PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11189808

Structural pluralism and all-cause mortality.

F W Young·T A Lyson
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study tested the hypothesis that "structural pluralism" reduces age-standardized mortality rates. Structural pluralism is defined as the potential for political competition in communities. METHODS: US counties were the units of analysis. Multiple regression techniques were used to test the hypothesis. RESULTS: Structural pluralism is a stronger determinant of lower mortality than any of the other variables examined--specifically, income, education, and medical facilities. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the case for a new structural variable, pluralism, as a possible cause of lower mortality, and they indirectly support the significance of comparable ecologic dimensions, such as social trust.

Explore related subjects

Community ParticipationCross-Sectional StudiesFactor Analysis, StatisticalHealth ResourcesHumansModels, PsychologicalMortalityPoliticsRegression AnalysisSocioeconomic FactorsUnited StatesJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

F W Young, T A Lyson. 2001. Structural pluralism and all-cause mortality.. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.91.1.136

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Picturing the nurse-person/family/community process in the year 2050.

How will nurses relate with persons in the year 2050? And, how might technology enable or limit the nursing process with persons, families, and communities? These are the questions addressed in this column. Imaging practice in light of the technological imaginings and projections is facilitated by a possible scenario that includes robotics that not only monitor human biological processes, they also emote compassion and caring that may one day be dosed according to the latest diagnostic prescription. Three nurses in this column present their views of how nursing might evolve. Karnick, aligned with the human becoming school of thought, imagines a practice anchored in respect for humanity and quality of life and an accompanying respect for nursing knowledge and nursing work. Senesac and Sato, aligned with Roy's adaptation model, call for nurses to envision and choose the future they want to have. Clear in both perspectives is a reverence for human values and human experience and for the critical role of nursing knowledge as we move toward the not-yet of 2050.

Community Participation↗
PubMed2006

Insights on linking forests, trees, and people from the air, on the ground, and in the laboratory.

Governing natural resources sustainably is a continuing struggle. Major debates occur over what types of policy "interventions" best protect forests, with choices of property and land tenure systems being central issues. Herein, we provide an overview of findings from a long-term interdisciplinary, multiscale, international research program that analyzes the institutional factors affecting forests managed under a variety of tenure arrangements. This program analyzes satellite images, conducts social-ecological measurements on the ground, and tests the impact of structural variables on human decisions in experimental laboratories. Satellite images track the landscape dimensions of forest-cover change within different management regimes over time. On-the-ground social-ecological studies examine relationships between forest conditions and types of institutions. Behavioral studies under controlled laboratory conditions enhance our understanding of explicit changes in structure that affect relevant human decisions. Evidence from all three research methods challenges the presumption that a single governance arrangement will control overharvesting in all settings. When users are genuinely engaged in decisions regarding rules affecting their use, the likelihood of them following the rules and monitoring others is much greater than when an authority simply imposes rules. Our results support a frontier of research on the most effective institutional and tenure arrangements for protecting forests. They move the debate beyond the boundaries of protected areas into larger landscapes where government, community, and comanaged protected areas are embedded and help us understand when and why deforestation and regrowth occur in specific regions within these larger landscapes.

Community Participation↗