Controlling food, controlling relationships: exploring the meanings and dynamics of family food practices through the diary-interview approach.

Potential merits of a social practice perspective for examining the meanings and dynamics of family food include moving beyond individual behaviour, and exploring how practices emerge, develop and change. However, researchers have struggled to encourage reflection on mundane practices, and how to understand associated meanings. Drawing on a study of families in South Wales, this article reflects on the value of the diary-interview approach in addressing these methodological challenges, and aims to explore and understand the dynamics of control across family contexts. Contemporary practice theories distinguish between practices as 'performances' and practices as 'entities' and the diary-interview method facilitated an examination of these dimensions. Detailed accounts of daily 'performances' (through diaries), alongside reflection on underlying contexts and 'entities' (through interviews), illustrated the entanglement of control, practices and context. The article adds further complexity to the concept of practice 'bundles' which facilitated an understanding of how food was interrelated with other practices - across family contexts and across generations. Sociological approaches with a practices perspective at the core, offer potential for developing public health interventions by acknowledging: the relational meaning of food; the embeddedness of food within everyday practices; and the need to consider interventions across a range of policy areas.

The communities first (ComFi) study: protocol for a prospective controlled quasi-experimental study to evaluate the impact of area-wide regeneration on mental health and social cohesion in deprived communities.

INTRODUCTION: Recent systematic reviews have highlighted the dearth of evidence on the effectiveness of regeneration on health and health inequalities. 'Communities First' is an area-wide regeneration scheme to improve the lives of people living in the most deprived areas in Wales (UK). This study will evaluate the impact of Communities First on residents' mental health and social cohesion. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A prospective controlled quasi-experimental study of the association between residence in Communities First regeneration areas in Caerphilly county borough and change in mental health and social cohesion. The study population is the 4226 residents aged 18-74 years who responded to the Caerphilly Health and Social Needs Study in 2001 (before delivery) and 2008 (after delivery of Communities First). Data on the location, type and cost of Communities First interventions will be extracted from records collected by Caerphilly county borough council. The primary outcome is the change in mental health between 2001 and 2008. Secondary outcomes are changes: in common mental disorder case status (using survey and general practice data), social cohesion and mental health inequalities. Multilevel models will examine change in mental health and social cohesion between Communities First and control areas, adjusting for individual and household level confounding factors. Further models will examine the effects of (1) different types of intervention, (2) contamination across areas, (3) length of residence in a Communities First area, and (4) population migration. We will carry out a cost-consequences analysis to summarise the outcomes generated for participants, as well as service utilisation and utility gains. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has had approval from the Information Governance Review Panel at Swansea University (Ref: 0266 CF). Findings will be disseminated through peer-review publications, international conferences, policy and practice partners in local and national government, and updates on our study website (http://medicine.cardiff.ac.uk/clinical-study/communities-first-regeneration-programme/).

Health impact assessment in the UK planning system: the possibilities and limits of community engagement.

This paper explores the use of health impact assessment (HIA) as a means of facilitating community engagement in spatial planning. The paper discusses the background to the development of HIA as a tool for assessing the likely impact of policies and wider changes on health with a view to building those into planning and decision-making, and describes the evolution of HIA into more participatory forms. It then goes on to describe a case-study of plans for a waste incinerator in an inner-city area in the UK, where HIA was used in response to community concerns about the development as a means of building in the views of local people to the decision-making around the plan. We describe in detail how the HIA was conducted and additional research undertaken within a timescale set by the planning processes. We discuss the difficulties involved in conducting any kind of research-based HIA so rapidly and in a situation of multiple, competing stakeholder interests. We argue that although the HIA failed to influence the final decisions in this particular instance it does, nonetheless, provide a model for how to create 'knowledge spaces' in which different perspectives and information can be brought around the table to create more democratic approaches to planning for waste.

Framing health inequalities for local intervention: comparative case studies.

This article explores how health inequalities are constructed as an object for policy intervention by considering four framings: politics, audit, evidence and treatment. A thematic analysis of 197 interviews conducted with local managers in England, Scotland and Wales is used to explore how these framings emerge from local narratives. The three different national policy regimes create contrasting contexts, especially regarding the different degrees of emphasis in these regimes on audit and performance management. We find that politics dominates how health inequalities are framed for intervention, affecting their prioritisation in practice and how audit, evidence and treatment are described as deployed in local strategies.

Developing public sociology through health impact assessment.

The renewed interest in 'public sociology' has sparked debate and discussion about forms of sociological work and their relationship to the State and civil society. Medical sociologists are accustomed to engaging with a range of publics and audiences inside and outside universities and are in a position to make an informed contribution to this debate. This paper describes how some of the debates about sociological work are played out through a 'health impact assessment' of a proposed housing renewal in a former coal mining community. We explore the dynamics of the health impact assessment process and relate it to wider debates, current in the social sciences, on the 'new knowledge spaces' within which contentious public issues are now being discussed, and the nature of different forms of expertise. The role of the 'public sociologist' in mediating the relationships between the accounts and interpretations of lay participants and the published 'evidence' is described as a process of mutual learning between publics, professionals and social scientists. It is argued that the continued existence and development of any meaningful 'professional sociology' requires an openness to a 'public sociology' which recognises and responds to new spaces of knowledge production.

Harnessing expertise: involving peer interviewers in qualitative research with hard-to-reach populations.

The use of peer interviewers with privileged access to a particular population group, which is difficult to reach via more conventional methods, has been acknowledged in recent research. This paper explores a number of key issues relating to the employment of peer interviewers by reflecting on a project designed to explore the views and experiences of parents who use illegal drugs. The project presented the research team with a number of challenges. These included the need to provide on-going support for the interviewers, a sense of distance felt by the researchers from the raw data they collected, and the difficulties of gaining from the skills and experiences of peer interviewers without exploiting their labour. The paper also explores the advantages of involving peer interviewers closely in research work and reflects on the nature and boundaries of expert knowledge that can become evident in such collaborations. The need for a certain amount of flexibility over the roles and domains of control that lay experts and researchers traditionally inhabit is suggested. In conclusion, it is argued that the involvement of peer interviewers in research can be a valuable means of enhancing our knowledge and understanding of a variety of population groups who tend to live beyond the gaze of more orthodox researchers.