Use and effectiveness of health impact assessment in the energy and natural resources sector in the United States, 2007 – 2016

Nkyekyer, Esi; Dannenberg, Andrew L.

doi:10.1080/14615517.2018.1519221

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…where sharing of knowledge is monetarised, ndings are business sensitive and expectations in editing approvals need managing [23,24]. To help counter these limitations, PHE emphasised that the research was not an evaluation but an examination of effectiveness of HIA in spatial planning.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Impact Assessment in two Planning Projects in England: Reflections on Normative Effectiveness

Fischer

Chang²,

Muthoora

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This article reports on research commissioned by (what was at the time) Public Health England (PHE) on the normative effectiveness of Health Impact Assessment (HIA) applied in two planning situations; (a) a new town at Cranbrook, Devon (HIA prepared in 2007), and (b) the regeneration of the Marsh farm area in Luton (HIA prepared in 2009). The aim was to examine the contribution of HIA to actions that are intended to lead to good or improved health and wellbeing. Methods Normative HIA effectiveness criteria were used to guide the analysis. The two included HIA cases were previously identified as good practice examples with regards to procedure and report quality. Semi-structured interviews with public health, planning and other actors originally involved in the HIAs were conducted in 2021. This was followed up by web-searches for evidence on actual developments in 2023. Results Interviews indicated that normative effectiveness was initially high, but that the longer term effects of the financial crash of 2008, reduced this. Delays in initially anticipated timelines and HIA actors moving elsewhere meant that HIAs were not followed-up and connections between developments and the HIAs were no longer made. However, key HIA suggestions were eventually implemented, albeit with delay. There is evidence for improved IMD (index of multiple deprivation) rankings in the Marsh farm case. Conclusion A mismatch is observed with regards to HIA exercises appearing to be largely ‘forgotten’ after over a decade of their publication, but recommendations still being implemented, possibly as a result of ‘institutional memory’. Making monitoring and follow-up of HIA binding rather than advisory would allow for direct linkages to be made.

show abstract

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%