Health Power Resources Theory: A Relational Approach to the Study of Health Inequalities

Link and Phelan’s pioneering 1995 theory of fundamental causes urged health scholars to consider the macro-level contexts that “put people at risk of risks.” Allied research on the political economy of health has since aptly demonstrated how institutions contextualize risk factors for health. Yet scant research has fully capitalized on either fundamental cause or political economy of health’s allusion to power relations as a determinant of persistent inequalities in population health. I address this oversight by advancing a theory of health power resources that contends that power relations distribute and translate the meaning (i.e., necessity, value, and utility) of socioeconomic and health-relevant resources. This occurs through stratification, commodification, discrimination, and devitalization. Resurrecting historical sociological emphases on power relations provides an avenue through which scholars can more fully understand the patterning of population health and better connect the sociology of health and illness to the central tenets of the discipline.

Notes on Bio-History: Michel Foucault and the Political Economy of Health

In October 1974, Foucault gave three lectures in Rio de Janeiro on the archeology of the cure. This piece will comment on the first two, published a few years later in France with the original titles: Crise de la médicine ou crise de l’antimédicine? and La naissance de la médicine sociale. Bio-history is the term Michel Foucault initially uses – in the second lecture – to refer to the effect of the strong medical intervention at the biological level that started in the eighteenth century and has left a trace that is still visible in our society. It is on this occasion that Foucault introduces the concept, or rather the prefix “bio-” in his analysis, and it is here – as my reflections intend to demonstrate – that we may trace the original meaning of a term that today seems rather abused and find a valuable analytical framework for a cogent approach to the relationship between medicine and power dynamics.

Exploring the role of gender and women in the political economy of health in armed conflict: a narrative review

Background The ripple effects of protracted armed conflicts include: significant gender-specific barriers to accessing essential services such as health, education, water and sanitation and broader macroeconomic challenges such as increased poverty rates, higher debt burdens, and deteriorating employment prospects. These factors influence the wider social and political determinants of health for women and a gendered analysis of the political economy of health in conflict may support strengthening health systems during conflict. This will in turn lead to equality and equity across not only health, but broader sectors and systems, that contribute to sustainable peace building. Methods The methodology employed is a multidisciplinary narrative review of the published and grey literature on women and gender in the political economy of health in conflict. Results The existing literature that contributes to the emerging area on the political economy of health in conflict has overlooked gender and specifically the role of women as a critical component. Gender analysis is incorporated into existing post-conflict health systems research, but this does not extend to countries actively affected by armed conflict and humanitarian crises. The analysis also tends to ignore the socially constructed patriarchal systems, power relations and gender norms that often lead to vastly different health system needs, experiences and health outcomes. Conclusions Detailed case studies on the gendered political economy of health in countries impacted by complex protracted conflict will support efforts to improve health equity and understanding of gender relations that support health systems strengthening.

Feminist Political Economy of Health: Current Perspectives and Future Directions

Feminist political economy of health is a term that has emerged as a result of research that has combined and connected a feminist political economy lens with a focus on health disparities of women. This paper provides an overview of the literature from the work of feminist medical sociologists and feminist health scholars that have shaped the concept of feminist political economy of health. The analysis indicates that while women have experienced health inequities inside the healthcare system, there are also significant health disparities that are experienced outside the healthcare system due to women’s social, economic, political, and cultural conditions. Given that there are dual crises with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic as well as social movements pushing for change, further work that uses intersectional approaches is advocated.

The Political Economy of Health: Revisiting Its Marxian Origins to Address 21st-Century Health Inequalities

The “political economy of health” is concerned with how political and economic domains interact and shape individual and population health outcomes. However, the term is variously defined in the public health, medical, and social science literatures. This could result in confusion about the term and its associated tradition, thereby constituting a barrier to its application in public health research and practice. To address these issues, I survey the political economy of health tradition, clarify its specifically Marxian theoretical legacy, and discuss its relevance to understanding and addressing public health issues. I conclude by discussing the benefits of employing critical theories of race and racism with Marxian political economy to better understand the roles of class exploitation and racial oppression in epidemiological patterning. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print December 22, 2020:e1–e8. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2020.305996 )