Department of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Health Services Research & Policy, London, UK.
Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Health Promot Int. 2021 Oct 13;36(5):1290-1299. doi: 10.1093/heapro/daaa019.
In the health field, there is great interest in the role empowerment might play in reducing social inequalities in health. Empowerment is understood here as the processes of developing capabilities that individuals and/or communities need to exercise control over decisions and actions impacting on their lives and health. There is a fundamental problem, however, in identifying and measuring capabilities for collective control that emerge at the level of the collective, with much of the existing literature focusing on individual measures even where community-level processes are concerned. Collective measures need to capture the dynamics of interactions within and between groups, not simply aggregate individual-level measures. This article, Part 2 in a three-part series, takes up the challenge of identifying qualitative markers of capabilities for collective control. We applied the emancipatory power framework (EPF) reported in Part 1 of the series, to qualitative data generated during a longitudinal evaluation of a major English area-based empowerment initiative, the Big Local (BL). We identified empirical 'markers' of shifts towards greater collective control pertaining to each of the 'power' dimensions in the EPF-'power within', 'power with' and 'power to'-and markers of communities exercising 'power over' other institutions/community members. These markers can usefully be applied in the evaluation planning and evaluation of empowerment initiatives. Part 3 in the series uses these markers and a second analytical framework developed during our evaluation of BL to explore how power dynamics unfold in participatory spaces in BL neighbourhoods.
在健康领域,人们对赋权在减少健康方面的社会不平等方面可能发挥的作用非常感兴趣。在这里,赋权被理解为发展个人和/或社区行使对影响其生活和健康的决策和行动的控制权所需的能力的过程。然而,在确定和衡量集体层面出现的集体控制能力方面存在一个根本问题,尽管存在很多关注社区层面过程的文献,但其中大部分仍侧重于个体措施。集体措施需要捕捉群体内部和群体之间相互作用的动态,而不仅仅是聚合个体层面的措施。本文是一个三部分系列的第二部分,旨在确定集体控制能力的定性标记。我们应用了第一部分中报告的解放力量框架 (EPF),对一项重要的基于英格兰地区的赋权倡议——大地方 (BL) 的纵向评估中生成的定性数据进行了分析。我们确定了与 EPF 中的每一个“权力”维度相关的、更倾向于更大集体控制的经验“标记”——“内部权力”、“权力合作”和“权力行动”——以及社区对其他机构/社区成员行使“权力”的标记。这些标记可用于赋权倡议的评估规划和评估。该系列的第三部分使用这些标记和我们在 BL 评估过程中开发的第二个分析框架,探讨了权力动态如何在 BL 社区的参与空间中展开。