Achieving paid family leave in Oregon, USA: analysis of the policy process using the advocacy coalition framework.

Only a few states have adopted a paid family leave (PFL) policy in the United States of America. Local media described the 2019 Oregon PFL legislation as "the most progressive" policy in the country, with coalitions as crucial policy advocates. This case study applies the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to examine policy learning and negotiated agreements as causal mechanisms to explain the adoption of the PFL. We identified three modes of policy learning: previous policy cycles, learning from other coalitions, and learning from community organizations. ACF explains the evolution of negotiated agreements based on the stability of coalition belief systems, including consensus on leave time, inclusivity, and cost-sharing contributions. ACF helps describe how coalitions adopted progressive ideas such as equity. However, ACF's elements that allow a deeper exploration of narratives were missing. Future studies should include interviews with coalition members and compare state policies to assess strategies. Future policy initiatives could integrate feedback from community organizations into policy strategies.

Citizens' preferences on green infrastructure practices and their enhancement in Portland, Oregon.

Green infrastructure (GI) has been gaining increasing attention due to its efficiency in controlling and purifying urban stormwater runoff, creating environmental amenities, and biodiversity conservation. Nevertheless, the existing knowledge of people's preferences for GI is not yet sufficient for evidence-based policymaking for enhancing GI. This study analyzes citizens' perceptions of the relative importance of six GI practices and estimates their willingness to pay (WTP) to enhance them. To this end, the study applies two types of stated preference methods (best-worst scaling and contingent valuation) to citizen survey data collected in Portland, Oregon. We found that GI practices that are more likely to lead to private benefits (e.g., rain barrels, urban trees) received relatively higher ratings, whereas the ratings of practices that do not offer such benefits (e.g., bioswales, rain gardens) were relatively lower. However, the diversity of preferences was large, as the relative importance varied widely among respondents. Heterogeneous preferences were also found in terms of citizens' WTP for hypothetical GI enhancement. Our comparison of uniform and variable payment schemes revealed that variable payment outperformed uniform payment because of the significant variation in citizens' WTP. The difference was large when the annual household payment was small.

Towards comprehensive malaria planning: the effect of government capacity, health policy, and land use variables on malaria incidence in India.

We present what we believe is the first empirical research that accounts for subnational government capacity in estimating malaria incidence. After controlling for relevant extrinsic factors, we find evidence of a negative effect of state government capacity on reported malaria cases in Indian states over the period 1993-2002. Government capacity is more successful in predicting malaria incidence than potentially more direct indicators such as state public health expenditures and economic development levels. We find that high government capacity can moderate the deleterious health effects of malaria in rice producing regions. Our research also suggests that government capacity may have exacerbated the effectiveness of the World Bank Malaria Control Project in India over the period studied. We conclude by proposing the integration of government capacity measures into existing planning efforts, including vulnerability mapping tools and disease surveillance efforts.