Search

Background: Evidence on current, national physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour (SB) policies is limited. We, therefore, analysed availability, comprehensiveness, implementation, and effectiveness of PA and SB policies internationally., Methods: In this cross-sectional study, Global Observatory for Physical Activity (GoPA!) Country Contacts from 173 countries were asked to provide data on their national PA and SB policies by completing GoPA! Policy Inventory. Data were collected for 76 countries (response rate = 44%)., Results: Formal written policies for PA and SB were found in 92% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86, 98) and 62% (95% CI: 50, 75) of countries, respectively. Sixty-two percent (95% CI: 51, 73) of countries have national PA guidelines, while 40% (95% CI: 29, 52) have SB guidelines. Fifty-two (95% CI: 40, 64) and 11% (95% CI: 3, 19) of countries have quantifiable national targets for PA and SB, respectively. The most represented ministries/departments involved in the promotion of more PA and/or less SB were in the sport (reported by 99% countries; 95% CI: 96, 100), health (97%; 95% CI: 94, 100), education (94%; 95% CI: 88, 100), and recreation and leisure (85%; 95% CI: 71, 99) sectors. The median score (0-10) for the comprehensiveness of PA and SB policies was 4 (95% CI: 4, 5) and 2 (95% CI: 2, 3), respectively. For PA and SB policy implementation it was 6 (95% CI: 5, 6). For the effectiveness of PA and SB policies it was 4 (95% CI: 3, 5) and 3 (95% CI: 2, 4), respectively. PA and SB policies were generally best developed in high-income countries and countries of European and Western-Pacific regions., Conclusions: Most of the included countries have PA policies, but their comprehensiveness, implementation, and effectiveness are generally low-to-moderate. SB policies are less available, comprehensive, implemented, and effective than PA policies. PA and SB policies are better developed in high-income countries, compared with low- and lower-middle-income countries, and in countries of European and Western-Pacific regions, compared with other world regions. More investment is needed in development and implementation of comprehensive and effective PA and SB policies, particularly in low- and lower-middle-income countries.

Background: Policy analysis is considered essential for achieving successful reforms in health promotion and public health. The only framework for physical activity (PA) policy analysis was developed at a time when the field of PA policy research was in its early stages. PA policy research has since grown, and our understanding of what elements need to be included in a comprehensive analysis of PA policy is now more refined. This study developed a new conceptual framework for PA policy analysis - the Comprehensive Analysis of Policy on Physical Activity (CAPPA) framework., Methods: The development of the CAPPA framework was based on: (i) an extensive review of literature; (ii) an open discussion between the authors; (iii) three rounds of a Delphi process; and (iv) two-rounds of consultations with PA policy stakeholders., Results: The CAPPA framework specifies 38 elements of a comprehensive analysis of PA policies in the following six categories, which comprise the building blocks of the framework: (i) purpose of analysis (including auditing and assessment of policies); (ii) policy level (including: international; national; subnational; local; and institutional policies); (iii) policy sector (including: health; sport; recreation and leisure; education; transport; environment; urban/rural planning and design; tourism; work and employment; public finance; and research sectors); (iv) type of policy (including: formal written policies; unwritten formal statements; written standards and guidelines; formal procedures; and informal policies); (v) stage of policy cycle (including: agenda setting; formulation; endorsement/legitimisation; implementation; evaluation; maintenance; termination; and succession); and (vi) scope of analysis (including availability; context; processes; actors; political will; content; and effects). Based on the CAPPA framework, we also proposed broad and inclusive definitions of PA policy and PA policy analysis., Conclusion: The CAPPA framework may be used to guide future studies related to PA policy and to provide a context for the analysis of its specific components. The framework could be used in the same way for sedentary behaviour policy research. Future research should examine the extent to which PA policy analysis has covered each of the elements specified in the CAPPA framework and analyse the elements for which evidence is lacking. Future studies should also determine whether the existing tools allow for auditing and assessment of all the CAPPA elements and develop new tools if needed to allow for a more comprehensive PA policy analysis.

Since 2020, the world has been navigating an epidemiologic transition with both infectious diseases (COVID-19) and noncommunicable diseases intertwined in complex and diverse ways. In fact, the pandemics of physical inactivity, noncommunicable diseases, and COVID-19 coincide in a tragically impactful ménage à trois with their detrimental long-term health consequences yet to be determined. We know that people in low- and middle-income countries not only have the highest risk of developing chronic diseases, they also develop the diseases at a younger age, they suffer longer, and they die earlier than people in high-income countries. This commentary features 5 compelling reasons for putting physical activity in low- and middle-income countries high up on the public health research agenda and calls for more commitment to inclusive and context-specific public health practices that are paired with locally relevant promotion and facilitation of PA practice, research, and policymaking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]