This paper describes the use of three governance tools for health in all policies utilised to facilitate implementation in the municipality of Kuopio, Finland: impact assessments, a city mandate (the Kuopio strategy), and shared budgets.
Methods:
An explanatory case study was used. Data sources included semistructured interviews with 10 government employees and scholarly literature. Realist scientific methods were used to reveal mechanisms underlying the use of tools in health in all policies.
Results:
Strong evidence was found supporting initial and new theory/hypotheses regarding the use of each tool in achieving positive implementation outcomes. Impact assessments facilitated health in all policies by enhancing understanding of health implications. The Kuopio strategy aided in implementation by giving credence to health in all policies work via formal authority. Shared budgets promoted intersectoral discussions and understanding, and a sense of ownership, in addition to allowing time to be spent on health in all policies work and not financial deliberation.
Conclusions:
Findings confirm the efficacious use of three governance tools in implementing health in all policies in Kuopio. Knowledge and evidence-based guidelines on local health in all policies implementation are needed as this policy approach continues to be recognised and adopted as a means to promote population health and health equity.
FreilerAMuntanerCShankardassK, et al. Glossary for the implementation of health in all policies (HiAP). J Epidemiol Community Health2013;67:1068–1072.
4.
St-PierreL.Governance tools and frameworks for health in all policies. National Collaborating Centre for Health Public Policy. Quebec City: International Union for Health Promotion and Education and European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, 2009.
5.
OllilaE.Health in all policies: from rhetoric to action. Scand J Public Health2011;39:11–18.
6.
World Health Organization. Health impact assessment: main concepts and suggested approach. The Gothenburg consensus paper. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 1999.
7.
GuglielminMMuntanerCO’CampoP, et al. A scoping review of the implementation of health in all policies at the local level. Health Policy2018;122(3):284–292.
8.
MelkasT.Health in all policies as a priority in Finnish health policy: a case study on national health policy development. Scand J Public Health2013;41:3–28. doi:10.1177/1403494812472296
9.
ShankardassKSolarOMurphyK, et al. A scoping review of intersectoral action for health equity involving governments. Int J Public Health2011;57(1):25–33.
10.
PuskaPVartiainenELaatikainenT, et al. The North Karelia Project: from North Karelia to National Action. Helsinki: Helsinki University Printing House, 2009.
11.
KaikkonenRMurtoJPentala-NikulainenO, et al. Health and welfare in Finnish cities and regions in 2010–2015. Helsinki: National Institute for Health and Welfare, 2015 [In Finnish].
12.
HelliwellJFLayardRSachsJ, et al. (eds). World Happiness Report 2020. New York: Sustainable Development Solutions Network, 2020.
ShankardassKRenahyRMuntanerC, et al. Strengthening the implementation of Health in All Policies: a methodology for realist explanatory case studies. Health Policy Planning2015;30: 462–475. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czu021
15.
YinR.Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage, 2014.
16.
SaidlaK.Health promotion by stealth: active transportation success in Helsinki, Finland. Health Promot Intl2016;1–16. doi:10.1093/heapro/daw110
17.
KauppinenTNelimarkkaKPerttilaK.The effectiveness of human impact assessment in Finnish health cities network. Public Health2006;120:1033–1041. doi:10.1016/j.punhe.2006.05.028
18.
AaltonenNChydeniusMKokkinenL.“First do no harm”: have the health impacts of government bills on tax legislation been assessed in Finland?Int J Health Policy Manage2018;7:696–698.
19.
MuntanerC.Invited commentary: on the future of social epidemiology – a case for scientific realism. Am J Epidemiol2013;178:852–857. doi:10.1093/aje/kwt143
MolnarARenahyEO’CampoP, et al. Using win-win strategies to implement health in all policies: a cross-case analysis. PLoS ONE2016;11: e0147003. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147003
22.
O’CampoPFreilerAMuntanerC, et al. Resisting austerity measures to social policies: multiple explanatory case studies. Health Promot Intl2019;34:1130–1140.
23.
EloSKaariainenMKansteO, et al. Qualitative content analysis: a focus on trustworthiness. SAGE, 2014, pp. 1–10. doi:10.1177/2158244014522633
24.
KokkinenLMuntanerCO’CampoP, et al. Implementation of Health 2015 public health program in Finland: a welfare state in transition. Health Promot Intl2019;34:258–268. doi:10.1093/heapro/dax081
25.
KauppinenTNelimarkkaKPerttiläK.The effectiveness of human impact assessment in Finnish health cities network. Public Health2006;120:1033–1041. doi:10.1016/j.punhe.2006.05.028
26.
McDaidDParkA-L.Evidence on financing and budgeting mechanisms to support intersectoral actions between health, education, social welfare and labour sectors. (Health Evidence Network (HEN) synthesis report 48). Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2016.
27.
PintoAMolnarAShankardassK, et al. Economic considerations and health in all policies initiatives: evidence from interviews with key informants in Sweden, Quebec and South Australia. BMC Public Health 2015;15:1–9. doi:10.1186s/s12889-015-1350-0
28.
StormIHartingJStronksK, et al. Measuring stages of health in all policies on a local level: the applicability of a maturity model. Health Policy2014;114:183–191.
29.
StevensonABanwellKPinkR.Greater Christchurch Draft Urban Development Strategy 2005. NSW Public Health Bull2007;18:9–10.
30.
KemmJ.Health impact assessment and health in all policies. In: StåhlTWismarMOlilaE, et al. (eds) Health in All Policies Prospects and Potentials. Helsinki: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, 2006, pp. 189–207.
31.
IsonE.Health impact assessment in a network of European cities. J Urban Health: Bull NY Acad Med2012;90:s105–s115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11524-011-9644-8.
32.
BaumFDelany-CroweTMacDougallC, et al. To what extent can the activities of the South Australian Health in All Policies initiative be linked to population health outcomes using a program theory-based evaluation?BMC Public Health2019;19:1–16.
33.
CorburnJCurlSArredondoG.A health-in-all-policies approach addresses many of Richmond, California’s place-based hazards, stressors. Health Affairs2014;33:1905–1913.
34.
Elster J. Local justice: how institutions allocate scarce goods and necessary burdens. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1992.
35.
Van Vliet-Brown C, Shahram S and Oelke N. Health in all policies utilization by municipal governments: scoping review. Health Promot Intl 2018;33:713–722. doi:10.1093/heapro/dax008
36.
EykHBaumFDelany-CroweT.Creating a whole-of-government approach to promoting healthy weight: what can health in all policies contribute?Int J Public Health2019;64:1159–1172.
