Inadequate Social Housing and Health: The Case of Oliver Bond House, The Liberties, Dublin

Background

Inadequate housing is an important social justice issue that adversely affects health.

Methods

Drawing on an extended ethnography case study, this paper presents the results of a resident-led survey to highlight the health consequences of inadequate social housing, as residents wait for a 'fair regeneration' of their social housing 'flats' estate within a gentrifying inner-city Dublin neighbourhood.

Results

Four key concerns were identified by residents as part of this analysis: (1) substandard housing conditions which are physically harmful to health; (2) the emotional toll of an unsafe social environment; (3) lack of child friendly and community green spaces; and (4) constrained mobility due to inaccessible housing design.

Conclusions

The results highlight the urgent need to place greater priority on the maintenance of the existing social housing stock and demonstrate the need for public housing policies that recognize the quality and quantity of adequate housing provision, where care is at the heart of housing policies. The paper also presents a novel 'City of Care' framework, following the need to develop an ethics of care within cities where public health, community wellbeing, solidarity, residents' empowerment, and social justice principles are at the forefront. Given that housing is an essential contributor to good health, it is now time for a joint public housing and public health agenda to create healthier homes by confronting the everyday impact of inadequate housing to tackle social inequalities more broadly.

COVID-19 and migrants: lessons for pandemic preparedness from the Malaysian experience

BACKGROUND

Aligning with global evidence related to migrants and COVID-19, the pandemic highlighted and exposed long-standing structural inequities in the context of migrant populations in Malaysia who experienced a disproportionate level of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 morbidity, as well as exacerbated precarity during COVID-19 owing to disruptions to their livelihoods, health, and life.

MAIN BODY

Focusing on COVID-19 and migrant workers in Malaysia, this review addresses two research queries: (i) what are the policy responses of the government toward migrants with regard to COVID-19? (ii) what are the lessons learned from the Malaysian experience of COVID-19 and migrants that can inform pandemic preparedness, especially regarding migrant health policy? The review used Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework refined by Levac, Colquhoun, and O'Brien. In addition to the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and EBSCO databases, and Malaysian English language newspapers, including the Malay Mail, Malaysiakini, and the New Straits Times, the search also included reports from the websites of government ministries and departments, such as the Immigration Department, Ministry of Human Resources, Ministry of Health, and the International Trade and Industry Ministry.

CONCLUSION

Using the case example of Malaysia and the policy approach toward migrant populations in Malaysia during the height of the COVID pandemic in 2020 and 2021, this paper unravels complex pathways and inter-linkages between the contexts of migration and health which coalesced to engender and exacerbate vulnerability to disease and ill-health for the migrant workers. The lack of coordination and coherence in policies addressing migrant workers during the pandemic, the normalization of cheap and disposable labor in neoliberal economic regimes, and the securitization of migration were key factors contributing to the failure of migration policies to provide protection to migrant workers during COVID-19. The review suggests that policy approaches embodying the principles of Health in All Policies, a whole-of-society approach, and the promotion of safe, just, and regular migration, predicated on equity and inclusion, are integral to a comprehensive and effective response to pandemics such as COVID-19.

Health in All Policies at the Local Level: What Facilitates Success? Comment on "A Realist Explanatory Case Study Investigating How Common Goals, Leadership, and Committed Staff Facilitate Health in All Policies Implementation in the Municipality of Kuopio, Finland"

The paper by Guglielmin and colleagues1 examines the implementation of Health in All Policies (HiAP) in a local government context in Kuopio Finland. The authors use a realist explanatory case study design to explore what has supported HiAP implementation with a focus on two specific hypotheses on what leads to success: common goals and committed leadership and staff. The paper is well argued using appropriate methodology and their findings support the importance of the success factors tested by their two hypotheses. However, the narrowed focus on just two hypotheses underrepresents the complexity of implementing HiAP at any level of government, including local government. Given its local government focus, the paper would have been strengthened by referencing the lessons gained from the Healthy Cities movement. Local government is a critical setting for action to address health and health equity and there is great potential to continue research that adds to the knowledge base on how to successful implement HiAP. Finally, it is important to acknowledge that Finland has a unique HiAP history. It is recognised as a global leader in the field, and the role of local government in Finland differs from many other countries. These factors may impact on the transferability of the case study findings.

Where Is Equity in HiAP? Comment on "A Realist Explanatory Case Study Investigating How Common Goals, Leadership, and Committed Staff Facilitate Health in All Policies Implementation in the Municipality of Kuopio, Finland"

Health equity is no longer a central feature of Health in All Policies (HiAP) approaches despite its presence in select definitions of HiAP. In other words, HiAP is not just about considering health, but also health equity. But as HiAP has become more mainstream, its success around health equity has been muted and largely non-existent. Given the normative underpinning and centrality of equity in HiAP, equity should be better considered in HiAP and particularly when considering what 'successful' implementation may look like. Raising health on the radar of policy-makers is not mutually exclusive from considering equity. Taking an incremental approach to considering equity in HiAP can yield positive results. This article discusses these ideas and presents potential actions to restore HiAP's once central equity objectives, which include: seeking synergies focused on health equity with those who hold different convictions, both in terms of goals and measures of success; considering the conditions that allow HiAP to be fostered, such as good governance; and drawing on research on HiAP and other multisectoral approaches.

A "bottom up" Health in All Policies program: Supporting local government wellbeing approaches

ISSUE ADDRESSED

A wellbeing economy requires multiple inputs to enable the wholistic vision of a sustainable healthy population and planet. A Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach is a useful way to support policy makers and planners to implement the activities required to support a wellbeing economy.

OUTLINE OF THE PROJECT

Aotearoa New Zealand's Government has explicitly set a path towards a wellbeing economy. Here, we report the utility of a HiAP approach in Greater Christchurch, the largest urban area in the South Island of New Zealand, to achieving the shared societal goals of a sustainable healthy population and environment. We use the World Health Organisation draft Four Pillars for HiAP implementation as a framework for discussion. SO WHAT?: The paper adds to the growing number of examples of city and regions supporting a wellbeing agenda, specifically focused on some of the successes and challenges for local HiAP practitioners working within a public health unit in influencing this work.

