Search

Despite abundant evidence on social determinants of health (SDH) and health inequities, effective uptake of the evidence in health policies of high-income countries has been limited. Health policies might acknowledge evidence on SDH but still direct most strategies towards biomedical and behavioural interventions. This article reports on a framework developed for qualitative analysis of health policy documents to assess how and to what extent policies address health inequities and SDH outside health care services. This framework provides an effective way to interrogate health policies on key points raised in recent literature about the translation of evidence on SDH into policy.

Background: Debate continues in public health on the roles of universal or targeted policies in providing equity of access to health-related goods or services, and thereby contributing to health equity. Research examining policy implementation can provide fresh insights on these issues. Methods: We synthesised findings across case studies of policy implementation in four policy areas of primary healthcare (PHC), telecommunications, Indigenous health and land use policy, which incorporated a variety of universal and targeted policy structures. We analysed findings according to three criteria of equity in access - availability, affordability and acceptability - and definitions of universal, proportionate-universal, targeted and residual policies, and devolved governance structures. Results: Our analysis showed that existing universal, proportionate-universal and targeted policies in an Australian context displayed strengths and weaknesses in addressing availability, affordability and acceptability dimensions of equity in access. Conclusion: While residualist policies are unfavourable to equity of access, other forms of targeting as well as universal and proportionate-universal structure have the potential to be combined in context-specific ways favourable to equity of access to health-related goods and services. To optimise benefits, policies should address equity of access in the three dimensions of availability, affordability and acceptability. Devolved governance structures have the potential to augment equity benefits of either universal or targeted policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although rising rates of obesity are recognized as a major concern for Australian public health, debate on what (if any) responsive action should be undertaken is conceptually and normatively complex. It is shaped by diverse values and interests; different representations of the problem; and many options for action by government, the private sector or individuals. This paper presents research documenting arguments for and against implementing a sugar tax in Australia. It is based on semi-structured interviews with representatives from industry (n  = 4), public health (n  = 4), policy think tanks (n  = 2); and document and media analyses. The research design was informed by framing and agenda setting theory with results reported under four main themes: framing economic impacts, framing equity, framing obesity and framing the 'nanny state' versus individual liberty argument. We found that proposals for a sugar tax as part of policy responses to the issue of overweight and obesity in Australia are framed very differently by actors who either support or oppose it. A conclusion is that policy makers and public health advocates involved in policy debates on a sugar tax need to understand the role of problem and 'solution' framing, and develop positions based on protecting the public interest as a basic ethical responsibility of governments and public agencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Australia, incarceration rates have steadily increased since the 1980s, providing an imperative for crime prevention. We explored the extent to which Australian justice sector policies were aimed at preventing crime, using a framework for "primary, secondary and tertiary" crime prevention. We analyzed policies and legislation (n = 141) across Australian jurisdictions (a census was undertaken from May to September 2016, with policies spanning from 1900 to 2022). We found a strong focus on tertiary crime prevention, with recidivism rather than root causes of crime problematised. We also found little focus on primary crime prevention, despite some high-level cross sectoral strategies designed to prevent crime. In this paper, we will use the framework of Bacchi's "what's the problem?" approach, considering levels of crime prevention, social determinants of health, and discourses surrounding crime. We discuss policy implications and make suggestions for policy reform and accountability mechanisms to reduce crime and incarceration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Governments in Australia and internationally show growing interest in wellbeing as a policy goal; however, such interests raise questions about the theories or definitions of wellbeing they will apply. Choices about how wellbeing is defined for policy purposes are likely to delimit the strategies applied. Wholly individualized conceptualizations of wellbeing may lead to policy focused narrowly on 'improving' individuals rather than on creating favourable social conditions. Also, Indigenous theories of wellbeing may have much to offer policy for public wellbeing, but little research has examined whether this potential is considered in contemporary health policy. We report on research examining Indigenous and non-Indigenous theories of wellbeing in a representative sample of current Australian health policy documents. We examine what theories or definitions of wellbeing are present, whether policies recognize social determinants of health; if 'lifestyle drift' is present; how Indigenous and non-Indigenous theories of wellbeing are positioned; and whether policies propose strategies consistent with their definitions of wellbeing. We discuss implications of current approaches for effective policy to promote Indigenous and non-Indigenous wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Indigenous peoples in Australia and similar colonised countries are subject to racism and systemic socioeconomic disadvantages, resulting in worse health outcomes compared to non‐Indigenous counterparts. Such inequities persist despite governments' attempts to reduce them. Since 2008, Australian governments have committed to a national 'Closing the Gap' (CTG) to reduce inequities in health, education, and employment outcomes between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and other Australians, but with limited success. We applied policy theory and a cultural safety framework developed for the research to analyse stakeholder perceptions of CTG policy implementation between 2008 and 2019. We identified policy‐shaping ideas and policy incoherence in the environment surrounding CTG policy that obstructed culturally safe policy. Top‐down, prescriptive modes of implementation were also a barrier. However, Indigenous‐led policy partnerships and community‐controlled services in the health sector have