Articlegold2016

Using Win-Win Strategies to Implement Health in All Policies: A Cross-Case Analysis

Émilie Renahy · Patricia J O'Campo · Carles Muntaner · Alix Freiler · Ketan Shankardass

89 citations0/0 files storedPLoS ONE

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology Public Health Policies and Education Health Policy Implementation Science

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In spite of increasing research into intersections of public policy and health, little evidence shows how policy processes impact the implementation of Health in All Policies (HiAP) initiatives. Our research sought to understand how and why strategies for engaging partners from diverse policy sectors in the implementation of HiAP succeed or fail in order to uncover the underlying social mechanisms contributing to sustainable implementation of HiAP. METHODS: In this explanatory multiple case study, we analyzed grey and peer-review literature and key informant interviews to identify mechanisms leading to implementation successes and failures in relation to different strategies for engagement across three case studies (Sweden, Quebec and South Australia), after accounting for the role of different contextual conditions. FINDINGS: Our results yielded no support for the use of awareness-raising or directive strategies as standalone approaches for engaging partners to implement HiAP. However, we found strong evidence that mechanisms related to "win-win" strategies facilitated implementation by increasing perceived acceptability (or buy-in) and feasibility of HiAP implementation across sectors. Win-win strategies were facilitated by mechanisms related to several activities, including: the development of a shared language to facilitate communication between actors from different sectors; integrating health into other policy agendas (eg., sustainability) and use of dual outcomes to appeal to the interests of diverse policy sectors; use of scientific evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness of HiAP; and using health impact assessment to make policy coordination for public health outcomes more feasible and to give credibility to policies being developed by diverse policy sectors. CONCLUSION: Our findings enrich theoretical understanding in an under-unexplored area of intersectoral action. They also provide policy makers with examples of HiAP across wealthy welfare regimes, and improve understanding of successful HiAP implementation practices, including the win-win approach.

Citations in this library

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 89 citations exist upstream.

References

1980Qualitative research and evaluation methods 2003Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.)1984Agendas, alternatives, and public policies 2005Multiple Case Study Analysis 2013The Possibility of Naturalism 1996Classifying political regimes 2014The Possibility of Naturalism 2011Realist methods in medical education research: what are they and what can they contribute?

Cited by

2021‘Health in All Policies’—A Key Driver for Health and Well-Being in a Post-COVID-19 Pandemic World 2018Health in All Policies: From rhetoric to implementation and evaluation – the Finnish experience 2018Inequalities in health and health risk factors in the Southern African Development Community: evidence from World Health Surveys 2023Urban policies and the creation of healthy urban environments: A review of government housing and transport policy documents in the United Kingdom 2021The perceptions and priorities of professionals in health and social welfare and city planning for creating a healthy living environment: a concept mapping study

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.