Governance of Intersectoral Collaborations for Population Health and to Reduce Health Inequalities in High-Income Countries: A Complexity-Informed Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

A 'Health in All Policies' (HiAP) approach has been widely advocated as a way to involve multiple government sectors in addressing health inequalities, but implementation attempts have not always produced the expected results. Explaining how HiAP-style collaborations have been governed may offer insights into how to improve population health and reduce health inequalities.

METHODS

Theoretically focused systematic review. Synthesis of evidence from evaluative studies into a causal logic model.

RESULTS

Thirty-one publications based on 40 case studies from nine high-income countries were included. Intersectoral collaborations for population health and equity were multi-component and multi-dimensional with collaborative activity spanning policy, strategy, service design and service delivery. Governance of intersectoral collaboration included structural and relational components. Both internal and external legitimacy and credibility delivered collaborative power, which in turn enabled intersectoral collaboration. Internal legitimacy was driven by multiple structural elements and processes. Many of these were instrumental in developing (often-fragile) relational trust. Internal credibility was supported by multi-level collaborations that were adequately resourced and shared power. External legitimacy and credibility was created through meaningful community engagement, leadership that championed collaborations and the identification of 'win-win' strategies. External factors such as economic shocks and short political cycles reduced collaborative power.

CONCLUSION

This novel review, using systems thinking and causal loop representations, offers insights into how collaborations can generate internal and external legitimacy and credibility. This offers promise for future collaborative activity for population health and equity; it presents a clearer picture of what structural and relational components and dynamics collaborative partners can focus on when planning and implementing HiAP initiatives. The limits of the literature base, however, does not make it possible to identify if or how this might deliver improved population health or health equity.

An umbrella review of intersectoral and multisectoral approaches to health policy

Despite the widespread acceptance of the need for intersectoral and multisectoral approaches, knowledge around how to support, achieve, and sustain multisectoral action is limited. While there have been studies that seek to collate evidence on multisectoral action with a specific focus (e.g., Health in All Policies [HiAP]), we postulated that successes of working cross-sectorally to achieve health goals with one approach can glean insights and perhaps translate to other approaches which work across sectors (i.e., shared insights across HiAP, Healthy Cities, One Health, and other approaches). Thus, the goal of this study is to assemble evidence from systematic approaches to reviewing the literature (e.g., scoping review, systematic review) that collate findings on facilitators/enablers of and barriers to implementing various intersectoral and multisectoral approaches to health, to strengthen understanding of how to best implement health policies that work across sectors, whichever they may be. This umbrella review (i.e., review of reviews) was informed by the PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews, yielding 10 studies included in this review. Enablers detailed are: (1) systems for liaising and engaged communication; (2) political leadership; (3) shared vision or common goals (win-win strategies); (4) education and access to information; and (5) funding. Barriers detailed were: (1) lack of shared vision across sectors; (2) lack of funding; (3) lack of political leadership; (4) lack of ownership and accountability; and (5) insufficient and unavailable indicators and data. These findings provide a rigorous evidence base for policymakers to inform intersectoral and multisectoral approaches to not only aid in the achievement of goals, such as the Sustainable Development Goals, but to work towards health equity.

Policy design for territorial equity in multi-level and multi-sectoral political systems: Comparing health and education strategies

The EU has many plans to foster equity and spatial justice. However, each has separate reference points, and it is difficult to find an overall vision. To demonstrate, we analyse two sectoral strategies to identify their implications for spatial justice strategies. Education focuses on early investment and public service reform. Health prioritises intersectoral action to address the 'social determinants' beyond the control of health services. Both warn against equating territorial cohesion or spatial justice with equal access to public services. These findings could inform European Commission strategy, but it tends to respond with renewed rhetoric rather than reconsidering its approach.

Intersectoral and multisectoral approaches to health policy: an umbrella review protocol

BACKGROUND

It is widely recognized that one's health is influenced by a multitude of nonmedical factors, known as the social determinants of health (SDH). The SDH are defined as "the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age, and which are shaped by the distribution of money, power and resources at global, national and local levels". Despite their influence on health, most of the SDH are targeted through government departments and ministries outside of the traditional health sector (e.g. education, housing). As such, the need for intersectoral and multisectoral approaches arises. Intersectoral and multisectoral approaches are thought to be essential to addressing many global health challenges our world faces today and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. There are various ways of undertaking intersectoral and multisectoral action, but there are three widely recognized approaches (Health in All Policies [HiAP], Healthy Cities, and One Health) that each have a unique focus. However, despite the widespread acceptance of the need for intersectoral and multisectoral approaches, knowledge around how to support, achieve and sustain multisectoral action is limited. The goal of this study is to assemble evidence from systematic approaches to reviewing the literature (e.g. scoping review, systematic review) that collate findings on facilitators/enablers and barriers to implementing various intersectoral and multisectoral approaches to health, to strengthen understanding of how to best implement health policies that work across sectors, whichever they may be.

METHODS

An umbrella review (i.e. review of reviews) is to be undertaken to collate findings from the peer-reviewed literature, specifically from Ovid MEDLINE and Scopus databases. This umbrella review protocol was developed following the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P), and study design informed by the PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR).

DISCUSSION

Countries that employ multisectoral approaches are better able to identify and address issues around poverty, housing and others, by working collaboratively across sectors, with multisectoral action by governments thought to be required to achieve health equity.

Opportunity for HiAP through a Healthy Cities initiative in Taiwan: a multiple streams analysis

Health in All Policies (HiAP) is an effective approach to promote population health through addressing comprehensive social determinants of health. In 1997, the World Health Organization designed a 20-step protocol for developing a Healthy Cities (HC) project to build healthy public policies. Taiwan adopted the concept of HC in 2002 and established the first demonstration project in Tainan City in 2003. This study explores the impact of the HC initiative on the development of HiAP, as well as how a window of opportunities for HiAP was opened through the HC movement, using Tainan City as an example. Tainan was selected as the case for this study because of its relative maturity in the development of an HC initiative. A theory-driven thematic analysis was conducted in the study with archived documents between 2003 and 2010. We first adopted a Multiple Streams Approach to examine how the city government opened a window for HiAP through the HC initiative and then drew on the Maturity Model to evaluate the stage of HiAP in the Tainan HC project. After analyzing all related documents, we concluded that HiAP in the Tainan HC project had reached Stage V Institutionalization after 7 years. Key contexts, factors, challenges and strategies were identified. This study suggests that the HC initiative can indeed contribute to the development of HiAP and that the window was opened for HiAP through a concurrence of the three streams of problem, policy and politics along with the HC movement process.

