Abstract
Background The Middle-Out Perspective (MOP) provides a lens to examine how actors positioned between government (top) and individuals (bottom) act to promote broader societal changes from the middle-out (rather than the top-down or bottom-up). The MOP has been used in recent years in the fields of energy, climate change, and development studies. Public health practitioners involved with advocacy activities and creating alliances to amplify health promotion actions will be familiar with the general MOP concept if not the formal name.
Methods This paper introduces the MOP conceptual framework and customises it for a public health audience by positioning it among existing concepts and theories for actions within public health. Using two UK case studies (increasing signalised crossing times for pedestrians and the campaign for smoke-free legislation), we illustrate who middle actors are and what they can do to result in better public health outcomes.
Results These cases studies show that involving a wider range of middle actors, including those not traditionally involved in improving the public’s health, can broaden the range and reach of organisations and individuals involving in advocating for public health measures. They also demonstrate that middle actors are not neutral. They can be recruited to improve public health outcomes, but they may also be exploited by commercial interests to block healthy policies or even promote a health-diminishing agenda.
Conclusions Using the MOP as a formal approach can help public health organisations and practitioners consider potential ‘allies’ from outside traditional health-related bodies or professions. Formal mapping can expand the range of who are considered potential middle actors for a particular public health issue. By applying the MOP, public health organisations and staff can enlist the additional leverage that is brought to bear by involving additional middle actors in improving the public’s health.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
A Middle–Out Perspectives workshop in Herzliya, Israel, 11–12 March 202 was funded by the UK Foundation The Academic Study Group on Israel and The Middle East, and a grant from University College London's Global Engagement Fund for Africa and the Middle East. This paper grew out of discussions held at the workshop and subsequently, but the authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, nor publication of this article. The workshop funders played no part in the drafting of or approving the manuscript, nor in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
yparag{at}idc.ac.il
s.bartington{at}bham.ac.uk
laura.stoll{at}nhs.net
j.barlow{at}imperial.ac.uk
k.janda{at}ucl.ac.uk
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.