Open AccessProcess Is the Point
Author(s) -
Sofia Gruskin,
Norman Daniels
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
american journal of public health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.284
H-Index - 264
eISSN - 1541-0048
pISSN - 0090-0036
DOI - 10.2105/ajph.2007.123182
Subject(s) - legitimacy , process (computing) , set (abstract data type) , distributive justice , value (mathematics) , point (geometry) , economic justice , public relations , focus (optics) , political science , management science , computer science , law and economics , sociology , business , knowledge management , law , economics , politics , mathematics , physics , geometry , optics , machine learning , programming language , operating system
Most people responsible for setting priorities in health have considerable expertise relevant to deciding how to use resources effectively and the kinds of improvements that should be emphasized. Most are also concerned with distributing improvements equitably. Accordingly, they often invoke human rights or principles of distributive justice to legitimize choices that create winners and losers. We propose an approach that draws on the strengths of both perspectives as a way to add legitimacy to efforts to set priorities in health. Our proposal provides a process for setting priorities but is not a formula or an algorithm for generating particular priorities. We propose an approach that would do away with the process through which priorities are set and decisions made, and suggest the value of a focus on the process of legitimizing these decisions.