The future of public health policymaking after COVID-19: a qualitative systematic review of lessons from Health in All Policies

Background: 'Health in All Policies' (HiAP) describes the pursuit of health equity. It has five main elements: treat health as a human right; identify evidence of the 'social determinants' of health inequalities, recognise that most powers to affect health are not held by health departments, promote intersectoral policymaking and collaboration inside and outside of government, and generate political will. Studies describe its potential but bemoan a major implementation gap. Some HiAP scholars learn from policymaking research how to understand this gap, but the use of policy theories is patchy. In that context, our guiding research question is: How does HiAP research use policy theory to understand policymaking? It allows us to zoom-out to survey the field and zoom-in to identify: the assumed and actual causes of policy change, and transferable lessons to HiAP scholars and advocates. Methods: Our qualitative systematic review (two phases, 2018 and 2020) identified 4972 HiAP articles. Of these, 113 journal articles (research and commentary) provide a non-trivial reference to policymaking (at least one reference to a policymaking concept). We use the 113 articles to produce a general HiAP narrative and explore how the relatively theory-informed articles enhance it. Results: Most articles focus on policy analysis (identifying policy problems and solutions) rather than policy theory (explaining policymaking dynamics). They report a disappointing gap between HiAP expectations and policy outcomes. Theory-informed articles contribute to a HiAP playbook to close that gap or a programme theory to design and evaluate HiAP in new ways.   Conclusions: Few HiAP articles use policy theories for their intended purpose. Policy theories provide lessons to aid critical reflection on power, political dilemmas, and policymaking context. HiAP scholars seek more instrumental lessons, potentially at the cost of effective advocacy and research.

The future of public health policymaking after COVID-19: a qualitative systematic review of lessons from Health in All Policies

Background: 'Health in All Policies' (HiAP) describes the pursuit of health equity. It has five main elements: treat health as a human right; identify evidence of the 'social determinants' of health inequalities, recognise that most powers to affect health are not held by health departments, promote intersectoral policymaking and collaboration inside and outside of government, and generate political will. Studies describe its potential but bemoan a major implementation gap. Some HiAP scholars learn from policymaking research how to understand this gap, but the use of policy theories is patchy. In that context, our guiding research question is: How does HiAP research use policy theory to understand policymaking? It allows us to zoom-out to survey the field and zoom-in to identify: the assumed and actual causes of policy change, and transferable lessons to HiAP scholars and advocates. Methods: Our qualitative systematic review (two phases, 2018 and 2020) identified 4972 HiAP articles. Of these, 113 journal articles (research and commentary) provide a non-trivial reference to policymaking (at least one reference to a policymaking concept). We use the 113 articles to produce a general HiAP narrative and explore how the relatively theory-informed articles enhance it. Results: Most articles focus on policy analysis (identifying policy problems and solutions) rather than policy theory (explaining policymaking dynamics). They report a disappointing gap between HiAP expectations and policy outcomes. Theory-informed articles contribute to a HiAP playbook to close that gap or a programme theory to design and evaluate HiAP in new ways.   Conclusions: Few HiAP articles use policy theories for their intended purpose. Policy theories provide lessons to aid critical reflection on power, political dilemmas, and policymaking context. HiAP scholars seek more instrumental lessons, potentially at the cost of effective advocacy and research.

Lessons from an International Initiative to Set and Share Good Practice on Human Health in Environmental Impact Assessment

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is applied to infrastructure and other large projects. The European Union EIA Directive (2011/92/EU as amended by 2014/52/EU) requires EIAs to consider the effects that a project might have on human health. The International Association for Impact Assessment and the European Public Health Association prepared a reference paper on public health in EIA to enable the health sector to contribute to this international requirement. We present lessons from this joint action. We review literature on policy analysis, impact assessment and Health Impact Assessment (HIA). We use findings from this review and from the consultation on the reference paper to consider how population and human health should be defined; how the health sector can participate in the EIA process; the relationship between EIA and HIA; what counts as evidence; when an effect should be considered ‘likely’ and ‘significant’; how changes in health should be reported; the risks from a business-as-usual coverage of human health in EIA; and finally competencies for conducting an assessment of human health. This article is relevant for health authorities seeking to ensure that infrastructure, and other aspects of development, are not deleterious to, but indeed improve, human health.

Promoting health equity through the built environment in Duluth, MN: External Resources and Local Evolution Toward Health in All Policies

Communities, professionals, and researchers recognize that environmental factors contribute to the health inequities experienced by vulnerable populations in the U.S. These environmental health injustices persist despite well-developed systems for both public health and environmental protection. The root cause of these issues is often "siloed" decision-making by separate health and environmental institutions. Health Impact Assessment (HIA) can be an important tool for bridging these silos to promote health equity at the local level. This raises the question: how can external resources best support local initiatives? This paper examines the interaction between national, state, and non-governmental efforts to promote HIA and local actions to promote healthy and equitable built environment in Duluth, MN. A wide range of local activities in Duluth aimed to alter the long term trends, decision processes, and institutions shaping its built environment. These included integrating health in brownfield redevelopment, local land use plans, food access, and transportation decisions. Technical and financial support from external groups played a key role in developing the community's capacity to promote health equity across public, private, and non-profit organizations. These multiple streams of action culminated in the mayor's declaration in 2016 that health and fairness would be adopted as key goals of the city's new Comprehensive Plan. How did such innovative efforts thrive in a small, post-industrial city with limited resources? Duluth's experiences provide insight into how external governmental, funding, academic, and non-profit entities can more effectively, efficiently, and equitably support the evolution of local initiatives.

Improving child literacy using South Australia's Health in All Policies approach

The Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach aims to create coherent policy across government that will improve population health, wellbeing and equity while progressing the goals of other sectors. The quest to achieve policy coherence across government has focused interest on processes that facilitate collaboration between health and many other sectors. Health and education sectors have long been seen as natural partners with mutually beneficial goals. This article focuses on a case study of HiAP work, undertaken between health and education in South Australia to increase parental engagement in children's literacy among lower socio-economic families. It draws on a document analysis of 71 documents, seven in-depth interviews with senior policy actors and a programme logic model. The project began with the intention of using policy levers to improve long-term health outcomes through addressing child literacy, a proven social determinant of health. Because of the context in which it was operating, the project extended from a focus on policy to working directly with four schools implementing strategies to facilitate parental engagement, with the intention of finally influencing system-wide education policy. We use an institutional framework to support our analysis through a discussion of ideas, actors and institutions and how these influenced the project. The article provides insight into the facilitators and impediments to intersectoral efforts to progress shared educational and health goals and achieve sustainable change, and identifies lessons for others intending to use this approach.

