can ethical expertise give biopolitical decisions?]

Reframing the public/private debate on healthcare services: Tracking boundaries in the National Health Service

'Kontra-partido': untangling oppositional local politics and healthcare devolution in the Philippines

Politics and policy of Artificial Intelligence