Employing a political-economic approach, we examine the Atlantic bluefin tuna fisheries in the Mediterranean. In doing so, we highlight historical transformations in fishing operations given the commodification of bluefin tuna and the growth imperative of capitalism. Fieldwork in Sicily and Sardinia, in-depth interviews, and primary and secondary data inform this analysis. Within the global agro-food system, traditional trap fisheries that operated for centuries have diminished. Industrialized fishing and tuna-ranching operations - that make use of high-tech, capital-intensive methods - have reorganized production, including the labour process, the capture of fish and the lifecycles of bluefin tuna. In an attempt to profit from the exploitation of the most prized fish in the world, capitalist fishing operations are harvesting bluefin tuna at a rate that exceeds the reproductive capabilities of the existing stock, which has had negative consequences for the traditional trap fishery and may lead to the collapse of this fishery. Modern capitalist social relations have destabilized an ecological system that has long been coupled with human systems within a few decades, with extensive socio-ecological consequences. Aquaculture, as a proposed solution, is a technological fix, which cannot resolve fundamental ecological contradictions.

Belief in angels and their intervention in the material world is prevalent in the United States. Theoretically, the concept of folk religion offers an instructive lens into the popularity of these beliefs, which exist inside, outside, and across official religious doctrines, and are therefore able to transcend the boundaries of specific religious traditions by appealing to a diverse array of believers. Empirical analyses from a recent national survey support the application of the concept of folk religion, demonstrating that these beliefs are present in substantial proportions across disparate subgroups. Belief in angelic intervention is prevalent among conservative and "mainline" Protestants, Catholics, those with high levels of conventional religious practice, biblical literalists, and even those who strongly believe in "paranormal" phenomena such as Bigfoot and ESP. Belief in angels and claims of angelic protection provide compelling and flexible narratives, ready cognitive attributions, and emotional comfort. Consequently, these views have strong memetic appeal and are transposable into multifarious subcultures.

An analysis of information obtained from interviews with 660 older native inhabitants of the southern Appalachian region in the United States indicates that plant foods, especially cultivars and materials processed from them, and some wildcrafted plant foods as well, constituted the bulk of the folk materia medica in the 1920s and 1930s. Aside from their use for the treatment of common ailments, many plant foods were, and still are to a lesser extent, valued in the region for cleaning and building blood, cleaning the bowel, and as a source of vitamins and minerals. The dependence on plant foods and wildcrafted medicinal plants, however, appears to have diminished considerably in recent years.

The Ecuadorian Indian movement entered electoral politics in 1996 through the Pachakutik political party. For the 2002 presidential and congressional elections, Pachakutik made an alliance with ex-colonel and 2000 coup leader Lucio Gutiérrez. After a first-place finish in the first round, Gutiérrez went on to win the presidency in a run-off. This research seeks to determine whether the Indian movement, via Pachakutik, was able to transform its constituency into an effective indigenous voting bloc. The analysis of the 2002 electoral returns applies the Ecological Inference method developed by Gary King. The results show that while indigenous voters were more likely to support Gutiérrez and Pachakutik congressional candidates than non-indigenous voters, large proportions of the indigenous electorate apparently did not follow the well-organized and relatively unified movement leadership.

Religiously conservative Americans consistently demonstrate lower scientific literacy than other Americans. Some argue, however, that Americans’ scientific literacy is contingent on subcultural conflict, showing differences in scientific literacy that emerge only on religiously contested scientific claims. Building on these insights, we find that the most salient factor explaining Americans’ divergence on contested (though not on uncontested) scientific claims is not religious commitment or conservatism per se, but an ideology that seeks political—and consequently epistemic—dominance: Christian nationalism. National data show that Christian nationalism is unassociated with Americans’ answers on questions about uncontested scientific knowledge. However, Christian nationalism is the strongest predictor of incorrect answers on questions about religiously contested scientific claims. Contemporary “culture war” debates over science have little to do with outright ignorance of science, nor are they strictly about religiosity or theological conservatism. Rather, disputes over science and religion reflect politically motivated denials of scientific facts that threaten Christian nationalism’s claims to epistemic and cultural authority.

