Health systems in the COVID‐19 crises: Comparative patterns of NHS satisfaction and preferences for public health action in Scotland and England

Author:

Deeming Christopher1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Social Work & Social Policy University of Strathclyde Glasgow UK

Abstract

AbstractIt is often claimed Scotland is more social democratic in outlook compared to England, if this is the case then we might expect to find differences in public attitudes towards health and social justice, reflecting the growing health policy divergence between the two nations. Comparative attitudes towards healthcare in Scotland and England are worthy of close scrutiny here, given the different reform trajectories, with the running of the Scottish NHS based on professionalism and the English NHS structure built on market‐based principles. The Scottish Government also implemented stricter lockdown restrictions compared to the UK Government in England. However, the extent to which the policy responses to the pandemic reflect different attitudes towards collective public health action in the two countries remains under‐researched. In this article, public attitudes towards health in Scotland are compared with those in England. The comparative analysis relies primarily on survey data from the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) module on health and healthcare. This survey was fielded in Scotland and England in the autumn of 2021, during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Overall, Scotland is more solidaristic or ‘social democratic’ than England on key issues relating to public health action and social justice. The findings reveal some commonalities between the nations, confidence in the NHS during the pandemic, and a willingness to improve the health service via higher taxes for example, but also important differences in attitudes and preferences for state action exist that help set the scene for greater policy divergence in the UK.

Funder

Economic and Social Research Council

Publisher

Wiley

Reference42 articles.

1. Trust and compliance to public health policies in times of COVID-19

2. ‘Immigrationization’ of welfare politics? Anti-immigration and welfare attitudes in context

3. Financing the welfare state in times of extreme crisis: public support for health care spending during the Covid-19 pandemic in Germany

4. Pandemic preparedness and covid‐19: An exploratory analysis of infection and fatality rates, and contextual factors associated with preparedness in 177 countries, from Jan 1, 2020, to Sept 30, 2021;Covid‐19 National Preparedness Collaborators;The Lancet,2022

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3