![]() ![]() ![]() The goal of the project was to change the direction of research in several scholarly fields, not necessarily to produce a single scholarly product. ![]() Some of the project’s research results give scholars and public-policy analysts the ability to forecast, analyze, and in part ameliorate the consequences of a major cause of death and human misery. The decision to go to war is an important political behavior, but from a public health perspective the ultimate dependent variable is not war but human misery.Īt the broadest level, “Military Conflict as a Public Health Problem” integrated the ideas and concerns of the public health, international relations, and statistical-methodology communities in order to reorient several scholarly literatures, public policies, and action agendas. Studying war as a public health problem leads political scientists and security-studies researchers to ask new questions about military conflict, to look at the world differently, and to define and explain different dependent variables. Studies of war typically focus on the political decision to go to war. Some work on this problem had occurred in all three fields, but with few exceptions the fields had generally operated in isolation. The goal of the project was to convince the public health, international relations and statistical methodology communities of the benefits of treating military conflict as a public health problem. Their project, “Military Conflict as a Public Health Problem,” was launched in the 2000–2001 academic year. The Weatherhead Center awarded the first Weatherhead Initiative in International Affairs faculty grant in March 2000 to Harvard professors Gary King of the Department of Government and Chris Murray of the School of Public Health. This initiative has concluded its research. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |