Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31269927›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2019

Street-level diplomacy and local enforcement for meat safety in northern Tanzania: knowledge, pragmatism and trust.

T A Hrynick, V Barasa, J Benschop, S Cleaveland, J A Crump, M Davis, B Mariki, B T Mmbaga, N Mtui-Malamsha, G Prinsen and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Aggregation ofParasite epidemiology and control · 2023
    Review
  5. Meat Safety in Tanzania's Value Chain: Experiences, Explanations and Expectations in Butcheries and Eateries.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

T A HrynickInstitute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
V BarasaInstitute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
J BenschopmEpiLab, School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Palmerston, New Zealand.
S CleavelandInstitute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
J A CrumpCentre for International Health, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
M DavisPaul G. Allen School for Global Animal Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, Washington State University, Pullman, USA.
B MarikiTanzania Chamber of Commerce - Kilimanjaro, Moshi, Tanzania.
B T MmbagaKilimanjaro Christian Medical University College, Tumaini University, Moshi, Tanzania.
N Mtui-MalamshaMinistry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, Dodoma, Tanzania.
G PrinsenSchool of People, Environment and Planning, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
J SharpSchool of Geographical and Earth Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
E SindiyoMwanga District Council Department of Livestock and Fisheries, Mwanga, Tanzania.
E S SwaiMinistry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, Dodoma, Tanzania.
K M ThomasCentre for International Health, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
R ZadoksInstitute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
L WaldmanInstitute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK. L.Waldman@ids.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0864-9467
Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries · TZUniversity of Glasgow · GBUniversity of Sussex · GBMassey University · NZTumaini University · TZKilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre · TZWashington State University · US

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L017679/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L018926/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith increasing demand for red meat in Tanzania comes heightened potential for zoonotic infections in animals and humans that disproportionately affect poor communities. A range of frontline government employees work to protect public health, providing services for people engaged in animal-based livelihoods (livestock owners and butchers), and enforcing meat safety and food premises standards. In contrast to literature which emphasises the inadequacy of extension support and food safety policy implementation in low- and middle-income countries, this paper foregrounds the 'street-level diplomacy' deployed by frontline actors operating in challenging contexts.

methodsThis research is based on semi-structured interviews with 61 government employees, including livestock extension officers/meat inspectors and health officers, across 10 randomly-selected rural and urban wards.

resultsFrontline actors combined formal and informal strategies including the leveraging of formal policy texts and relationships with other state employees, remaining flexible and recognising that poverty constrained people's ability to comply with health regulations. They emphasised the need to work with livestock keepers and butchers to build their knowledge to self-regulate and to work collaboratively to ensure meat safety. Remaining adaptive and being hesitant to act punitively unless absolutely necessary cultivated trust and positive relations, making those engaged in animal-based livelihoods more open to learning from and cooperating with extension officers and inspectors. This may result in higher levels of meat safety than might be the case if frontline actors stringently enforced regulations.

conclusionThe current tendency to view frontline actors' partial enforcement of meat safety regulations as a failure obscures the creative and proactive ways in which they seek to ensure meat safety in a context of limited resources. Their application of 'street-level diplomacy' enables them to be sensitive to local socio-economic realities, to respect local social norms and expectations and to build support for health safety interventions when necessary. More explicitly acknowledging the role of trust and positive state-society relations and the diplomatic skills deployed by frontline actors as a formal part of their inspection duties offers new perspectives and enhanced understandings on the complicated nature of their work and what might be done to support them.

Indexed as

DiplomacyFood SafetyAnimalsFemaleGovernment EmployeesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansLivestockMaleMeatPovertyPublic HealthQualitative ResearchTanzaniaTrustZoonosesButchersExtension officersFood safetyFrontline actorsMeat safetyPolicy implementationTanzania

Identifiers

PMID31269927
PMCPMC6610827
OpenAlexW2954112116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.