Search results

Animal welfare is increasingly favoured by consumers in their choice of food and cosmetic products, proposed by manufacturers and retailers. This study aims to investigate the impact of the “not tested on animals” claim on consumers' attitude and behavioural intention towards a cosmetic product through an enriched version of Ajzen's theory of planned behaviour.

A between-subjects design has been used. 450 participants were recruited through the social network of a cosmetics and personal hygiene brand in Quebec, Canada, and answered a questionnaire. They were randomly assigned to either a manipulation group (n = 226) or a control group (n = 224). Data were analysed with partial least squares structural equation modelling.

This study shows that external (credibility and attitude towards marketing claims) and internal psychological variables (subjective norms and altruistic concerns with animal welfare) influence attitude towards and purchase intention of “not tested on animals” personal care products. More egotistic concerns, such as personal appearance, also explain the formation of attitude towards cruelty-free cosmetics.

This research supplements Ajzen's original model with internal psychological (individuals' concerns with animal welfare and personal appearance) and external (general credibility of cosmetic products claims, credibility of the “not tested on animals” claim and attitude towards this claim) variables. These variables, as suggested by previous research on cosmetics and their claims, improve the understanding of consumer attitude and purchase behaviour patterns.

The study's findings point out the role of companies to increase consumers' knowledge on the significance and transparency of their messages, notably the “not tested on animals” claim. They also stress that policymakers in regions where regulation is unclear should at least punish untruthful communication pertaining to animal testing in cosmetic and personal care products.

Prior studies on cosmetic products did not investigate the difference of consumer attitude formation towards cruelty-free products compared to conventional cosmetic products. Consequently, this research shows that the construction of attitude towards cruelty-free products highly differs from conventional personal care.

This article examines options for the reform of adult social care funding, noting that universal agreement on the need for a new system has not been matched by political consensus on how this could be achieved. The costs and outcomes of some of the principal options for reform are summarised ‐ including a revised version of The King's Fund partnership model and the policy of free personal care ‐ and how these compare with the existing means‐tested system if left unreformed. These and other models are not mutually exclusive, and the selection of which options to pursue will involve delicate balancing of political, economic and administrative criteria. On balance, our view is that a revised version of the original partnership model offers the best outcomes in relation to costs, and one that can be blended with other funding options to reflect the changing nature of trade‐offs between costs, affordability and simplicity.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the principal challenges facing the health and care system in England arising from an ageing population, assess the track record of the coalition government in addressing these and offer a perspective on the priorities likely to be faced by the next incoming government in relation to health and social care for older people.

Assessment of key policy documents and legislation and interpretation of published data on trends in health and social care activity and expenditure.

An ageing population requires a fundamental shift towards a new model of care that offers better coordinated care and promotes independence and healthy ageing. The Care Act 2014 is a significant achievement and NHS spending has been protected, but resulting cuts to local government budgets have since sharp reductions in social care for older people. The next incoming government will need to address a deepening financial crisis in health and care system; the increasingly unsustainability of means tested and rationed social care alongside universal free health care; and the need to make faster progress in developing a new models of integrated care closer to home.

The issues raised in this paper affect older people as voters, tax payers and as existing or potential users of health and social care services. As a group they will attract significant attention from political parties in the next election campaign.

This article explores to what extent the long debate in England over the funding of long-term care (LTC) has involved learning from abroad.

It draws on Mossberger and Wolman’s (2003) framework which proposes criteria for assessing policy transfer as a form of prospective policy evaluation: awareness; assessment and application. The documents examined are the sources cited by the reports that examined funding LTC in England since 1999. The study uses interpretive content analysis in a deductive approach (applying the framework) that focuses on both manifest and latent content.

It finds that both the reports and the cited studies tend to focus on a fairly narrow range of nations, with most attention on Germany, Japan and Scotland. Most studies broadly do not provide much in the way of a clear rationale, and the level of details provided varies. There is relatively little focus on problems. Aims, objectives and goals are little mentioned in some studies, but they tend to be fairly abstract or “high level.” Similarly, there is limited detail on settings. Finally, only a few studies provide a clear recommendation.

It focuses on the neglected topic of the evidence behind reports which are intended to provide recommendations for policy change. The Mossberger and Wolman’s (2003) framework has been used in a small-scale but appears to be well-suited for this purpose.

Debate on long‐term care funding reform has evolved steadily over the last five years. New thinking has explored the role of ‘matching contributions’ and ‘cohort insurance’. However, despite the emergence of a government green paper and a white paper, and significant resources expended inside and outside government, both consensus and the starting point for reform have proved elusive. With the ‘elderly support ratio’ now in decline, and the UK confronting a period of extended fiscal austerity, what are the key questions confronting policy‐makers?