Intersectoral action: local governments promoting health

Rantala, Riikka; Bortz, Martin; Armada, Francisco

doi:10.1093/heapro/dau047

Cited by 73 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While ideas about ISA are generally popular, their implementation have been difficult (Hendriks et al, 2013;Ollila, 2011; Public Health Agency of Canada [PHAC], 2007). A growing body of scholarly literature addresses the lack of ISA implementation, typically by exploring barriers and facilitators as well as strategies for (better) implementation (Berkeley & Springett, 2006;Freiler et al, 2013;Hendriks et al, 2013;Larsen, Rantala, Koudenburg & Gulis, 2014;Rantala, Bortz & Armada, 2014;Ollila, 2011). Governance structures, political leadership and capacity building are common themes, often with an instrumentalist ambition to advance the ability of public health professionals to engage other sectors in collaboration to promote health (Embrett & Randall, 2014;McQueen et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambiguous expectations for intersectoral action for health: a document analysis of the Danish case

Holt¹,

Waldorff

Tjørnhøj‐Thomsen³

et al. 2017

Critical Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ideas about intersectoral action and policymaking for health (ISA) are prominent among public health professionals. They are often presented as effective ways to address root causes of poor health and health inequality, and as such the best way to promote population health. The implementation of such ideas has proven difficult though. In this paper we argue that neo-institutional theory can help us conceptualize implementation challenges by pointing to implicit expectations and contradictions associated with the ISA idea itself. With Denmark as empirical case, we conducted a document analysis of recommendations for municipal ISA. The analysis shows how the recommendations provide a very abstract conceptualization of ISA that does not give much practical guidance for action. We show how ISA is discursively constructed with buzzword qualities as the natural way to organize health promotion, by being presented as a means to produce better quality services, more cost-effective operations, and ensure the future of the welfare state, while at the same time hardly changing much at all. By applying the lens of institutional logics we show how ISA, although being vaguely defined, offer ambiguous normative and symbolic repertoires for action. We discuss the implementation challenges associated with this advocacy rhetoric and suggest that the domination of the corporation logic may appear to reduce the political character of ISA and potentially conflict with the ideals of health as a matter of social justice and human rights.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambiguous expectations for intersectoral action for health: a document analysis of the Danish case

Holt¹,

Waldorff

Tjørnhøj‐Thomsen³

et al. 2017

Critical Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…investing in collaborative relationships; and agreeing on criteria for success (20). Similar recommendations can be found in reviews throughout the literature, many of which also draw substantially from case studies (5)(6)(7)(8)10,11,13,(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26).…”

Section: Figure 4: Distribution Of Research Methods On Msc By Topicalmentioning

confidence: 73%

Methodological gaps and opportunities for studying multisectoral collaboration for health in low- and middle-income countries

Glandon

Mondal

Okeyo

et al. 2019

Health Policy and Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current body of research into multisectoral collaborations (MSCs) for health raises more questions than it answers, both in terms of how to implement MSCs and how to study them. This article reflects on current methodological gaps and opportunities for advancing MSC research, based on a targeted review of existing literature and qualitative input from researchers and practitioners at the 2018 Health Systems Research (HSR) Symposium in Liverpool. Through framework analysis of 205 MSC research papers referenced in a separately published MSC ‘overview of reviews’ paper, this article identifies six broad MSC question domains (‘meta questions’) and applies content analysis to estimate the relative frequency with which these meta questions and the research method(s) used to answer them are present in the literature. Results highlight a preponderance of research exploring MSC implementation using case study methods, which, in aggregate, does not seem to adequately meet policymakers’ and practitioners’ needs for generalizable or transferable insights. The content analysis is complemented by qualitative insights from HSR Symposium participants and the authors’ own experience to identify six key methodological gaps in research on MSC for health. For each of these gaps, we propose areas in which we believe there are opportunities for methodological development and innovation to help advance this field of study, including: better understanding the role of power dynamics in shaping MSCs; development of a classification framework (or frameworks) of governance arrangements; exploring divergence of perspective and experience among MSC partners; identifying or generating theoretical frameworks for MSC that work across sectors and disciplines; developing intermediate indicators of collaboration; and increasing transferability of insights to other contexts. Collaboration with researchers outside of the health sector will enhance efforts in each of these areas, as will the establishment and strengthening of pluralistic MSC evidence networks also involving policymakers and practitioners.

show abstract

“…Thus, it has created the National Policy for the Monitoring and Evaluation of Primary Care 23 , and it has stimulated family health teams to perform M&E actions through the Programa Nacional de Melhoria do Acesso e da Qualidade da Atenção Básica (PMAQ-AB 24 -National Program to Improve the Access to and the Quality of Primary Care). In the international context, a study developed by the WHO 25 analyzed 25 cases of health promotion interventions developed by the local governments of 19 countries and showed that the majority of these interventions mentioned the use of evaluation as a strategy to monitor the results of interventions. Moreover, this study highlighted the importance of the participation of universities or research institutions in the local governments' support to the performance of M&E actions in interventions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring and evaluation of physical activity interventions in the primary care network of Pernambuco

Silva

Lemos

Wanderley

et al. 2016

Rev Bras Ativ Saude

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to analyze the elements that characterize monitoring and evaluation (M&E) in physical activity interventions developed in the primary care network in the state of Pernambuco, Brazil. A statewide cross-sectional study was carried out in 104 cities, and questionnaires were used to collect data from managers, professionals, and users of the interventions. Among the managers, the following variables were analyzed: presence and frequency of M&E actions; participation of users and professionals; use of M&E results in planning; type of instrument that was used; level of importance attributed to M&E actions; and perception of barriers and of professionals' level of technical competence to develop M&E actions. The professionals provided information about their level of knowledge and skills to perform M&E, and the users reported the frequency of their participation in M&E actions. Among the 145 managers who were interviewed, 82.4% referred performing M&E actions. This proportion was not significantly different comparing the types of interventions that were evaluated. Only 47.6% of the managers used M&E results to support planning. Among the 481 professionals who were interviewed, only 21.6% reported a high or very high level of knowledge about M&E actions. Among the 942 users, 44% reported that they had never participated in M&E actions. Although most of the managers reported performing M&E actions, less than half used M&E results to support planning. Furthermore, we found a low proportion of professionals with adequate levels of technical competence to develop M&E actions and a low participation of users in these actions.

show abstract

Intersectoral action: local governments promoting health

Cited by 73 publications

References 6 publications

Ambiguous expectations for intersectoral action for health: a document analysis of the Danish case

Ambiguous expectations for intersectoral action for health: a document analysis of the Danish case

Methodological gaps and opportunities for studying multisectoral collaboration for health in low- and middle-income countries

Monitoring and evaluation of physical activity interventions in the primary care network of Pernambuco

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About