Search

Both environmental improvement and collective agency over local decisions are recognised strategies for promoting health and health equity. However, both strategies have been critiqued for their association with policies that emphasise local resources and decision-making while the state disinvests in social and environmental determinants of health. This paper explores the role of place-based community empowerment initiatives in building collective control and improving health. We examined the perspectives of participating communities using qualitative data from interviews and observational fieldwork embedded within an evaluation of a national community empowerment initiative: Big Local (funded by The National Lottery Community Fund and overseen by Local Trust). We selected five examples of community action to improve and maintain built environments. We found that while academics (including the authors) are interested in mechanisms to health impacts, participants focused on something more general: delivering benefits to their communities and maintaining services threatened by state disinvestment. Participants sometimes used 'health' as a pragmatic justification for action. We posit that systemic pathways to health impact are plausible even when communities themselves do not forefront health goals. For example, 'quick wins' and 'quick losses' resulting from early community action have potential to galvanise or undermine collective agency, and so affect communities' capability to deliver future improvements to social and environmental determinants of health. However, structural limitations and unequal access to resources limit the potential of communities to make health-promoting change, as some participants acknowledged. Collective agency may improve socio-environmental determinants of health but systemic barriers to empowerment and equity persist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Māori, the indigenous people of Aotearoa New Zealand, experience poorer health than non-Māori across a range of health measures. Interventions focused at an individual level have proved largely ineffective; ‘bottom-up’ approaches where communities determine their own priorities may be more sustainable than ‘top-down’ approaches where goals are determined by health authorities. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate an innovative health promotion programme aimed at improving Māori health and to discuss the importance of ownership and control of health initiatives by Māori. Evaluators conducted a comprehensive evaluation of a Healthy Eating Healthy Action programme in six small Māori health agencies, gathering information from programme managers and co-ordinators, participants and wider community members about what changes were occurring at individual, family and community levels. Effective interventions built on cultural values and practices and were delivered by Māori with close connections to the community. Changes in nutrition and physical activity made by participants also benefitted their wider families and community. The changes demonstrated subtle but important shifts in thinking about healthy eating and healthy activity that in the longer term could lead to more measurable change towards improved quality of life for people within communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Area-based initiatives that include a focus on community empowerment are increasingly being seen as potentially an important way of improving health and reducing inequalities. However, there is little empirical evidence on the pathways between communities having more control and health outcomes. Purpose To identify pathways to health improvement in a community-led area-based community empowerment initiative. Methods Longitudinal data on mental health, community control, area belonging, satisfaction, social cohesion and safety were collected over two time points, 6 months apart from 48 participants engaged in the Big Local programme, England. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) was used to explore pathways to health improvement. Results There was no clear single pathway that led to mental health improvement but positive changes in 'neighbourhood belonging' featured in 4/5 health improvement configurations. Further, where respondents experienced no improvement in key social participation/control factors, they experienced no health improvement. Conclusion This study demonstrates a potential pathway between an improvement in 'neighbourhood belonging' and improved mental health outcomes in a community empowerment initiative. Increasing neighbourhood belonging could be a key target for mental health improvement interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]