Effectiveness of joint health and safety committees: a realist review.

BACKGROUND: Joint health and safety committees (JHSCs) are widely acknowledged as important to a healthy and safe work environment. However, it is also generally believed that having a JHSC is necessary but not sufficient; the JHSC must be effective. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken to find empirical studies regarding the effectiveness of JHSCs; realist review methodology was applied to determine context-mechanism-outcome patterns. Experts from across Canada and from various sectors and perspectives including government, employers, and unions, were brought together to inform the synthesis. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies met inclusion criteria. Mechanisms identified as important determinants of JHSC effectiveness across various jurisdictions include adequate information, education and training; appropriate committee composition; senior management commitment to JHSCs; and especially a clear mandate with a broad scope and corresponding empowerment (through legislation and/or union presence). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent empowerment mechanisms emerge as determinants of successful JHSCs across contexts despite few evidence-based details for best practice implementation. Intervention research is warranted.

Mining, Colonial Legacies, and Neoliberalism: A Political Ecology of Health Knowledge : Mineria, legados coloniales y neoliberalismo: una ecologia politica del conocimiento en salud.

Scholarship on the health impacts of resource extraction displays prominent gaps and apparent corporate and neocolonial footprints that raise questions about how science is produced. We analyze production of knowledge, on the health impacts of mining, carried out in relation to the Canadian International Resources and Development Institute (CIRDI), a university-based organization with substantial extractive industry involvement and links to Canada's mining-dominated foreign policy. We use a "political ecology of knowledge" framework to situate CIRDI in the context of neoliberal capitalism, neocolonial sustainable development discourses, and mining industry corporate social responsibility techniques. We then document the interactions of specific health disciplinary conventions and knowledges within CIRDI-related research and advocacy efforts involving a major Canadian global health organization. This analysis illustrates both accommodation and resistance to large-scale political economic structures and the need to directly confront the global North governments and sectors pushing extractive-led neoliberal development globally.ResumenLa investigación sobre los impactos en la salud de la extracción de recursos naturales delata brechas importantes y huellas corporativas y neocoloniales, que plantean dudas acerca de cómo se produce la ciencia. Analizamos la producción de conocimiento sobre los impactos en la salud de la minería en relación con el Instituto Canadiense de Desarrollo y Recursos Internacionales (CIRDI, siglas en inglés), una organización universitaria que cuenta con participación sustancial de la industria extractiva y tiene vínculos con la política exterior de Canadá, la cual es dominada por intereses mineros. Utilizamos un marco de "ecología política del conocimiento" para situar a CIRDI en el contexto del capitalismo neoliberal, los discursos neocoloniales de desarrollo sostenible y las técnicas de responsabilidad social corporativa de la industria minera. Luego, documentamos las interacciones entre los conocimientos y convenciones disciplinarias de salud dentro de los esfuerzos de investigación y promoción relacionados con CIRDI que involucran a una importante organización canadiense de salud global. Este análisis muestra tanto la complacencia como la resistencia a las estructuras políticas económicas a gran escala, y la necesidad de confrontar directamente a los gobiernos y sectores del Norte global que manejan el desarrollo neoliberal impulsado por la extracción a nivel mundial.

Corporate sponsorship of global health research: Questions to promote critical thinking about potential funding relationships.

Funding options for global health research prominently include grants from corporations, as well as from foundations linked to specific corporations. While such funds can enable urgently-needed research and interventions, they can carry the risk of skewing health research priorities and exacerbating health inequities. With the objective of promoting critical reflection on potential corporate funding options for global health research, we propose a set of three questions developed through an open conference workshop and reflection on experiences of global health researchers and their institutions: 1) Does this funding allow me/us to retain control over research design, methodology and dissemination processes? 2) Does accessing this funding source involve altering my/our research agenda (i.e., what is the impact of this funding source on research priorities)? 3) What are the potential "unintended consequences" of accepting corporate funding, in terms of legitimizing corporations or models of development that are at the root of many global health problems? These questions outline an intentional and cautionary approach to decision-making when corporate funding for global health research is being considered by funding agencies, institutions, researchers and research stakeholders.