[The city as a place for healthy living?! : Urban development as a health policy area]

Cities can be described by different factors. From a health perspective, density is a factor of great importance. Cities are seen as dynamic places with interaction between built and social environments as well as design by societal stakeholders. This is illustrated through the example of noise and greenspaces as determinants of health and the provision of health services. Different city types and guiding principles of spatial and urban development are explained through the health lens. The potential to influence health determinants through local interventions is illustrated by planning instruments of urban development and environmental protection. Participation of the public and other stakeholders plays a crucial role in local settings. This paper shows the great potential of healthy urban development, which is not utilized in many cases.

Health Impact Assessment (HIA) of a fluvial environment recovery project in a medium-sized Spanish town

INTRODUCTION

The Interdepartamental Public Health Plan of Catalonia (2014) seeks to enforce Health in All Policies (HiAP) at the regional and local levels. Within this context, the City Council of Sant Andreu de la Barca (SAB), the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona (MAB), and the Public Health Agency of Catalonia started a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) of an urbanistic redesign of the Llobregat fluvial area in SAB, the results of which are presented in this paper.

METHODOLOGY

In 2018, after a HIA screening, a prospective nonquantitative HIA was conducted. Politicians, professionals, and citizens participated in identifying potential impacts. Impacts were prioritized and linked to health determinants, scientific evidence, and potentially affected social groups. Afterwards, recommendations were formulated in order to improve the health impacts of the project. Finally, indicators were selected to evaluate HIA implementation.

RESULTS

The HIA was successfully implemented with the participation of technicians and citizens of SAB. The health impacts identified were mainly related to environmental, public safety, lifestyle, socioeconomic, and political contexts. Ten recommendations were defined to minimize the potential negative health impacts of the project, with six of them directly included and only one dismissed due to incompatibility.

CONCLUSION

A HIA was successfully carried out in the medium-sized town of Catalonia, promoting Health in all Policies at a local level and improving health impacts of an urbanistic project.

Health in All Policies (HiAP) governance: lessons from network governance

The Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach requires formal and sustained governance structures and mechanisms to ensure that the policies of various non-health sectors maximize positive and minimize negative impacts on population health. In this paper, we demonstrate the usefulness of a network perspective in understanding and contributing to the effectiveness of HiAP. We undertook an exploratory, qualitative case study of a HiAP structure in Iran, the Kerman province Council of Health and Food Security (CHFS) with diverse members from health and non-health sectors. We analyzed relevant policy texts and interviewed 32 policy actors involved in the CHFS. Data were analyzed using within-case analysis and constant comparative methodology. Our findings suggest that CHFS governance from a network perspective drew in practice on elements of two competing network governance modes: the network administrative organization (NAO) and the lead organization mode. Our results also show that a shift from a hierarchical and market-based mode of interaction to a network logic within CHFS has not yet taken place. In addition, CHFS suffers from large membership and an inability to address complex 'wicked problems', as well as low trust, legitimacy and goal consensus among its members. Drawing on other HiAP studies and commentaries, insights from organization network theory, and in-depth findings from our case study, we conclude that a NAO may be the most effective mode of governance for tackling complex social problems in HiAP structures. Since similar studies are limited, and our single case study may not be transferable across all contexts, we suggest that further research be undertaken to explore HiAP structures from a network perspective in different institutional and cultural settings. With increasing emphasis given to HiAP approaches in national and international health policy discourse, it is important that comparative knowledge about the effectiveness of HiAP governance arrangements be developed.

How and why do win-win strategies work in engaging policy-makers to implement Health in All Policies? A multiple-case study of six state- and national-level governments

Background

Much of the research about Health in All Policies (HiAP) implementation is descriptive, and there have been calls for more evaluative evidence to explain how and why successes and failures have occurred. In this cross-case study of six state- and national-level governments (California, Ecuador, Finland, Norway, Scotland and Thailand), we tested hypotheses about win–win strategies for engaging policy-makers in HiAP implementation drawing on components identified in our previous systems framework.

Methods

We used two sources of data — key informant interviews and peer-reviewed and grey literature. Using a protocol, we created context–mechanism–outcome pattern configurations to articulate mechanisms that explain how win–win strategies work and fail in different contexts. We then applied our evidence for all cases to the systems framework. We assessed the quality of evidence within and across cases in terms of triangulation of sources and strength of evidence. We also strengthened hypothesis testing using replication logic.

Results

We found robust evidence for two mechanisms about how and why win–win strategies build partnerships for HiAP implementation — the use of shared language and the value of multiple outcomes. Within our cases, the triangulation was strong, both hypotheses were supported by literal and contrast replications, and there was no support against them. For the third mechanism studied, using the public-health arguments win–win strategy, we only found evidence from Finland. Based on our systems framework, we expected that the most important system components to using win–win strategies are sectoral objectives, and we found empirical support for this prediction.

Conclusions

We conclude that two mechanisms about how and why win–win strategies build partnerships for HiAP implementation — the use of shared language and the value of multiple outcomes — were found as relevant to the six settings. Both of these mechanisms trigger a process of developing synergies and releasing potentialities among different government sectors and these interactions between sectors often work through sectoral objectives. These mechanisms should be considered when designing future HiAP initiatives and their implementation to enhance the emergence of non-health sector policy-makers’ engagement.

The SIPHER Consortium: Introducing the new UK hub for systems science in public health and health economic research

The conditions in which we are born, grow, live, work and age are key drivers of health and inequalities in life chances. To maximise health and wellbeing across the whole population, we need well-coordinated action across government sectors, in areas including economic, education, welfare, labour market and housing policy. Current research struggles to offer effective decision support on the cross-sector strategic alignment of policies, and to generate evidence that gives budget holders the confidence to change the way major investment decisions are made. This open letter introduces a new research initiative in this space. The SIPHER ( Systems Science in Public Health and Health Economics Research) Consortium brings together a multi-disciplinary group of scientists from across six universities, three government partners at local, regional and national level, and ten practice partner organisations. The Consortium’s vision is a shift from health policy to healthy public policy, where the wellbeing impacts of policies are a core consideration across government sectors. Researchers and policy makers will jointly tackle fundamental questions about: a) the complex causal relationships between upstream policies and wellbeing, economic and equality outcomes; b) the multi-sectoral appraisal of costs and benefits of alternative investment options; c) public values and preferences for different outcomes, and how necessary trade-offs can be negotiated; and d) creating the conditions for intelligence-led adaptive policy design that maximises progress against economic, social and health goals. Whilst our methods will be adaptable across policy topics and jurisdictions, we will initially focus on four policy areas: Inclusive Economic Growth, Adverse Childhood Experiences, Mental Wellbeing and Housing.