met principles of cultural safety. Identifying these strengths and weaknesses points to ways in which implementation of CTG policies can be improved to achieve cultural safety and reduce Indigenous health inequities. These results may hold lessons for similar countries such as the United States, New Zealand, and Canada. We applied policy theory and a cultural safety framework to investigate stakeholder views of the implementation of Australia's 'Closing the Gap' (CTG) Indigenous health policies, circa 2008–2019. The paper identifies strengths and weaknesses of CTG and identifies key areas of policy reform to advance cultural safety and improve Indigenous health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Transnational corporations (TNCs) shape population health both positively and negatively through their national and international social, political and economic power and influence; and are a vital commercial determinant of health. Individual and group advocacy and activism in response to corporate products, practices or policy influences can mediate negative health impacts. This paper discusses the unequal power relations existing between TNCs that promote their own financial interests, and activists and advocates who support population and environmental health by challenging corporate power. It draws on interview data from 19 respondents who informed 2 health impact assessments conducted on TNCs; 1 from the fast food industry, and 1 from the extractive industries sector. It reveals the types of strategies that civil society organizations (CSOs) have used to encourage TNCs to act in more health promoting ways. It discusses the extent to which these strategies have been effective, and how TNCs have used their power to respond to civil society action. The paper highlights the rewards, and the very real challenges faced by CSOs trying to change TNC practices related to health, within a neoliberal policy environment. It aims to provide evidence for socially oriented actors to inform their advocacy for changes in public policy or corporate practices that can contribute to improving population health and equity and tackling commercial determinants of health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of cultural safety (CS) has been developed as a critical perspective on healthcare provided to Indigenous service users in neo-colonial countries such as New Zealand, Australia and Canada. Unlike other frameworks for culturally competent healthcare, a CS approach recognizes impacts of colonization and power inequalities on Indigenous peoples and asks how these may manifest in healthcare settings. It has been argued that CS thinking is suited to critical analysis of public policy, but there has been limited work in this direction. Drawing on literature on CS in Australian healthcare, we defined a CS framework consisting of five concepts: reflexivity, dialogue, reducing power differences, decolonization and regardful care. Our research examined whether and in what terms this framework could be adapted as a tool for critical analysis of Australian public policy as it affects Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. We used a collaborative inquiry process combining perspectives of an Aboriginal researcher and a non-Indigenous researcher. We developed a thematic analysis framework to examine how the five concepts might be reflected in contemporary writings on policy by leading Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander thinkers. We found the framework is applicable as a tool for policy analysis; bringing together key concerns raised by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders and critical concepts such as sovereignty and interface thinking. We concluded the framework is likely to be a useful tool for critical, systemic thinking about public policy as it affects Indigenous peoples and for specifying areas where performance can be improved to achieve culturally safe policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Critical social and economic resources, such as employment, education, and health services, increasingly require online access, highlighting the growing need to address equity of access to high-speed broadband telecommunications. Ensuring access to broadband requires the necessary infrastructure which, in Australia, is the National Broadband Network (NBN). In this paper, we use policy implementation theory to examine the translation of the government's NBN policy into service delivery, specifically in relation to the choice of policy instruments to install the broadband infrastructure, the associated barriers and enablers to their implementation, and the equity considerations that are emerging as the policy is implemented. We conducted a rapid review of NBN policy documents and academic and grey literature to map the NBN policy instruments and to examine how key contextual, political, and technical aspects of NBN policy implementation are likely to affect equity. Our findings indicate a range of equity concerns in the implementation of NBN policy. The instrument choice of a public–private 'hybrid' organisation to implement NBN policy has created a fertile ground for competing political, social, and commercial priorities, thereby affecting how the policy is implemented and thus increasing the risks to equity as it competes with other priorities. As these mixed public–private instruments become more prevalent as policy tools to deliver major infrastructure, determining the best means to safeguard equity is a vital consideration to ensure the benefits are distributed fairly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is strong, and growing, evidence documenting health inequities across the world. However, most governments do not prioritize policies to encourage action on the social determinants of health and health equity. Furthermore, despite evidence concerning the benefits of joined-up, intersectoral policy to promote health and health equity, it is rare for such policy approaches to be applied systematically. To examine the usefulness of political and social science theory in understanding the reasons for this disjuncture between evidence and practice, researchers and public servants gathered in Adelaide for an Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia (ASSA) Workshop. This paper draws together the learnings that emerged from the Workshop, including key messages about the usefulness of various theories as well as insights drawn from policy practice. Discussions during the Workshop highlighted that applying multiple theories is particularly helpful in directing attention to, and understanding, the influence of all stages of the policy process; from the construction and framing of policy problems, to the implementation of policy and evaluation of outcomes, including those outcomes that may be unintended. In addition, the Workshop emphasized the value of collaborations among public health researchers, political and social scientists and public servants to open up critical discussion about the intersections between theory, research evidence and practice. Such