This article examines venturing, or the commercial sale of services and products, as a strategy employed by voluntary social agencies to bolster their faltering budgets. It reports the findings of a descriptive study of a population of 101 such agencies in greater Philadelphia. The authors suggest that the increase in commercial ventures by nonprofits is to some extent a by-product of the expansion of government contracting in the social welfare field. They conclude that even when successful, commercial ventures pose significant risks to nonprofit agencies.

:  Medical and higher education institutions have become centerpieces of urban economies, employing large numbers, purchasing goods and services, and anchoring neighborhoods by their land investments. Perhaps even more important in the knowledge economy of the twenty‐first century, these knowledge‐generating institutions help cities compete for growth. Yet the literature on urban economic development neglects them. Using Philadelphia as a case study, this article asks whether local and state policymakers have enacted policies to promote the meds and eds. It finds that, far from supporting these institutions, public officials have withdrawn support from them during the 1990s. State government has been shifting subsidies away from the institutions in favor of subsidizing their customers (i.e., patients, students). And municipal officials have challenged the tax‐exempt status of major nonprofit institutions. The article concludes that if policy makers recognized these as leading export sectors of the urban economy, they would be more supportive.

Background There is good evidence of both community support for sharing public sector administrative health data in the public interest and concern about data security, misuse and loss of control over health information, particularly if private sector organizations are the data recipients. To date, there is little research describing the perspectives of informed community members on private sector use of public health data and, particularly, on the conditions under which that use might be justified. Methods Two citizens' juries were held in February 2020 in two locations close to Sydney, Australia. Jurors considered the charge: ‘Under what circumstances is it permissible for governments to share health data with private industry for research and development?’ Results All jurors, bar one, in principle supported sharing government administrative health data with private industry for research and development. The support was conditional and the juries' recommendations specifying these conditions related closely to the concerns they identified in deliberation. Conclusion The outcomes of the deliberative processes suggest that informed Australian citizens are willing to accept sharing their administrative health data, including with private industry, providing the intended purpose is clearly of public benefit, sharing occurs responsibly in a framework of accountability, and the data are securely held. Patient and Public Contribution The design of the jury was guided by an Advisory Group including representatives from a health consumer organization. The jurors themselves were selected to be descriptively representative of their communities and with independent facilitation wrote the recommendations.

In this article we explore the role of data custodians in establishing and maintaining social licence for the use of personal information in health research. Personal information from population‐level data collections can be used to make significant contributions to health and medical research, but this use is dependent on community acceptance or a social licence. We conducted semi‐structured interviews with data custodians across Australia to better understand data custodians’ views on their roles and responsibilities. This inductive, thematic analysis of the interview data focuses on three factors that contribute to social licence – reciprocity, non‐exploitation and the public good. While the data custodians interviewed did not explicitly frame their role in the context of social licence, their descriptions of their roles and responsibilities clearly indicated that they did have some role to play in building and maintaining social licence.