Creating a whole-of-government approach to promoting healthy weight: What can Health in All Policies contribute?

OBJECTIVES

This paper examines the opportunities and barriers that the South Australian Health in all Policies (SA HiAP) approach encountered when seeking to establish a whole-of-government response to promoting healthy weight.

METHODS

The paper draws on data collected during 31 semi-structured interviews, analysis of 113 documents, and a program logic model developed via workshops to show the causal links between strategies and anticipated outcomes.

RESULTS

A South Australian Government target to increase healthy weight was supported by SA HiAP to develop a cross-government response. Our analysis shows what supported and hindered implementation. A combination of economic and systemic framing, in conjunction with a co-benefits approach, facilitated intersectoral engagement. The program logic shows how implementation can be expected to contribute to a population with healthy weight.

CONCLUSIONS

The HiAP approach achieved some success in encouraging a range of government departments to contribute to a healthy weight target. However, a comprehensive approach requires national regulation to address the commercial determinants of health and underlying causes of population obesity in addition to cross-government action to promote population healthy weight through regional government action.

[Environmental justice as an approach to tackle environmental health inequalities]

Current international studies show that environment-related diseases disproportionately affect vulnerable people. This is a case of environmental injustice. Environmental justice goes beyond the mere description of environment- and health-related social inequalities by comprising two dimensions of justice as a normative approach: distributional and procedural justice. Attempts to explain the link between social circumstances, the environment and health deal with both the socially unequal distribution of environmental hazards and environmental resources (exposure variation) and social differences in vulnerability to the health effects of environmental exposures (effect modification). Integrated monitoring approaches provide the basis for deriving interventions under various aspects of environmental justice. Parting from public health research and embedded in the Health in All Policies (HiAP) concept, environmental justice has now been taken up in a number of fields, including politics, administration and practice. There are strategic considerations and attempts to anchor it in politics at the federal, state and the communal level, both by government and non-government groups. Health-promoting urban development is a core field for intervention. The Soziale Stadt (Social City) programme for promoting urban planning and construction as well as place oriented sectoral planning make an important contribution by helping to focus on urban spaces with multiple health hazards and to implement target group-oriented participation processes. There continues to be a need to develop methods and systematically implemented evaluations of political strategies and corresponding interventions regarding their effects on inequalities in health and environmental justice.

[Environment and the "Health in All Policies" approach-an overview]

BACKGROUND

One quarter of the global disease burden could be avoided with management strategies for environmental risk factors such as air and water pollution, food contamination, injuries and poor road safety. Many decisions influencing health are made outside the health sector; thus, the joint consideration and implementation of health and environmental factors in the relevant policies are becoming increasingly important.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

By means of a selective literature search, we identified important policy documents and selected research articles as a basis for the introduction and current discussion of the Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach. Parallels with the Environment in All Policies (EIAP) approach are debated.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The consideration and reinforcement of environmental topics in HiAP and the link with health in the EiAP approach increase the chances of policies with mutually positive effects, especially with regard to the significance of social factors for health and the environment. The UN Sustainable Development Goals provide a good starting point for a joint strategy for reinforcing health and environmental aspects. Health and Environmental Impact Assessments are accepted procedures in many countries. The HiAP strategy implemented in South Australia provides a well-documented institutional approach to the integration and linkage of health and environmental issues. These examples can be used as well-established starting points for a definition of HiAP incorporating the equitable involvement of environmental issues. Barriers to this goal relate, for example, to the particular interests of the various participating sectors.

California Healthy Places Index: Frames Matter

INTRODUCTION

We describe the California Healthy Places Index (HPI) and its performance relative to other indexes for measuring community well-being at the census-tract level. The HPI arose from a need identified by health departments and community organizations for an index rooted in the social determinants of health for place-based policy making and program targeting. The index was geographically granular, validated against life expectancy at birth, and linked to policy actions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Guided by literature, public health experts, and a positive asset frame, we developed a composite index of community well-being for California from publicly available census-tract data on place-based factors linked to health. The 25 HPI indicators spanned 8 domains; weights were derived from their empirical association with tract-level life expectancy using weighted quantile sums methods.

RESULTS

The HPI's domains were aligned with the social determinants of health and policy action areas of economic resources, education, housing, transportation, clean environment, neighborhood conditions, social resources, and health care access. The overall HPI score was the sum of weighted domain scores, of which economy and education were highly influential (50% of total weights). The HPI was strongly associated with life expectancy at birth (r = 0.58). Compared with the HPI, a pollution-oriented index did not capture one-third of the most disadvantaged quartile of census tracts (representing 3 million Californians). Overlap of the HPI's most disadvantaged quartile of census tracts was greater for indexes of economic deprivation. We visualized the HPI percentile ranking as a web-based mapping tool that presented the HPI at multiple geographies and that linked indicators to an action-oriented policy guide.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The framing of indexes and specifications such as domain weighting have substantial consequences for prioritizing disadvantaged populations. The HPI provides a model for tools and new methods that help prioritize investments and identify multisectoral opportunities for policy action.

Implementation of Health 2015 public health program in Finland: a welfare state in transition

Our study sought to examine the implementation of Health 2015 [a public health programme prepared following the principles of Health in All Policies (HiAP)] between 2001 and 2015 in the context of welfare state restructuring. We used data from the realist multiple explanatory case study by HARMONICS, which focused on political factors (processes) that lead to the (un)successful implementation of programmes following the principles of HiAP. We analyzed data-key informant interviews, grey and scholarly literature-from our Finnish case to examine how Health 2015 implementation has been affected by the changing role of the state. We find that the dismantling of formal funding allocation decreased the capacity of national authorities to exert control over municipalities' health promotion work, diluting the financial arrangements regarding municipal obligations. As a result, most municipalities failed to contribute to Health 2015, resulting in losses for health promotion activities. Our results also point to joining the EU. Whereas the procedures for preparing Finland's unanimous positions on EU matters were useful in harmonizing ideologies on various policy issues between different ministries, joining the EU also increased commercial interests and the strength of the lobby system, leading to the prioritization of economic objectives over public health objectives. Finally, our informants also highlighted the changing relationship between the state and the market, manifested in market deregulation and increasing influence of pro-growth arguments during the implementation of Health 2015.