Religious nonaffiliates who have high certainty in the existence of God or a higher power (theistic nones) have grown rapidly in size in the U.S. in the last 30 years, and are now the fourth largest American religious or secular category. This subgroup has been overlooked in prior research on religion, secularism, and health. We build on recent work on religion and health by distinguishing between atheists, agnostics, and nonaffliliated theists when examining the link between religious or secular identification and self-rated health. Specifically, we advance research on the heterogeneity of secular individuals and health by splitting nonaffiliated theists into two subgroups: those who report certainty in their beliefs about God or some higher power (i.e., theistic nones), and those who are less certain about their beliefs in God (i.e., doubting nones). We analyze 13 waves (1988–2018) of pooled data (N = 15,349) from the General Social Survey (GSS), a large, recurring, and nationally-representative sample of U.S. adults conducted on a periodic basis. Using the GSS, we assessed self-rated health across religious and secular categories in a well-controlled model. When compared with conservative Protestants, theistic nones and atheists had significantly higher levels of self-rated health, whereas agnostics and low-certainty nonaffiliated theists (doubting nones) did not report significantly higher levels of self-rated health. This study adds to previous research by differentiating between theistic and doubting nones among nonaffiliated theists in relation to overall health differences. The results suggest that the level of certainty in beliefs about God or a higher power are an important factor among religious nones for predicting health outcomes. These findings highlight the necessity of analyzing heterogenous subgroups within secular populations in studies of health and well-being.

Objective: Vaccine hesitancy remains a significant public health challenge, and one that is socially patterned. This study examined whether the vaccine hesitancy effects of identifying as female, race–ethnicity, the number of children, educational attainment, and political conservatism were mediated by governmental conspiracy beliefs. Methods: Linear mediation models controlling for potential confounders were employed to analyze data from a national survey of adults (2019 Chapman University Survey of American Fears; n = 1,209). Results: Effects on vaccine hesitancy were significant and negative for educational attainment, and significant and positive for the other focal predictors. Governmental conspiracy beliefs significantly mediated each of these effects; the percent mediated was largest for Hispanic identity (79 percent), followed by female identification (69 percent), educational attainment (69 percent), number of children (55 percent), black identification (34 percent), and political conservatism (30 percent). Conclusion: This study underscores the importance of nonvaccine-related conspiracy beliefs for future interventions aimed at reducing sociodemographic disparities in vaccine hesitancy.

During his 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump distinguished himself from other candidates via his hardline stances on issues of immigration. Using data from national surveys conducted between 2014 and 2019, we identify three key findings about views of immigrants among the American public during the Trump era. First, xenophobia was the strongest predictor of Americans’ feelings—anger, fear, pride, and hope—about Donald Trump during his time in office, and the second strongest predictor of feelings about the Republican party (after partisan identification). Second, the influence of Americans’ levels of xenophobia on their feelings about the Republican Party were significantly mediated by their feelings about Trump, especially for negative affect (anger and fear). Third, there has been a backlash against xenophobia, such that political independents and Democrats became significantly more favorable toward immigrants after 2016. As a result, views of immigrants have become more favorable overall, but also more politically polarized. These findings support and extend immigration backlash theory, contribute to research on affective polarization, and document consequential trends in contemporary American politics.

Despite the growing emphasis on collaboration in public health, there remains a dearth of literature providing tools for the evaluation of coalitions and councils. This study employed social network gap analysis as an evaluation tool. Survey data collected from the Southeastern Health Equity Council members were used to assess connections among members as a whole, by committee, by state, and by health specialty area. Analysis of how well Southeastern Health Equity Council met the representation outlined in its strategic plan was also conducted. Recommendations for improving the network and opportunities to effectively recruit and advance the work of Southeastern Health Equity Council are discussed.

Background: Community engagement—the collaborative process of addressing issues that impact the well-being of a community—is a strategic effort to address community issues. The Gulf States Health Policy Center (GS-HPC) formed the Hattiesburg Area Health Coalition (HAHC) in November 2014 for the purpose of addressing policies impacting the health of Forrest and Lamar counties in Mississippi. Objectives: To chronicle the community-based participatory research (CBPR) process used by HAHC’s identification of infant and maternal health as a policy area, domestic violence in pregnancy as a priority area within infant and maternal health, and a community action plan (CAP) regarding this priority area. Methods: HAHC reviewed data and identified infant and maternal health as a priority area. They then conducted a policy scan of local prenatal health care to determine the policy area of domestic violence in pregnancy. Results: HAHC developed a CAP identifying three goals with regard to domestic violence and pregnancy that together informed policy. Changes included the development of materials specific to resources available in the area. The materials and recommended changes will first be implemented by Southeast Mississippi Rural Health Initiative (SeMRHI) through a screening question for all pregnant patients, and the adoption of policies for providing information and referrals. Conclusions: The lack of community-level data was a challenge to HAHC in identifying focus and priority areas, but this was overcome by shared leadership and community engagement. After completion of the CAP, 100% of expecting mothers receiving prenatal care in the area will be screened for domestic violence.