| Title |
Beyond idealism and realism: Canadian NGO/government relations during the negotiation of the FCTC
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Public Health Policy, March 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1057/jphp.2009.48 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Raphael Lencucha, Ronald Labonté, Michael J Rouse |
| Abstract |
The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) marks a unique point in the history of global health governance. This convention produced the first legally binding treaty under the auspices of the World Health Organization. Another first was the extent to which non-governmental organizations (NGOs) participated in the negotiation process. This article explores the relationship between one group of NGOs and their respective government during the negotiation of the FCTC. Documentary analyses and 18 individual in-depth interviews were conducted with both government and NGO representatives. In contrast to the polar perspectives of idealism (NGOs as unique and autonomous) and realism (NGOs as funded arms of the government), our findings suggest that neither opposition nor conformity on the part of the NGOs characterize the relationship between the NGOs and government. While specific to the case under study (the FCTC), our findings nonetheless indicate the need for a nuanced view of the relationship between governments and NGOs, at least during the process of multilateral health policy negotiations. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 22% |
| Unknown | 7 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 8 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 19% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 7 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 June 2020.
All research outputs
#7,229,557
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Public Health Policy
#338
of 790 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,210
of 95,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Public Health Policy
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 790 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 95,011 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.