Suchergebnisse

Chapter 1: Introduction -- Part 1: Methodology matters -- Chapter 2: The positioning of health in public policy (with an urban flavour) -- Chapter 3: Healthy Public Policy analysis switches on the floodlights -- Chapter 4: The steps in critical realist analysis -- Chapter 5: Drawing out the essentials for analysing public policy for health: the policy cube, etc.

Various forms of 'boundary‐crossing' practices continue to proliferate in public management and public service provision (i.e. activities that require engagement and collaboration across sectors, institutions, and organisations). Yet the dynamic nature of this type of joined‐up working is proving to be a major management challenge. In this paper, we bring a number of concepts to bear on the management of joined‐up and cross‐boundary working in public management of complex social issues. Firstly, we present the concept of 'adaptive management', which we draw from field of environmental policy and planning (and human ecology). Secondly, we introduce a rethinking of the role of 'policy targets' using a complexity lens. These concepts are integrated into a practice heuristic (or framework) designed to assist cross‐boundary policy implementation in real‐world settings. We argue that adaptive management approaches may have significant utility for ensuring effective governance in uncertain environments.

Background: Emerging evidence suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic is widening pre-pandemic health, social, and economic inequalities between refugees, migrants, and asylum seekers and the general population. This global scoping review examined the impact of the pandemic on community-based asylum seekers and undocumented migrants in high- and upper-middle-income countries. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of peer-reviewed articles in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Central. We applied Katikireddi's framework of understanding and addressing inequalities to examine the differential impact of the pandemic across exposure, vulnerability to infection, disease consequences, social consequences, effectiveness of control measures, and adverse consequences of control measures. Results: We included 32 articles in the review. The analysis showed that asylum seekers and undocumented migrants experienced greater exposure to the COVID-19 virus and higher infection rates. They also experienced differential social consequences in the form of job loss and lost and/or reduced work hours. The effectiveness of pandemic response measures on asylum seekers and undocumented migrants was also affected by pre-pandemic social and economic marginalisation, exclusion from pandemic-induced policy measures, lack of appropriate pandemic communication, and variable trust in governments and authority. Pandemic control measures had greater adverse consequences on asylum seekers and undocumented migrants than the general population, with the majority of studies included in this review reporting worsened mental health and social isolation conditions and reduced access to health care. Conclusions: Asylum seekers and undocumented migrants experienced a disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic across the six thematic areas of comparison. Policies that reduce exposure and vulnerability to the infection, grant equitable access to health and social care, and build capacities and resilience, are critical to enable asylum ...

AbstractHealth in All Policies is an approach that seeks to strengthen public policy‐making across health and other sectors in order to achieve the most favourable health impacts. There is currently interest in understanding how Health in All Policies is applied in different contexts; whether it makes a difference to policy practices, health outcomes and health equity; and what is required to equip the different sectors to work effectively to improve the health equity impacts of their policies. This article presents findings from a review of domestic policies and practices of Health in All Policies in countries across the World Health Organization Western Pacific Region. The findings illustrate that there is a strong foundation for action, particularly given prior intersectoral action and the important convening point that issues like non‐communicable diseases and transport provide for Health in All Policies within the Western Pacific Region. However, the consideration of health equity in Health in All Policies needs more explicit attention. This knowledge can be used for building capacity within the health sector and other sectors to undertake sustainable and effective intersectoral collaboration for improved health equity.

Purpose and setting: Infrastructure is a global multi-trillion dollar market presenting many opportunities and risks for sustainable development. This article aims to foster better conceptualisation of the connections and tensions between infrastructure policy and public health in the light of the Sustain-able Development Goals, especially 'good health and wellbeing' (number 3) and 'industry, innovation and infrastructure' (number 9), based on findings from interviews with a purposive sample of senior practicing Australian infrastructure policy makers. Principal findings: We use an institutional framework to explore the ideas, actors, rules and mandates, and procedures underpinning the inclusion of health in infrastructure policy. Informants defined infrastructure as the construction and provision of services that facilitate economic, environmental and social outcomes. The tendency to default to infrastructure as essential for economic success has fundamental challenges for the SDGs, particularly the politically driven pursuit of 'mega-project' legacies, sector-specific siloed governance arrangements, and inadequate conceptualisations of costs and benefits. Conclusions: Public health and infrastructure policy are mutually re-enforcing given they both concern the public interest with implications for all 17 SDGs. Positioning health and wellbeing as fundamental societal outcomes from infrastructure decisions would go a long way to helping achieve the SDGs. ; This research was funded by a Sydney University Kickstart Grant, funded by the Balnaves Foundation. Patrick Harris is funded by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Fellowship (APP1090644).

AbstractInequities in access to fast and reliable internet connections, essential for digital access to services and information that are important for health, can exacerbate social inequalities in health. We evaluated the social equity of the rollout of the National Broadband Network (NBN) in Australia based on the type of digital infrastructure delivered to areas of varying socioeconomic status. We found that areas of greater socioeconomic disadvantage were significantly less likely to receive the highest quality infrastructure, controlling for level of remoteness. These social inequities in provision of quality infrastructure will shape and possibly exacerbate inequities in health. In our discussion we consider how political decisions have obstructed equitable implementation of the policy. Lessons from the Australian case study may be valuable for other countries investing in public digital infrastructure who want to ensure equity of provision and can also inform Australian policy in the NBN's remaining rollout.