IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v358y2024ics0277953624006853.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“It's very much part of this movement to undermine democracy”: A qualitative study of European Union level opposition strategies against reproductive health and rights

Author

Listed:
  • Gilby, Lynda
  • Koivusalo, Meri

Abstract

Despite increasing contestations of agreed global commitments on sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), our understanding of strategies of opposition in global health policymaking remains limited. This article explores the opposition to SRHR at the European level focusing on the decision-making institutions of the European Union (EU). The central research questions ask i) how SRHR opposition actors seek to influence EU institutions and ii) what challenges their actions pose for health policymaking at the EU level. Our empirical focus is based on the qualitative method of framework analysis, with data collected from multiple sources, including documentary data on European Parliamentary debates, Council conclusions of the European Union, reports of nongovernmental organisations, and key informant interviews. Our study is in line with observations on globally coordinated efforts to restrict access to SRH services. This is a challenge for specific forums and countries, but as well for European Union's wider internal and external policies. We present a toolbox of strategies and actors operational at the European Union level. Our findings on opposition to SRHR indicate that it can be seen as a political tool that is part of a broader anti-democratic movement. Understanding strategies of anti-SRHR opposition is important for health policymakers as it shapes debates and the achievement of universal health coverage (UHC).

Suggested Citation

  • Gilby, Lynda & Koivusalo, Meri, 2024. "“It's very much part of this movement to undermine democracy”: A qualitative study of European Union level opposition strategies against reproductive health and rights," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 358(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:358:y:2024:i:c:s0277953624006853
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117232
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953624006853
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117232?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hawkins, B. & McCambridge, J., 2014. "Industry actors, think tanks, and alcohol policy in the United Kingdom," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 104(8), pages 1363-1369.
    2. Valentine Berthet, 2022. "United in Crisis: Abortion Politics in the European Parliament and Political Groups' Disputes over EU Values," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(6), pages 1797-1814, November.
    3. Greer, S.L. & Méndez, C.A., 2015. "Universal health coverage: A political struggle and governance challenge," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105, pages 637-639.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eastmure, Elizabeth & Cummins, Steven & Sparks, Leigh, 2020. "Non-market strategy as a framework for exploring commercial involvement in health policy: A primer," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    2. Nason Maani Hessari & May CI van Schalkwyk & Sian Thomas & Mark Petticrew, 2019. "Alcohol Industry CSR Organisations: What Can Their Twitter Activity Tell Us about Their Independence and Their Priorities? A Comparative Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-12, March.
    3. S. Cowlishaw, 2017. "Legitimate concerns about industry involvement in gambling research: response to Delfabbro and King (2017)," International Gambling Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 343-348, May.
    4. Masoud Behzadifar & Maryam Saran & Meysam Behzadifar & Mariano Martini & Nicola Luigi Bragazzi, 2021. "The ‘Health Transformation Plan’ in Iran: A policy to achieve universal health coverage in slums and informal settlement areas," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 267-272, March.
    5. Enai Ojeda & Christian Torres & Ángela Carriedo & Mélissa Mialon & Niyati Parekh & Emanuel Orozco, 2020. "The influence of the sugar-sweetened beverage industry on public policies in Mexico," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 65(7), pages 1037-1044, September.
    6. Hawkins, Benjamin & Durrance-Bagale, Anna & Walls, Helen, 2021. "Co-regulation and alcohol industry political strategy: A case study of the Public Health England-Drinkaware Drink Free Days Campaign," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    7. Julia Ngozi Chukwuma, 2023. "Implementing Health Policy in Nigeria: The Basic Health Care Provision Fund as a Catalyst for Achieving Universal Health Coverage?," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 54(6), pages 1480-1503, November.
    8. Mladovsky, Philipa, 2020. "Fragmentation by design: Universal health coverage policies as governmentality in Senegal," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    9. Thornton, Mary & Hawkins, Benjamin, 2017. "Between a rock and a hard place: Economic expansion and social responsibility in UK media discourses on the global alcohol industry," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 169-176.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:358:y:2024:i:c:s0277953624006853. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.