critique is vital to render visible the processes through which particular sources of knowledge may be privileged over others and to examine how political and bureaucratic environments shape policy proposals and implementation action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper analyses the policy process which enabled the successful adoption of Australia's National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan 2013–2023 (NATSIHP), which is grounded in an understanding of the Social Determinants of Indigenous Health (SDIH). Ten interviews were conducted with key policy actors directly involved in its development. The theories we used to analyse qualitative data were the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the Multiple Streams Approach, policy framing and critical constructionism. We used a complementary approach to policy analysis. The NATSIHP acknowledges the importance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter, Aboriginal) culture and the health effects of racism, and explicitly adopts a human-rights-based approach. This was enabled by a coalition campaigning to 'Close the Gap' (CTG) in health status between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians. The CTG campaign, and key Aboriginal health networks associated with it, operated as an effective advocacy coalition, and policy entrepreneurs emerged to lead the policy agenda. Thus, Aboriginal health networks were able to successfully contest conventional problem conceptions and policy framings offered by government policy actors and drive a paradigm shift for Aboriginal health to place SDIH at the centre of the NATSIHP policy. Implications of this research for policy theory and for other policy environments are considered along with suggestions for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors offer insights on the progress achieved since the 2008 publication of the final report of the World Health Organization (WHO) Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH). Topics discussed include the response of the Australian government to cited social determinants of health (SDH) in the country, the initiatives launched for the protection of Aboriginal children from sexual abuse, and the development of various health promotion programs in the country.

Intersectoral action between public agencies across policy sectors, and between levels of government, is seen as essential for effective action by governments to address social determinants of health (SDH) and to reduce health inequities. The health sector has been identified as having a crucial stewardship role, to engage other policy sectors in action to address the impacts of their policies on health. This article reports on research to investigate intersectoral action on SDH and health inequities in Australian health policy. We gathered and individually analysed 266 policy documents, being all of the published, strategic health policies of the national Australian government and eight State/Territory governments, current at the time of sampling in late 2012-early 2013. Our analysis showed that strategies for intersectoral action were common in Australian health policy, but predominantly concerned with extending access to individualized medical or behavioural interventions to client groups in other policy sectors. Where intersectoral strategies did propose action on SDH (other than access to health-care), they were mostly limited to addressing proximal factors, rather than policy settings affecting the distribution of socioeconomic resources. There was little evidence of engagement between the health sector and those policy sectors most able to influence systemic socioeconomic inequalities in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Significant changes have occurred in Australia's national primary healthcare (PHC) policy over the last decade, but little assessment has been made of implications for equity. This research aimed to identify key recent changes in national PHC policy and assess implications for equity of access to PHC. Academic literature was reviewed to identify issues affecting equity of access in national PHC policy, and grey literature was also reviewed to identify significant policy changes during 2005-16 with implications for equitable access. Equity implications of four areas of policy change, set against the existing Medicare system, were assessed. It was found that Medicare supports equitable access to general practice, but there is a risk of reduced equity under current policy settings. Four changes in PHC policy were selected as having particular implications for equity of access and these were assessed as follows: increased involvement of private health insurance presents risks for equity; equity implications of new models of coordinated care are unclear; and regional primary health organisations and current policy on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health have potential equity benefits, but these will depend on further implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evidence on social determinants of health and health equity (SDH/HE) is abundant but often not translated into effective policy action by governments. Governments' health policies have continued to privilege medical care and individualised behaviour-change strategies. In the light of these limitations, the 2008 Commission on the Social Determinants of Health called on health agencies to adopt a stewardship role; to take action themselves and engage other government sectors in addressing SDH/HE. This article reports on research using analysis of health policy documents - published by nine Australian national or regional governments - to examine the extent to which the Australian health sector has taken up such a role. We found policies across all jurisdictions commonly recognised evidence on SDH/HE and expressed goals to improve health equity. However, these goals were predominantly operationalised in health care and other individualised strategies. Relatively few strategies addressed SDH/HE outside of access to health care, and often they were limited in scope. National policies on Aboriginal health did most to systemically address SDH/HE. We used Kingdon's (2011)multiple streams theory to examine how problems, policies and politics combine to enable, partially allow, or prevent action on SDH/HE in Australian health policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Area-based strategies have been widely employed in efforts to improve population health and take action on social determinants of health (SDH) and health inequities, including in urban areas where many of the social, economic and environmental factors converge to influence health. Increasingly, these factors are recognized as being part of a complex system, where population health outcomes are shaped by multiple, interacting factors operating at different levels of social organization. This article reports on research to assess the extent to which an alliance of health and human service networks is able to promote action on SDH within an Australian urban region, using a