Sustainable food systems, health and infectious diseases: Concerns and opportunities

Food systems have been identified as one of the key issues in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Hence, food systems are embodied in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with a range of ramifications on different goals and targets. Current food systems practices are exposing the vulnerability of populations to various health issues. Indeed, several health challenges, such as malnutrition, infectious diseases, antimicrobial resistance and non-communicable diseases, are caused by existing food systems practices. There is growing awareness of the seriousness of the situation across sectors, including the public health community. The recommended paradigm shift in agriculture and diet are already underway at smaller scales through local efforts. Engaging with food systems towards health, equity, sustainability and resilience is a major opportunity for, as well as responsibility of, the public health community and asks for a training, research, monitoring and advocating role to be played towards policy reform and intersectoral action.

Examining Whether The Health-In-All-Policies Approach Promotes Health Equity

Scholars and public health advocates have expressed optimism about the potential for the health-in-all-policies approach to address social disparities in health, but little research has been done on whether it promotes health equity in practice. Based on sixty-five in-depth interviews with US officials in the public and private sectors conducted in five states in 2016-17, we found a relationship between the use of the approach and the prominence of health equity as a policy concern. In emphasizing the social determinants of health, the approach gives public officials and policy entrepreneurs a framework for promoting this goal. In some areas, we found a gradual transition in focus from health generally to health equity. Overall, we found that practitioners of the approach introduce equity selectively and strategically.

Health in All local Policies: Lessons learned on intersectoral collaboration in a community-based health promotion network in Denmark

Health promotion increasingly involves collaboration with civil society organisations and the private sector rather than being implemented exclusively by public sector stakeholders. Health in All Policies (HiAP) is an approach that promotes health in policy-making across public sectors. This study explored intersectoral integration and collaboration for health promotion at a local community level through a qualitative single case study of a local community network in Denmark: the Husum Health Network. The paper describes and discusses strengths, weaknesses, and challenges of HiAP-inspired local efforts to build alliances and supportive environments for health within an inter-organisational community-based network. The data were generated from participant observations made at 11 meetings and events organised by the network partners and nine qualitative, semi-structured interviews with Husum Health Network partners conducted from August 2014 to February 2015. The data were analysed using a theoretical framework introduced by Axelsson and Axelsson (2006) to characterise aspects of integration and differentiation between organisations. With high levels of structural and functional differentiation between the partners, the network provided an opportunity to exercise inter-organisational integration at the local level. Integration was fostered by knowledge sharing, face-to-face interaction, and communal events. However, the loose structure of the network was a challenge to its sustainability and achievement. We argue that Health in All local Policies is a meaningful concept in the context of local community development only when referring to the polices and strategies of all stakeholder organisations involved in decision-making and agenda setting, and not just local government institutions.

"First, Do No Harm": Have the Health Impacts of Government Bills on Tax Legislation Been Assessed in Finland?

As taxation is one of the key public policy domains influencing population health, and as there is a legal, strategic, and programmatic basis for health impact assessment (HIA) in Finland, we analyzed all 235 government bills on tax legislation over the years 2007–2014 to see whether the health impacts of the tax bills had been assessed. We found that health impacts had been assessed for 13 bills, bills dealing with tobacco, alcohol, confectionery, and energy legislation and that four of these impact assessments included impacts on health inequalities between social classes. Based on our theoretical classification, the health impacts of 40 other tax bills should have been evaluated.

Evaluating Health in All Policies Comment on "Developing a Framework for a Program Theory-Based Approach to Evaluating Policy Processes and Outcomes: Health in All Policies in South Australia"

Health in All Policies (HiAP) has gained attention as a potential tool to address complex health and societal challenges at global, regional, national and subnational levels. In a recent article, Lawless et al propose an evaluation framework developed in the context of the South Australia HiAP initiative. Strategies, mediators, activities and impacts identified in the framework could potentially be useful for evaluating HiAP in other settings. Creating and sustaining political will, managing conflicts of interest and achieving financially, politically and conceptually sustainable HiAP initiatives are challenges that could be further strengthened in the current framework.

Ideas for Extending the Approach to Evaluating Health in All Policies in South Australia Comment on "Developing a Framework for a Program Theory-Based Approach to Evaluating Policy Processes and Outcomes: Health in All Policies in South Australia"

Since 2008, the government of South Australia has been using a Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach to achieve their strategic plan (South Australia Strategic Plan of 2004). In this commentary, we summarize some of the strengths and contributions of the innovative evaluation framework that was developed by an embedded team of academic researchers. To inform how the use of HiAP is evaluated more generally, we also describe several ideas for extending their approach, including: deeper integration of interdisciplinary theory (eg, public health sciences, policy and political sciences) to make use of existing knowledge and ideas about how and why HiAP works; including a focus on implementation outcomes and using developmental evaluation (DE) partnerships to strengthen the use of HiAP over time; use of systems theory to help understand the complexity of social systems and changing contexts involved in using HiAP; integrating economic considerations into HiAP evaluations to better understand the health, social and economic benefits and trade-offs of using HiAP.

