Participation in both physical activity and sedentary behaviours follow a social gradient, such that those who are more advantaged are more likely to be regularly physically active, less likely to be sedentary, and less likely to experience the adverse health outcomes associated with inactive lifestyles than their less advantaged peers. The aim of this paper is to provide, in a format that will support policymakers and practitioners, an overview of the current evidence base and highlight promising approaches for promoting physical activity and reducing sedentary behaviours equitably at each level of 'Fair Foundations: The VicHealth framework for health equity'. A rapid review was undertaken in February-April 2014. Electronic databases (Medline, PsychINFO, SportsDISCUS, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Global Health and Embase) were searched using a pre-defined search strategy and grey literature searches of websites of key relevant organizations were undertaken. The majority of included studies focussed on approaches targeting behaviour change at the individual level, with fewer focussing on daily living conditions or broader socioeconomic, political and cultural contexts. While many gaps in the evidence base remain, particularly in relation to reducing sedentary behaviour, promising approaches for promoting physical activity equitably across the three levels of the Fair Foundations framework include: community-wide approaches; support for local and state governments to develop policies and practices; neighbourhood designs (including parks) that are conducive to physical activity; investment in early childhood interventions; school programmes; peer- or group-based programmes; and targeted motivational, cognitive-behavioural, and/or mediated individual-level approaches.

Children's health and development outcomes follow a social gradient: the further up the socioeconomic spectrum, the better the outcomes. Based upon a review of multiple forms of evidence, and with a specific focus upon Australia, this article investigates the causes of these socially produced inequities, their impact upon health and development during the early years and what works to reduce these inequities. Using VicHealth's Fair Foundations framework, we report upon child health inequity at three different levels: the socioeconomic, political and cultural level; daily living conditions; the individual health-related behaviours. Although intensive interventions may improve the absolute conditions of significantly disadvantaged children and families, interventions that have been shown to effectively reduce the gap between the best and worst off families are rare. Numerous interventions have been shown to improve some aspect of prenatal, postnatal, family, physical and social environments for young children; however, sustainable or direct effects are difficult to achieve. Inequitable access to services has the potential to maintain or increase inequities during the early years, because those families most in need of services are typically least able to access them. Reducing inequities during early childhood requires a multi-level, multi-faceted response that incorporates: approaches to governance and decision-making; policies that improve access to quality services and facilitate secure, stable, flexible workplaces for parents; service systems that reflect the characteristics of proportionate universalism, function collaboratively, and deliver evidence-based programs in inclusive environments; strong, supportive communities; and information and timely assistance for parents so they feel supported and confident.

What, when, where and how much people eat is influenced by a complex mix of factors at societal, community and individual levels. These influences operate both directly through the food system and indirectly through political, economic, social and cultural pathways that cause social stratification and influence the quality of conditions in which people live their lives. These factors are the social determinants of inequities in healthy eating. This paper provides an overview of the current evidence base for addressing these determinants and for the promotion of equity in healthy eating.

Social determinants, or the conditions in which individuals are born, grow, live, work and age, can result in inequities in health and well-being. However, to-date little research has examined alcohol use and alcohol-related problems from an inequities and social determinants perspective. This study reviewed the evidence base regarding inequities in alcohol consumption and alcohol-related health outcomes in Australia and identified promising approaches for promoting health equity. Fair Foundations: the VicHealth framework for health equity was used as an organizing schema. The review found that social determinants can strongly influence inequities in alcohol consumption and related harms. In general, lower socioeconomic groups experience more harm than wealthier groups with the same level of alcohol consumption. While Australia has implemented numerous alcohol-related interventions and policies, most do not explicitly aim to reduce inequities, and some may inadvertently exacerbate existing inequities. Interventions with the greatest potential to decrease inequities in alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harms include town planning, zoning and licensing to prevent disproportionate clustering of outlets in disadvantaged areas; interventions targeting licensed venues; and interventions targeting vulnerable populations. Interventions that may worsen inequities include national guidelines, technological interventions and public drinking bans. There is a need for further research into the best methods for reducing inequities in alcohol consumption and related harms.

Changing settings to be more supportive of health and healthy choices is an optimum way to improve population health and health equity. This article uses the World Health Organisation's (1998) (WHO Health Promotion Glossary. WHO Collaborating Centre for Health Promotion, Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Sydney, NSW) definition of settings approaches to health promotion as those focused on modifying settings' structure and nature. A rapid literature review was undertaken in the period June-August 2014, combining a systematically conducted search of two major databases with targeted searches. The review focused on identifying what works in settings approaches to address the social determinants of health inequities, using Fair Foundations: the VicHealth framework for health equity. This depicts the social determinants of health inequities as three layers of influence, and entry points for action to promote health equity. The evidence review identified work in 12 settings (cities; communities and neighbourhoods; educational; healthcare; online; faith-based; sports; workplaces; prisons; and nightlife, green and temporary settings), and work at the socioeconomic, political and cultural context layer of the Fair Foundations framework (governance, legislation, regulation and policy). It located a relatively small amount of evidence that settings themselves are being changed in ways which address the social determinants of health inequities. Rather, many initiatives focus on individual behaviour change within settings. There is considerable potential for health promotion professionals to focus settings work more upstream and so replace or integrate individual approaches with those addressing daily living conditions and higher level structures, and a significant need for programmes to be evaluated for differential equity impacts and published to provide a more solid evidence base.

The role of social innovations in transforming the lives of individuals and communities has been a source of popular attention in recent years. This article systematically reviews the available evidence of the relationship between social innovation and its promotion of health equity. Guided by Fair Foundations: The VicHealth framework for health equity and examining four types of social innovation--social movements, service-related social innovations, social enterprise and digital social innovations--we find a growing literature on social innovation activities, but inconsistent evaluative evidence of their impacts on health equities, particularly at the socio-economic, political and cultural level of the framework. Distinctive characteristics of social innovations related to the promotion of health equity include the mobilization of latent or unrealised value through new combinations of (social, cultural and material) resources; growing bridging social capital and purposeful approaches to linking individual knowledge and experience to institutional change. These have implications for health promotion practice and for research about social innovation and health equity.

No abstract

There is increasing emphasis on wellbeing as a target for mental health promotion, especially during the formative period of childhood. Despite growing research on the importance of mental wellbeing, there is little information on how to effectively promote it or how to promote it equitably. This article presents a scoping review of interventions which seek to promote mental wellbeing and reduce inequities in children and young people living in high income countries. We used Fair Foundations: The VicHealth framework for health equity (VicHealth (2013) Melbourne, Australia: The Victorian Health Promotion Foundation) to identify points of entry at three layers of influence: (i) socioeconomic, cultural and political contexts, (ii) daily living conditions, and (iii) individual and family health-related factors. We identified more than 1000 interventions which aimed to prevent or treat childhood mental illness, but there were far fewer that aimed to promote children's or young people's mental wellbeing. The interventions we studied were either universal or specifically targeted children from disadvantaged families: none explicitly used an equity framework to guide their design or evaluation or addressed social gradients in wellbeing. Most interventions remained focused on proximate factors, although we also identified a handful of interventions that sought to address children's access to services and their educational and neighbourhood environments. However, we found encouraging evidence that interventions in family and educational settings were successful in building children's strengths and supporting positive parenting, universally and within disadvantaged groups. Such positive programme evaluations signal the potential for using a proportionate universalism approach that emphasizes equity in the promotion of mental wellbeing.