Responding to the developing challenges of a new infectious disease
Risk and framing
In early 2020, COVID-19 was a new disease, so there was no evidence on which to base an assessment of risk. One way of dealing with this uncertainty was to equate the new disease with an existing disease, a process that can be referred to as framing. Goffman (1975) argues that when faced with a puzzling or novel situation, individuals have to decide ‘What is going on here?’, and framing enables them to do this. When framing a new phenomenon, individuals and groups
Framing strategies in
referendums from below
The referendum in Scotland and the non-binding unofficial
consultation in Catalonia dominated the two entities’ political agendas
in 2013–14. Despite their different natures and legal statuses, the two
votes radically changed their respective political debates, triggered
massive media and academic interest, and constituted momentous
events that have successfully reframed (or even completely altered)
understandings of nationalism in ‘quiet times’ (Beissinger, 2002). ‘In
both cases, the unexpectedly high
to bear in any given policy debate. The evidence base emphasised or prioritised will depend on the way in which the policy problem is defined and understood, the normative perspective from which it is viewed, or the policy objectives which are prioritised ( Hawkins and Parkhurst, 2015 ). Thus, from an EIPM perspective, evidence use depends on the specific way in which a policy problem is framed.
The concept of framing describes a strategic process of ‘meaning making’ which shapes the understanding of an issue and possible solutions through highlighting specific
As this book has examined the links between race, racism, policy and
policing – and academic scholarship on those – it has raised issues and
questions about change and sameness in them as interconnected fields
of study. A degree of ‘stop-start’ and circularity in academic research
and writing is evident concerning what race is, on institutional racism,
and in policy. The underlying argument is not that the past is simply
being repeated, not least because, as mentioned in the Introduction to
this book, contexts change and there is a
and equity with partners were enablers to creating shared understanding ( Delany et al, 2016 ).
There remains, however, limited evidence about if and how actors in the policy mix create a shared understanding and language of the WDOH and collaborative working to enhance health equity. The purpose of this paper is to explore this further: how the WDOH are framed and acted upon by people working within the public health system at a local level in England. It serves as a contribution to understanding if and how we can progress the goal of systems-level action on
Urban educational research, practice, and policy is preoccupied with problems, brokenness, stigma, and blame. As a result, too many people are unable to recognize the capacities and desires of children and youth growing up in working-class communities.
This book offers an alternative angle of vision—animated by young people’s own photographs, videos, and perspectives over time. It shows how a racially, ethnically, and linguistically diverse community of young people in Worcester, MA used cameras at different ages (10, 12, 16 and 18) to capture and value the centrality of care in their lives, homes, and classrooms.
Luttrell’s immersive, creative, and layered analysis of the young people’s images and narratives boldly refutes biased assumptions about working-class childhoods and re-envisions schools as inclusive, imaginative, and care-ful spaces. With an accompanying website featuring additional digital resources (childrenframingchildhoods.com), this book challenges us to see differently and, thus, set our sights on a better future.
4Framing the project
What do we want to achieve when we ‘research’? The most difficult aspect
of research is not the fieldwork or even the analysis of data, but the first
step of figuring out what you want to know. People new to research often
find the time-consuming process of determining the focus of a research
project surprising. Mostly, people think that this can be decided quickly
and easily and that the bulk of the work centres on the empirical phase
or fieldwork. Consequently, the important first step of framing a research
All general theories must, as theories, keep modestly in the background, not in open argument only, but even in our own minds.
Academic and political approaches to sustainable development, governance and public administration reflect a diverse range of values and disciplinary lenses. This makes it nigh impossible to find a common theoretical frame for exploring the question of what lessons sustainable development governance has for bureaucracy. Any single framing risks ignoring important debates and viewpoints. Applying
using a framing experiment. For one thing, the symbolic impact of female politicians does not happen in a vacuum; rather, attitudinal, cultural or behavioural shifts may largely depend on how citizens observe and react to elected women ( Franceschet et al, 2012 : 239–42). Indeed, citizens are frequently exposed to images of and discourses about female politicians provided by the media ( Ross, 2003 ; García-Blanco and Wahl-Jorgensen, 2013 ). Second, women politicians are often subject to a gendered mediation through which their presence or performance is omitted
Our theoretical frame
In order to supplement the existing and extensive body of literature
surrounding youth work and youth violence, we felt we needed to set
out a distinctive theoretical grounding for our enquiry. This involved
selecting those theoretical perspectives we believed most insightfully
illuminated our data. While seeking to remain open to the potential
explanatory power of a wide range of perspectives, we opted to build
on the broad conceptual and philosophical undercurrents of youth
work and youth violence outlined in Chapter One. We