How Do We Evaluate Health in All Policies? Comment on "Developing a Framework for a Program Theory-Based Approach to Evaluating Policy Processes and Outcomes: Health in All Policies in South Australia"

It is well-established that population health is influenced by a multitude of factors, many of which lie outside the scope of the health sector. In the public health literature it is often assumed that intersectoral engagement with nonhealth sectors will be instrumental in addressing these social determinants of health. Due to the expected desirable outcomes in population health, several countries have introduced Health in All Policies (HiAP). However, whether this systematic, top-down approach to whole-of-government action (which HiAP entails) is efficient in changing government policies remains unclear. A systematic evaluation of HiAP is therefore much needed. Lawless and colleagues present an evaluation framework for HiAP in their article: "Developing a Framework for a Program Theory-Based Approach to Evaluating Policy Processes and Outcomes: Health in All Policies in South Australia." This work is an important endeavor in addressing this problem (of uncertainty as to whether HiAP is effective) and represents an essential contribution to the HiAP literature. Nonetheless, in the spirit of encouraging ongoing reflection on this topic, we wish to highlight some challenges in the presented framework, which may pose difficulties in operationalization. We find that the evaluation framework faces two main limitations: its unclear causal logic and its level of complexity. We argue that in order to function as a tool for evaluation, the framework should be explicit about the mechanisms of change and enable us to trace whether the assumed causal relations resulted in changes in practice. Developing manageable evaluation frameworks, albeit simplified, may then be an important part of cumulating the theoretical insights aspired in theory-based evaluation. On this basis, we highlight how HiAP processes and healthy public policies respectively involve different mechanisms, and thus argue that different program theories are needed.

From Mid-Level Policy Analysis to Macro-Level Political Economy Comment on "Developing a Framework for a Program Theory-Based Approach to Evaluating Policy Processes and Outcomes: Health in All Policies in South Australia"

This latest contribution by the evaluation research team at Flinders University/Southgate Institute on their multiyear study of South Australia’s Health in All Policies (HiAP) initiative is simultaneously frustrating, exemplary, and partial. It is frustrating because it does not yet reveal the extent to which the initiative achieved its stated outcomes; that awaits further papers. It is exemplary in describing an evaluation research design in which the research team has excelled over the years, and in adding to it an element of theory testing and re-testing. It is partial, in that the political and economic context considered important in examining both process and outcome of the HiAP initiative stops at the Australian state’s borders as if the macro-level national and global political economy (and its power relations) have little or no bearing on the sustainability of the policy learning that the initiative may have engendered. To ask that of an otherwise elegant study design that effectively engages policy actors in its implementation may be demanding too much; but it may now be time that more critical political economy theories join with those that elaborate well the more routine praxis of public policy-making.

Health in All Policies in South Australia-Did It Promote and Enact an Equity Perspective?

Mobilising cross-sectoral action is helpful in addressing the range of social determinants that contribute to health inequities. The South Australian Health in All Policies (SA HiAP) approach was implemented from 2007 to stimulate cross-sector policy activity to address the social determinants of health to improve population wellbeing and reduce health inequities. This paper presents selected findings from a five year multi-methods research study of the SA HiAP approach and draws on data collected during interviews, observation, case studies, and document analysis. The analysis shows that SA HiAP had dual goals of facilitating joined-up government for co-benefits (process focus); and addressing social determinants of health and inequities through cross-sectoral policy activity (outcomes focus). Government agencies readily understood HiAP as providing tools for improving the process of intersectoral policy development, while the more distal outcome-focused intent of improving equity was not well understood and gained less traction. While some early rhetorical support existed for progressing an equity agenda through SA HiAP, subsequent economic pressures resulted in the government narrowing its priorities to economic goals. The paper concludes that SA HiAP’s initial intentions to address equity were only partially enacted and little was done to reduce inequities. Emerging opportunities in SA, and internationally, including the UN Sustainable Development Goals, may revive interest in addressing equity.

Ideas, actors and institutions: lessons from South Australian Health in All Policies on what encourages other sectors' involvement

BACKGROUND

This paper examines the extent to which actors from sectors other than health engaged with the South Australian Health in All Policies (HiAP) initiative, determines why they were prepared to do so and explains the mechanisms by which successful engagement happened. This examination applies theories of policy development and implementation.

METHODS

The paper draws on a five year study of the implementation of HiAP comprising document analysis, a log of key events, detailed interviews with 64 policy actors and two surveys of public servants.

RESULTS

The findings are analysed within an institutional policy analysis framework and examine the extent to which ideas, institutional factors and actor agency influenced the willingness of actors from other sectors to work with Health sector staff under the HiAP initiative. In terms of ideas, there was wide acceptance of the role of social determinants in shaping health and the importance of action to promote health in all government agencies. The institutional environment was initially supportive, but support waned over the course of the study when the economy in South Australia became less buoyant and a health minister less supportive of health promotion took office. The existence of a HiAP Unit was very helpful for gaining support from other sectors. A new Public Health Act offered some promise of institutionalising the HiAP approach and ideas. The analysis concludes that a key factor was the operation of a supportive network of public servants who promoted HiAP, including some who were senior and influential.

CONCLUSIONS

The South Australian case study demonstrates that despite institutional constraints and shifting political support within the health sector, HiAP gained traction in other sectors. The key factors that encouraged the commitment of others sectors to HiAP were the existence of a supportive, knowledgeable policy network, political support, institutionalisation of the ideas and approach, and balancing of the economic and social goals of government.

Public health terminology: Hindrance to a Health in All Policies approach?

AIM

National public health policies in Norway are based on a Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach. At the local level, this means that public health, as a cross-sectional responsibility, should be implemented in all municipal sectors by integrating public health policies in municipal planning and management systems. The paper investigates these local processes, focusing on the use of public health terminology and how this terminology is translated from national to local contexts. We ask whether the terms 'public health' and 'public health work' are suitable when implementing an HiAP approach.

METHODS

A qualitative case study based on analyses of interviews and planning documents was performed in three Norwegian municipalities.

RESULTS

The results present dilemmas associated with using public health terminology when implementing an HiAP approach. On the one hand, the terms are experienced as wide, complex, advanced and unnecessary. On the other hand, the terms are experienced as important for a systematic approach towards understanding public health ideology and cross-sectional responsibility. One municipality used alternative terminology.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper promotes debate about the appropriateness of using the terms 'public health' and 'public health work' at the local level. It suggests that adaptation is suitable and necessary, unless it compromises knowledge, responsibility and a systematic approach. This study concludes that the use of terminology is a central factor when implementing the Norwegian Public Health Act at the local level.

The ambition of Health in All Policies in Norway: The role of political leadership and bureaucratic change

This paper presents and discusses status, challenges and future developments of Health in All Policies (HiAP) in Norway. Within the frames of the identified challenge of creating coordinated and durable policies and practices in local government, it discusses The Norwegian HiAP policy. More specifically, the paper identifies status and challenges for instituting firmer political and administrative attention to population health and health equity across administrative sectors and levels, and discusses how national authorities may stimulate more coordinated and durable HiAP policies and practices in the future.

