The political economy of health promotion: part 1, national commitments to provision of the prerequisites of health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada is a leader in developing health promotion concepts of providing the prerequisites of health through health-promoting public policy. But Canada is clearly a laggard in implementing these concepts. In contrast, France is seen as a nation in which health promotion concepts have failed to gain much traction yet evidence exists that France does far better than Canada in providing these health prerequisites. Such findings suggest that it is the political economy--or form of the welfare state--of a nation rather than its explicit commitments to health promotion concepts--that shape provision of the prerequisites of health. Part 1 of this article examines how health promotion rhetoric specifically concerned with provision of the prerequisites of health differs among nations identified as being either liberal, social democratic, conservative or Latin welfare states. Governing authorities of nations that are liberal or social democratic welfare states are more likely to make explicit rhetorical commitments to provision of the prerequisites of health, the conservative and Latin states less so. Part 2 of this article provides evidence however, that despite their rhetorical commitments to provision of the prerequisites of health, liberal welfare state nations fall well behind not only the social democratic nations, but also the conservative welfare states in implementing public policies that provide the prerequisites of health. The Latin welfare states express little commitment to provision of the prerequisites of health and rather limited public policy activity towards meeting this aim.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".