complex systems frame. We found that such an alliance was able to promote some effective action which takes into account complex interactions between social factors affecting health, but also identified significant potential barriers to other forms of desired action identified by alliance members. We found that a complex systems lens was useful in assessing a collaborative intervention to address SDH within an urban region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social determinants of health have come to greater prominence through the recent work of the WHO Commission on the Social Determinants of Health, and the Marmot Review of Health Inequalities in England. These reports also have significant implications for promotion of mental health in developed countries. In particular they reflect a growing research interest in the view that certain adverse social conditions may detrimentally affect mental or physical health by acting as chronic stressors. However, although the case for chronic arousal of stress systems as a risk factor for mental health is empirically well-founded, questions remain about how and why psychological exposure to certain kinds of proximal social conditions might contribute to such arousal. In this paper we argue that combining evidence and ideas from a number of disciplines, including public health research and psychiatry, presents an opportunity to understand the relationship better, and so inform complementary strategies in treatment, prevention and health promotion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper offers lessons to in-coming health ministers on how they can act to reduce inequities and take action on social determinants. It draws on an interview study of twenty former Australian State, Territory and Federal health ministers about the extent to which they were able to do these things during their tenure. In order to take effective health equity action the health ministers advised: ensure evidence is used to develop a strong party policy platform for health equity; install policy entrepreneurs for health equity and social determinants in the health ministry; build popular constituencies through processes of deliberative democracy; establish context appropriate cross-department mechanisms to coordinate action on social determinants; and be elected in the context of a political party which values social justice and redistribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The articulation of strong evidence and moral arguments about the importance of social determinants of health (SDH) and health equity has not led to commensurate action to address them. Policy windows open when, simultaneously, an issue is recognised as a problem, policy formulation and refinement happens and the political will for action is present. We report on qualitative interviews with 20 former Australian Federal, State or Territory health ministers conducted between September 2011 and January 2012 concerning their views about how and why the windows of policy opportunity on the SDH did or did not open during their tenure. Almost all ex-health ministers were aware of the existence of health inequalities and SDH but their complexity meant that this awareness rarely crystalised into a clear problem other than as a focus on high needs groups, especially Aboriginal people. Formulation of policies about SDH was assisted by cross-portfolio structures, policy entrepreneurs, and evidence from reviews and reports. It was hindered by the complexity of SDH policy, the dominance of medical power and paradigms and the weakness of the policy community advocating for SDH. The political stream was enabling when the general ideological climate was supportive of redistributive policies, the health care sector was not perceived to be in crisis, there was support for action from the head of government and cabinet colleagues, and no opposition from powerful lobby groups. There have been instances of Australian health policy which addressed the SDH over the past twenty five years but they are rare and the windows of opportunity that made them possible did not stay open for long. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Health services research is underpinned by partnerships between researchers and health services. Partnership-based research is increasingly needed to deal with the uncertainty of global pandemics, climate change induced severe weather events, and other disruptions. To date there is very little data on what has happened to health services research during the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper describes the establishment of an Australian multistate Decolonising Practice research project and charts its adaptation in the face of disruptions. The project used cooperative inquiry method, where partner health services contribute as coresearchers. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, data collection needed to be immediately paused, and when restrictions started to lift, all research plans had to be renegotiated with services. Adapting the research surfaced health service, university, and staffing considerations. Our experience suggests that cooperative inquiry was invaluable in successfully navigating this uncertainty and negotiating the continuance of the research. Flexible, participatory methods such as cooperative inquiry will continue to be vital for successful health services research predicated on partnerships between researchers and health services into the future. They are also crucial for understanding local context and health services priorities and ways of working, and for decolonising Indigenous health research., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

A growing interest among governments in policies to promote wellbeing has the potential to revive a social view of health promotion. However, success may depend on the way governments define wellbeing and conceptualize ways to promote it. We analyze theories of wellbeing to discern twelve types of wellbeing theory and assess the suitability of each type of theory as a basis for effective wellbeing policies. We used Durie's methodology of working at the interface between knowledge systems and Indigenous dialogic methods of yarning and deep listening. We analyzed selected literature on non-Indigenous theories and Indigenous theories from Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States to develop a typology of wellbeing theories. We applied political science perspectives on theories of change in public policy to assess the suitability of each type of theory to inform wellbeing policies. We found that some theory types define wellbeing purely as a property of individuals, whilst others define it in terms of social or environmental conditions. Each approach has weaknesses regarding the theory of change in wellbeing policy. Indigenous relational theories transcend an 'individual or environment' dichotomy, providing for pluralistic approaches to health promotion. A broad theoretic approach to wellbeing policy, encompassing individual, social, equity-based and environmental perspectives, is recommended.

