Building healthy and equitable societies: what Australia can contribute to and learn from the Commission on Social Determinants of Health (original) (raw)
Related papers
Action on the social determinants of health: Views from inside the policy process
It is now well documented that many of the key drivers of health reside in our everyday living conditions. In the last two decades, public health has urged political action on these critical social determinants of health (SDH). As noted by the World Health Organisation, encouraging action in this area is challenging. Recent research has argued that public health researchers need to gain a deeper understanding of the complex and changing rationalities of policymaking. This, it seems, is the crucial next step for social determinants of health research. In this paper, we turn our attention to the practitioners of ‘the art of government’, in order to gain insight into how to secure upstream change for the SDH. Through interviews with policy actors (including politicians, senior government advisors, senior public servants and experienced policy lobbyists) the research sought to understand the nature of government and policymaking, as it pertains to action on the SDH. Through exploring the policy process, we examine how SDH discourses, evidence and strategies align with existing policy processes in the Australian context. Participants indicated that approaches to securing change that are based on linear conceptualisations of the policy process (as often found in public health) may be seen as ‘out of touch’ with the messy reality of policymaking. Rather, a more dialogic approach that embraces philosophical and moral reasoning (alongside evidence) may be more effective. Based on our findings, we recommend that SDH advocates develop a deeper awareness of the political and policy structures and the discursive conventions they seek to influence within specific settings.
BMJ open, 2017
The development and implementation of multisectoral policy to improve health and reduce health inequities has been slow and uneven. Evidence is largely focused on the facts of health inequities rather than understanding the political and policy processes. This 5-year funded programme of research investigates how these processes could function more effectively to improve equitable population health. The programme of work is organised in four work packages using four themes (macroeconomics and infrastructure, land use and urban environments, health systems and racism) related to the structural drivers shaping the distribution of power, money and resources and daily living conditions. Policy case studies will use publicly available documents (policy documents, published evaluations, media coverage) and interviews with informants (policy-makers, former politicians, civil society, private sector) (~25 per case). NVIVO software will be used to analyse the documents to see how 'social ...
Intersectoral action on SDH and equity in Australian health policy
Health promotion international, 2016
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 clie...
Setting Goals for Australia's Health
Community Health Studies, 2010
Without a vision. the people perish, said the prophet. The concept of muddling through-the strategic method of Yes Minister!-guides contemporary mainstream health care. Utilitarian incrementalism. whereby we go on doing what we've been doing for the good of the greatest number, is free of visions. goals. targets. Yet the cost of doing nothing (or too little) in preventing ill-health is the same as the cost of treatment and care for preventable illness and injury plus income maintmance and associated loss of productivity. Prevention is generally preferable to treatment, although its benefits do not always accrue in the short term. Current non-planning encourages and reinforces the inequalities in the health of Australians and leaves the potential for prevention unexploited. The prepondera:ice of preventable illness and premature mortality suggests tha: the potential for intervention to improve health and reduce expenditure in the long term is very great. The National Health and Medical Research Council has expressed such a view and the Better Heal1.h Commission concluded that. while the costs of go3d prevention measures initially exceed benefits, savings in averted illness, disability. premature death and health care costs are substantial.' Predictions of sa\.ings should, of course, be treated with caution but preventable premature death, illness and injury exact a m.issive toll in Australia. Accurate costings of their burcen on health services and loss of productivity are hampered by inadequate and inaccurate information but estimates obtained from various sources give some indication of their magnitude: motor vehicle accidents 3.5billionpoornutrition3.5 billion poor nutrition 3.5billionpoornutrition6.0 billion 0 cardiovascular disease 2.0billionalcoholabuse2.0 billion alcohol abuse 2.0billionalcoholabuse1.5 billion The financial reasons for intervention are perhaps nowhere more graphically illustrated than in the case of AIDS. for which only effective health promotion measures stand between the community and a huge increase in health expenditure. It is expected that more than 2000 cases 0 1 AIDS will be diagnosed in Australia by 1990? and this will lead to major treatment and institL tional costs.