» Articles » PMID: 27334297

How to Improve Collaboration Between the Public Health Sector and Other Policy Sectors to Reduce Health Inequalities? - A Study in Sixteen Municipalities in the Netherlands

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2016 Jun 24
PMID 27334297
Citations 29
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The causes of health inequalities are complex. For the reduction of health inequalities, intersectoral collaboration between the public health sector and both social policy sectors (e.g. youth affairs, education) and physical policy sectors (e.g. housing, spatial planning) is essential, but in local practice difficult to realize. The aim of this study was to examine the collaboration between the sectors in question more closely and to identify opportunities for improvement.

Method: A qualitative descriptive analysis of five aspects of collaboration within sixteen Dutch municipalities was performed to examine the collaboration between the public health sector and other policy sectors: 1) involvement of the sectors in the public health policy network, 2) harmonisation of objectives, 3) use of policies by the relevant sectors, 4) formalised collaboration, and 5) previous experience. Empirical data on these collaboration aspects were collected based on document analysis, questionnaires and interviews.

Results: The study found that the policy workers of social sectors were more involved in the public health network and more frequently supported the objectives in the field of health inequality reduction. Both social policy sectors and physical policy sectors used policies and activities to reduce health inequalities. More is done to influence the determinants of health inequality through policies aimed at lifestyle and social setting than through policies aimed at socioeconomic factors and the physical environment. Where the physical policy sectors are involved in the public health network, the collaboration follows a very similar pattern as with the social policy sectors. All sectors recognise the importance of good relationships, positive experiences, a common interest in working together and coordinated mechanisms.

Conclusion: This study shows that there is scope for improving collaboration in the field of health inequality reduction between the public health sector and both social policy sectors and physical policy sectors. Ways in which improvement could be realised include involving physical policy sectors in the network, pursuing widely supported policy goals, making balanced efforts to influence determinants of health inequalities, and increasing the emphasis on a programmatic approach.

Citing Articles

Aiming for transformations in power: lessons from intersectoral CBPR with public housing tenants (Québec, Canada).

Radziszewski S, Houle J, Montiel C, Fontan J, Torres J, Frolich K Health Promot Int. 2024; 39(4).

PMID: 39110009 PMC: 11304601. DOI: 10.1093/heapro/daae085.


Strengthening collaboration within Dutch municipalities for a healthier living environment: experiences and possible improvements according to civil servants.

Mourits K, Spitters H, van der Velden K, Bekker M, Molleman G Front Public Health. 2024; 12:1406178.

PMID: 39005982 PMC: 11242545. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1406178.


Intersectoral Partnerships Between Local Governments and Health Organisations in High-Income Contexts: A Scoping Review.

Yashadhana A, Jaques K, Chaudhuri A, Pry J, Harris P Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024; 13:7841.

PMID: 38618835 PMC: 11016275. DOI: 10.34172/ijhpm.2024.7841.


The future of public health policymaking after COVID-19: a qualitative systematic review of lessons from Health in All Policies.

Cairney P, St Denny E, Mitchell H Open Res Eur. 2023; 1:23.

PMID: 37645203 PMC: 10445916. DOI: 10.12688/openreseurope.13178.2.


A fuzzy decision support model for the evaluation and selection of healthcare projects in the framework of competition.

Gavurova B, Kelemen M, Polishchuk V, Mudarri T, Smolanka V Front Public Health. 2023; 11:1222125.

PMID: 37614458 PMC: 10442559. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1222125.


References
1.
Peters D, Harting J, van Oers H, Schuit J, de Vries N, Stronks K . Manifestations of integrated public health policy in Dutch municipalities. Health Promot Int. 2014; 31(2):290-302. DOI: 10.1093/heapro/dau104. View

2.
Aarts M, Jeurissen M, van Oers H, Schuit A, van de Goor I . Multi-sector policy action to create activity-friendly environments for children: a multiple-case study. Health Policy. 2010; 101(1):11-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2010.09.011. View

3.
Storm I, Harting J, Stronks K, Schuit A . Measuring stages of health in all policies on a local level: the applicability of a maturity model. Health Policy. 2013; 114(2-3):183-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.05.006. View

4.
Storm I, Aarts M, Harting J, Schuit A . Opportunities to reduce health inequalities by 'Health in All Policies' in the Netherlands: an explorative study on the national level. Health Policy. 2011; 103(2-3):130-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.09.009. View

5.
Mannheimer L, Lehto J, Ostlin P . Window of opportunity for intersectoral health policy in Sweden--open, half-open or half-shut?. Health Promot Int. 2007; 22(4):307-15. DOI: 10.1093/heapro/dam028. View