From built environment to health inequalities: An explanatory framework based on evidence

OBJECTIVE

The Health in All Policies strategy aims to engage every policy domain in health promotion. The more socially disadvantaged groups are usually more affected by potential negative impacts of policies if they are not health oriented. The built environment represents an important policy domain and, apart from its housing component, its impact on health inequalities is seldom assessed.

METHODS

A scoping review of evidence on the built environment and its health equity impact was carried out, searching both urban and medical literature since 2000 analysing socio-economic inequalities in relation to different components of the built environment.

RESULTS

The proposed explanatory framework assumes that key features of built environment (identified as density, functional mix and public spaces and services), may influence individual health through their impact on both natural environment and social context, as well as behaviours, and that these effects may be unequally distributed according to the social position of individuals.

CONCLUSION

In general, the expected links proposed by the framework are well documented in the literature; however, evidence of their impact on health inequalities remains uncertain due to confounding factors, heterogeneity in study design, and difficulty to generalize evidence that is still very embedded to local contexts.

Whole-of-government approaches to NCDs: the case of the Philippines Interagency Committee-Tobacco

To address the rise in non-communicable diseases (NCDs), governments are now being urged to 'put forward a multisectoral approach for health at all government levels, to address NCD risk factors and underlying determinants of health comprehensively and decisively' [UN, 2011. Political Declaration of the High-Level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases (No. A/66/L.1). New York, NY: United Nations]. There is a global consensus that whole-of-government approaches (WG) can be particularly effective in regulating products such as tobacco, pre-packaged foods and alcohol, which are or can be major risk factors for NCDs. Despite the overwhelming push towards interagency arrangements for health policymaking and implementation, including in contemporary efforts to prevent and control NCDs, there has been minimal investigation into how countries have pursued WG and which types of institutional designs and arrangements offer particular utility to achieve health objectives. This article examines these issues through a case study concerning the interagency mechanism that the Philippine government currently utilizes to govern tobacco control, the Interagency Committee-Tobacco (IAC-T). We conducted key informant interviews (n = 33) with government officials, and representatives from civil society organizations, health professional associations and intergovernmental organizations. We targeted informants who have been involved in the work of the IAC-T and/or tobacco control policy more broadly. We also analysed public documents to contribute to our analysis of the structure, functioning and legal status of the IAC-T. Our findings highlight two salient challenges that arose in the Philippines case: (1) the inclusion of industry representation on the IAC-T and (2) the attempt to consolidate the responsibilities of the different departments through a policy of 'balance' between health and commercial interests. We analyse how health proponents navigated this challenging institutional arrangement and the various barriers they faced in achieving the intended health objectives. We draw from this case to discuss the lessons that can inform broad calls for WG to NCDs.

Health in All Policies in South Australia: what has supported early implementation?

Health in All Policies (HiAP) is a policy development approach that facilitates intersectoral responses to addressing the social determinants of health and health equity whilst, at the same time, contributing to policy priorities across the various sectors of government. Given that different models of HiAP have been implemented in at least 16 countries, there is increasing interest in how its effectiveness can be optimized. Much of the existing literature on HiAP remains descriptive, however, and lacks critical, empirically informed analyses of the elements that support implementation. Furthermore, literature on HiAP, and intersectoral action more generally, provides little detail on the practical workings of policy collaborations. This paper contributes empirical findings from a multi-method study of HiAP implementation in South Australia (SA) between 2007 and 2013. It considers the views of public servants and presents analysis of elements that have supported, and impeded, implementation of HiAP in SA. We found that HiAP has been implemented in SA using a combination of interrelated elements. The operation of these elements has provided a strong foundation, which suggests the potential for HiAP to extend beyond being an isolated strategy, to form a more integrated and systemic mechanism of policy-making. We conclude with learnings from the SA experience of HiAP implementation to inform the ongoing development and implementation of HiAP in SA and internationally.

How Health in All Policies are developed and implemented in a developing country? A case study of a HiAP initiative in Iran

Population health is influenced by many factors beyond the control of health system which should be addressed by other sectors through inter-sectoral collaboration (ISC). Countries have adopted diverse initiatives to operationalize ISC for health such as establishment of Councils of Health and Food Security (CHFSs) and development of provincial Health Master Plans (HMPs) in Iran. The literature, however, provides meager information on how these initiatives have been moved into the top policy agenda, how and by whom they have been formulated and what factors enable or inhibit their implementation. In addressing these knowledge gaps, we employed a qualitative case study approach, incorporating mixed methods: in-depth interviews and a textual analysis of policy documents. Iran founded the Supreme Council of Health and Food Security (SCHFS) at national level in 2006 followed by provincial and district CHFSs to ensure political commitment to ISC for health and Health in All Policies (HiAPs). In 2009, the SCHFS mandated all provincial CHFSs across the country to develop provincial HMP to operationalize the HiAP approach and Kerman was among the first provinces which responded to this call. We selected Kerman province HMP as a case study to investigate the research questions raised in this study. The study revealed two types of leverage, which played crucial role in agenda setting, policy formulation and implementation of HMP including politics (political commitment) and policy entrepreneurs. The multiple streams model was found to be informative for thinking about different stages of a policy cycle including agenda setting, policy formulation and policy implementation. It was also found to be a useful framework in analyzing HiAP initiatives as these policies do not smoothly and readily reach the policy agenda.

Beyond leadership: political strategies for coordination in health policies

Health in All Policies (HiAP) promises to improve population health by harnessing the energies and activities of various sectors. Nevertheless, it faces well-documented bureaucratic obstacles and appears to require intersectoral governance if it is to be established. The basic problems of establishing intersectoral governance for HiAP are known to public administration and political science. On reading that literature, we find that the difficulty of establishing intersectoral governance for HiAP breaks down into two kinds of problems: that of establishing coordinated actions at all (coordination); and ensuring that they endure in changed political circumstances (durability). We further find that policymakers' solutions fall into three categories: visible ones of political will (e.g., plans and targets); bureaucratic changes such as the introduction of Health Impact Assessment or reorganization; and indirect methods such as data publication and support from outside groups to put pressure on the government. It can seem that Health in All Policies, like much of public health, depends on effective and committed policymakers but is vulnerable to changing political winds. The three kinds of strategies suggest how policymakers can, and do, create intersectoral governance that functions and persists, expanding the range of effective policy recommendations.