Background: Universal health coverage (UHC) is central to current international debate on health policy. The primary healthcare (PHC) system is crucial to achieving UHC, in order to address the rising incidence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) more effectively and equitably. In this paper, we examine the Australian case as a mature system of UHC and identify lessons for UHC policy to support equity of access to PHC and reduce NCDs., Methods: Our qualitative research used policy mapping and monitoring and 30 key informant interviews, and applied policy theory, to investigate the implementation of Australian PHC policy between 2008 and 2018., Results: Although the Australian PHC system does support equity of access to primary medical care, other ideational, actor-centred and structural features of policy detract from the capacities of the system to prevent and manage NCDs effectively, deliver equity of access according to need, and support equity in health outcomes. These features include a dominant focus on episodic primary medical care, which is a poor model of care for NCDs, and an inequitable distribution of these services. Also, a mixed system of public and private insurance coverage in PHC contributes to inequities in access and health outcomes, driving additional NCD demand into the health system., Conclusion: Countries aiming to achieve UHC to support health equity and reduce NCDs can learn from strengths and weaknesses in the Australian system. We recommend a range of ideational, actor-centred and structural features of UHC systems in PHC that will support effective action on NCDs, equity of access to care according to need, and equity in health outcomes across geographically and ethnically diverse populations., (© 2022 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)

Anthropogenic trade and development have broken down dispersal barriers, facilitating the spread of diseases that threaten Earth's biodiversity. We present a global, quantitative assessment of the amphibian chytridiomycosis panzootic, one of the most impactful examples of disease spread, and demonstrate its role in the decline of at least 501 amphibian species over the past half-century, including 90 presumed extinctions. The effects of chytridiomycosis have been greatest in large-bodied, range-restricted anurans in wet climates in the Americas and Australia. Declines peaked in the 1980s, and only 12% of declined species show signs of recovery, whereas 39% are experiencing ongoing decline. There is risk of further chytridiomycosis outbreaks in new areas. The chytridiomycosis panzootic represents the greatest recorded loss of biodiversity attributable to a disease., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.)

Introduction: A well-established body of literature demonstrates that health and equity are strongly influenced by the consequences of governments' policy and resultant actions (or inactions) outside the health sector. Consequently, the United Nations, and its agency the WHO, have called for national leadership and whole-of-government action to understand and address the health impacts of policies in all sectors. This research responds to that call by investigating how policymaking in four sectors-urban planning, justice, energy and environment-may influence the social determinants of health and health equity (SDH/HE)., Methods and Analysis: The research design is informed by a critical qualitative approach. Three successive stages are included in the design. The first involves analysing all strategic policy documents and selected legislative documents from the four sectors (n=583). The document analysis is based on a coding framework developed to identify alignment between the documents and the SDH/HE. Two policies that demonstrate good practice in regard to SDH/HE will be selected from each sector during the second stage for embedded case study analysis (total n=8). This is intended to illuminate which factors have supported recognition and action on SDH/HE in the selected policies. The third stage involves progressive theoretical integration and development to understand political and institutional facilitators and barriers to action on SDH/HE, both within and between sectors., Ethics and Dissemination: The research will provide much needed evidence about how coherent whole-of-government action on SDH/HE can be advanced and contribute knowledge about how health-enhancing policy activity in the four sectors may be optimised. Learnings from the research will be shared via a project advisory group, policy briefings, academic papers, conference presentations and research symposia. Ethics approval has been secured for the embedded case studies, which involve research participants., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)