To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The chapter explores the Indian public’s proactive efforts to participate and insert themselves into the constitution-making process. This ran against the accepted wisdom at the time, which held that constitutions should be crafted by mature political elites and constitutional experts behind closed doors. Their insistence on having a say ultimately forced the Constituent Assembly to incorporate the public into its chambers and procedures, and it turned the constitution-making process into an open public affair. Newspapers, magazines, and radio programmes closely tracked the constitution-making process, and the draft constitution became a bestseller. The Indian public acted as unsolicited citizens, as sovereign-subjects, in their pursuit of their constitutional visions and aspirations. Even before the constitution arrived, the Indian public was busy working out its potential implications for their lives. Indians claimed ownership of the constitution, suggested amendments, translated it into vernacular languages, and they held the central and provincial governments to account on its basis. They, thus, legitimated the constitution even while it was being made.
Transparent evidence-based decision making has been promoted worldwide to engender trust in science and policy making. Yet, little attention has been given to transparency implementation. The degree of transparency (focused on how uncertain evidence was handled) during the development of folate and vitamin D Dietary Reference Values was explored in three a priori defined areas: (i) value request; (ii) evidence evaluation; and (iii) final values.
Design
Qualitative case studies (semi-structured interviews and desk research). A common protocol was used for data collection, interview thematic analysis and reporting. Results were coordinated via cross-case synthesis.
Setting
Australia and New Zealand, Netherlands, Nordic countries, Poland, Spain and UK.
Subjects
Twenty-one interviews were conducted in six case studies.
Results
Transparency of process was not universally observed across countries or areas of the recommendation setting process. Transparency practices were most commonly seen surrounding the request to develop reference values (e.g. access to risk manager/assessor problem formulation discussions) and evidence evaluation (e.g. disclosure of risk assessor data sourcing/evaluation protocols). Fewer transparency practices were observed to assist with handling uncertainty in the evidence base during the development of quantitative reference values.
Conclusions
Implementation of transparency policies may be limited by a lack of dedicated resources and best practice procedures, particularly to assist with the latter stages of reference value development. Challenges remain regarding the best practice for transparently communicating the influence of uncertain evidence on the final reference values. Resolving this issue may assist the evolution of nutrition risk assessment and better inform the recommendation setting process.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.