Objective: To investigate marketing techniques used on the packaging of childoriented products sold through supermarkets. Design: Food and beverage products which met criteria for 'marketed to children' were recorded as child-oriented. The products were analysed for food categories, nutritional value, and type and extent of marketing techniques used. Setting: A major supermarket chain in Adelaide, South Australia. Subjects: Child-oriented food and beverage products. Results: One hundred and fifty-seven discrete products were marketed to children via product packaging; most (75?2 %) represented non-core foods, being high in fat or sugar. Many marketing techniques (more than sixteen unique marketing techniques) were used to promote child-oriented food products. Claims about health and nutrition were found on 55?5 % of non-core foods.

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.

BackgroundThere is a significant body of evidence that highlights the importance of addressing the social determinants of child and youth health. In order to tackle health inequities Australian governments are being called upon to take action in this area at a policy level. Recent research suggests that the health and well-being of children and youth in Australia is ‘middle of the road’ when compared to other OECD countries. To date, there have been no systematic analyses of Australian child/youth health policies with a social determinants and health equity focus and this study aimed to contribute to addressing this gap.MethodsDocument analysis of seventeen strategic level child/youth health policies across Australia used an a priori coding framework specifically developed to assess the extent to which health departments address the social determinants of child/youth health and health equity. Policies were selected from a review of all federal and state/territory strategic health department policies dated between 2008 and 2013. They were included if the title of the policy addressed children, youth, paediatric health or families directly. We also included whole of government policies that addressed child/youth health issues and linked to the health department, and health promotion policies with a chapter or extensive section dedicated to children.ResultsAustralian child/youth health policies address health inequities to some extent, with the best examples in Aboriginal or child protection policies, and whole of government policies. However, action on the social determinants of child/youth health was limited. Whilst all policies acknowledge the SDH, strategies were predominantly about improving health services delivery or access to health services. With some exceptions, the policies that appeared to address important SDH, such as early childhood development and healthy settings, often took a narrow view of the evidence and drifted back to focus on the individual.ConclusionsThis research highlights that policy action on the social determinants of child/youth health in Australia is limited and that a more balanced approach to reducing health inequities is needed, moving away from a dominant medical or behavioural approach, to address the structural determinants of child/youth health.

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.