» Articles » PMID: 29068400

Health in All Policies in South Australia-Did It Promote and Enact an Equity Perspective?

Overview
Publisher MDPI
Date 2017 Oct 26
PMID 29068400
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Mobilising cross-sectoral action is helpful in addressing the range of social determinants that contribute to health inequities. The South Australian Health in All Policies (SA HiAP) approach was implemented from 2007 to stimulate cross-sector policy activity to address the social determinants of health to improve population wellbeing and reduce health inequities. This paper presents selected findings from a five year multi-methods research study of the SA HiAP approach and draws on data collected during interviews, observation, case studies, and document analysis. The analysis shows that SA HiAP had dual goals of facilitating joined-up government for co-benefits (process focus); and addressing social determinants of health and inequities through cross-sectoral policy activity (outcomes focus). Government agencies readily understood HiAP as providing tools for improving the process of intersectoral policy development, while the more distal outcome-focused intent of improving equity was not well understood and gained less traction. While some early rhetorical support existed for progressing an equity agenda through SA HiAP, subsequent economic pressures resulted in the government narrowing its priorities to economic goals. The paper concludes that SA HiAP's initial intentions to address equity were only partially enacted and little was done to reduce inequities. Emerging opportunities in SA, and internationally, including the UN Sustainable Development Goals, may revive interest in addressing equity.

Citing Articles

Interrogating Healthy Community Discourse in Municipal Policies: Priorities of a Medium-Sized CMA in Ontario, Canada.

Stenberg K, Dean J Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025; 22(2).

PMID: 40003398 PMC: 11855210. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph22020172.


Government, governance, and place-based approaches: lessons from and for public policy.

Klepac B, Mowle A, Riley T, Craike M Health Res Policy Syst. 2023; 21(1):126.

PMID: 38031069 PMC: 10685506. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-023-01074-7.


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.


Multisectoral actions in primary health care: A realist synthesis of scoping review.

Khatri R, Erku D, Endalamaw A, Wolka E, Nigatu F, Zewdie A PLoS One. 2023; 18(8):e0289816.

PMID: 37561811 PMC: 10414560. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289816.


How effective is the health promotion policy in Sichuan, China: based on the PMC-Index model and field evaluation.

Yang Y, Tang J, Li Z, Wen J BMC Public Health. 2022; 22(1):2391.

PMID: 36539758 PMC: 9764584. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-14860-9.


References
1.
Woodward A, Kawachi I . Why reduce health inequalities?. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000; 54(12):923-9. PMC: 1731601. DOI: 10.1136/jech.54.12.923. View

2.
Kawachi I, Subramanian S . A glossary for health inequalities. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002; 56(9):647-52. PMC: 1732240. DOI: 10.1136/jech.56.9.647. View

3.
Braveman P, Gruskin S . Defining equity in health. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003; 57(4):254-8. PMC: 1732430. DOI: 10.1136/jech.57.4.254. View

4.
Graham H . Social determinants and their unequal distribution: clarifying policy understandings. Milbank Q. 2004; 82(1):101-24. PMC: 2690205. DOI: 10.1111/j.0887-378x.2004.00303.x. View

5.
Marmot M . Social determinants of health inequalities. Lancet. 2005; 365(9464):1099-104. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)71146-6. View