...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Public Health >Health Impact Assessment in New South Wales & Health in All Policies in South Australia: differences, similarities and connections
【24h】

Health Impact Assessment in New South Wales & Health in All Policies in South Australia: differences, similarities and connections

机译:新南威尔士州的健康影响评估和南澳大利亚州所有政策中的健康:差异,相似点和联系

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Policy decisions made within all sectors have the potential to influence population health and equity. Recognition of this provides impetus for the health sector to engage with other sectors to facilitate the development of policies that recognise, and aim to improve, population outcomes. This paper compares the approaches implemented to facilitate such engagement in two Australian jurisdictions. These are Health Impact Assessment (HIA) in New South Wales (NSW) and Health in All Policies (HiAP) in South Australia (SA). Methods The comparisons presented in this paper emerged through collaborative activities between stakeholders in both jurisdictions, including critical reflection on HIA and HiAP practice, joint participation in a workshop, and the preparation of a discussion paper written to inform a conference plenary session. The plenary provided an opportunity for the incorporation of additional insights from policy practitioners and academics. Results Comparison of the approaches indicates that their overall intent is similar. Differences exist, however, in the underpinning principles, technical processes and tactical strategies applied. These differences appear to stem mainly from the organisational positioning of the work in each state and the extent to which each approach is linked to government systems. Conclusions The alignment of the HiAP approach with the systems of the SA Government increases the likelihood of influence within the policy cycle. However, the political priorities and sensitivities of the SA Government limit the scope of HiAP work. The implementation of the HIA approach from outside government in NSW means greater freedom to collaborate with a range of partners and to assess policy issues in any area, regardless of government priorities. However, the comparative distance of HIA from NSW Government systems may reduce the potential for impact on government policy. The diversity in the technical and tactical strategies that are applied within each approach provides insight into how the approaches have been tailored to suit the particular contexts in which they have been implemented.
机译:背景信息在所有部门中做出的政策决策都有可能影响人口健康和公平。认识到这一点为卫生部门与其他部门互动提供了动力,以促进制定承认和旨在改善人口成果的政策。本文比较了在澳大利亚两个司法管辖区促进这种参与的方法。这些是新南威尔士州(NSW)的健康影响评估(HIA)和南澳大利亚州(SA)的所有政策中的健康于所有政策(HiAP)。方法本文中提出的比较是通过两个辖区的利益相关者之间的合作活动得出的,包括对HIA和HiAP实践的批判性思考,联合参加研讨会以及编写为会议全体会议提供信息的讨论文件。全体会议为整合政策从业者和学者的其他见解提供了机会。结果这些方法的比较表明,它们的总体意图是相似的。但是,在所应用的基本原则,技术流程和战术策略方面存在差异。这些差异似乎主要源于每个州工作的组织定位以及每种方法与政府系统的关联程度。结论HiAP方法与SA政府系统的一致性增加了在政策周期内产生影响的可能性。但是,南非政府的政治优先事项和敏感性限制了HiAP工作的范围。在新南威尔士州,外部政府实施HIA方法意味着与更大范围的合作伙伴合作以及评估任何领域的政策问题的更大自由,无论政府优先事项如何。但是,HIA与新南威尔士州政府系统的相对距离可能会减少对政府政策产生影响的可能性。每种方法中所采用的技术和战术策略的多样性,使我们可以洞悉这些方法是如何定制的,以适应实施这些方法的特定环境。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号