ORCID Profile
0000-0002-1299-6023
Current Organisation
University of Tasmania
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 29-12-2015
DOI: 10.1017/S136898001400295X
Abstract: The development of food policy is strongly influenced by the understanding and position actors adopt in their ‘framing’ of sustainability. The Australian Government developed a National Food Plan (2010–2013). In public consultations on the National Food Plan Green Paper, the government sought stakeholders’ views on sustainability. The present study examined the way in which the food industry and civil society organizations framed sustainability in their submissions to the Green Paper. Submissions by food industry actors and civil society organizations were analysed using a framing matrix that examined positioning, drivers, underlying principles and policy solutions related to sustainability. Submissions were open coded and subsequently organized based on themes within the framing matrix. Australia. One hundred and twenty-four written submissions (1420 pages). While submissions from industry and civil society organizations often framed sustainability similarly, there were also major differences. Civil society organizations were more likely to make the link between the food supply and population health, while industry was more likely to focus on economic sustainability. Both viewed consumer demand as a driver of sustainability, welcomed the idea of a whole-of-government approach and stressed the need for investment in research and development to improve productivity and sustainable farming practices. The meaning of sustainability shifted throughout the policy process. There are opportunities for creating shared value in food policy, where the health, environment and economic dimensions of sustainability can be compatible. However, despite pockets of optimism there is a need for a shared vision of sustainability if Australia is to have a food policy integrating these dimensions.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 06-11-2018
DOI: 10.1093/PHE/PHX019
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 02-07-2020
Publisher: AMPCo
Date: 06-2015
DOI: 10.5694/MJA14.01611
Abstract: Type 2 diabetes mellitus, driven by overweight and obesity linked to unhealthy diets, is the fastest-growing non-communicable disease in Australia. Halting the rise of diabetes will require a paradigm shift from personal to shared responsibility, with greater accountability from Australian governments and the food industry. It will also require governments to try something different to the prevailing approaches emphasising education and the provision of information. We propose four priority areas where government regulation could strengthen Australia's response. Those areas relate to mandatory front-of-pack food labelling, regulating junk food advertising, better oversight of food reformulation and taxing sugar-sweetened beverages.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 04-2020
DOI: 10.1093/PHE/PHAA010
Abstract: The Lancet–O’Neill Institute/Georgetown University Commission on Global Health and Law published its report on the Legal Determinants of Health in 2019. The term ‘legal determinants of health’ draws attention to the power of law to influence upstream social and economic influences on population health. In this article, we introduce the Commission, including its background and rationale, set out its methodology, summarize its key findings and recommendations and reflect on its impact since publication. We also look to the future, making suggestions as to how the global health community can make the best use of the Commission’s momentum in relation to using law and legal tools to advance population health.
Publisher: Future Medicine Ltd
Date: 09-2021
Abstract: Like most health technology innovators, bioprinters are required to traverse a complex landscape featuring varied forms of regulation. This article focuses on one of the most complex aspects: the requirement imposed by regulatory authorities to satisfy them of the safety, efficacy and clinical utility of resultant healthcare products. Satisfaction of such requirements can result in a significant lag between ‘breakthrough’ and clinical delivery. This article examines this aspect of regulation in the USA, Europe and Australia, three leading bioprinting research jurisdictions. In particular, it examines medical devices and medicines categories of regulation, questioning whether a new approach to regulation is required or whether existing product-based regimes are sufficiently adaptive.
No related grants have been discovered for Jenny Kaldor.