Search

Consumer trust in the modern food system is essential given its complexity. Contexts vary across countries with regard to food incidents, regulation and systems. It is therefore of interest to compare how key actors in different countries might approach (re)building consumer trust in the food system; and particularly relevant to understanding how food systems in different regions might learn from one another. The purpose of this paper is to explore differences between strategies for (re)building trust in food systems, as identified in two separate empirical studies, one conducted in Australia, New Zealand and the UK (Study 1) and another on the Island of Ireland (Study 2). Interviews were conducted with media, food industry and food regulatory actors across the two studies (n  = 105 Study 1; n  = 50 Study 2). Data were coded into strategy statements, strategies describing actions to (re)build consumer trust. Strategy statements were compared between Studies 1 and 2 and similarities and differences were noted. The strategy statements identified in Study 1 to (re)build consumer trust in the food system were shown to be applicable in Study 2, however, there were notable differences in the contextual factors that shaped the means by which strategies were implemented. As such, the transfer of such approaches across regions is not an appropriate means to addressing breaches in consumer trust. Notwithstanding, our data suggest that there is still capacity to learn between countries when considering strategies for (re)building trust in the food system but caution must be exercised in the transfer of approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To explore differences in position emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) service provision internationally to further understand the impact variation may have upon cancer services. To identify areas of further exploration for researchers and policymakers to optimize PET-CT services and improve the quality of cancer services.Design: Comparative analysis using data based on pre-defined PET-CT service metrics from PET-CT stakeholders across seven countries. This was further informed via document analysis of clinical indication guidance and expert consensus through round-table discussions of relevant PET-CT stakeholders. Descriptive comparative analyses were produced on use, capacity and indication guidance for PET-CT services between jurisdictions.Setting: PET-CT services across 21 jurisdictions in seven countries (Australia, Denmark, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK).Participants: None.Intervention(s): None.Main Outcome Measure(s): None.Results: PET-CT service provision has grown over the period 2006-2017, but scale of increase in capacity and demand is variable. Clinical indication guidance varied across countries, particularly for small-cell lung cancer staging and the specific acknowledgement of gastric cancer within oesophagogastric cancers. There is limited and inconsistent data capture, coding, accessibility and availability of PET-CT activity across countries studied.Conclusions: Variation in PET-CT scanner quantity, acquisition over time and guidance upon use exists internationally. There is a lack of routinely captured and accessible PET-CT data across the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership countries due to inconsistent data definitions, data linkage issues, uncertain coverage of data and lack of specific coding. This is a barrier in improving the quality of PET-CT services globally. There needs to be greater, richer data capture of diagnostic and staging tools to facilitate learning of best practice and optimize cancer services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Minority government is becoming more common. With support declining for traditional parties and increasing for anti-establishment movements, government formation is becoming increasingly difficult in many jurisdictions. While minority government has been the subject of much normative debate, one type of minority arrangement that has not attracted much attention is that involving independent parliamentarians. Government in most countries tends to be party government, but in this article, we examine the experience in Australia and Ireland of independents supporting minority government. We assess the performance of these administrations in terms of their stability, their productivity and their electoral performance. We find that, contrary to expectation, minority government involving independents is not a recipe for instability nor necessarily results in an efficient parliament. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]