South West Public Health Observatory

                                  back to HIA Conference Page     
 

Practical approaches to health impact assessment 
Erica Ison, Public Health Resource Unit, University of Oxford

Notes of a presentation to the Health Impact Assessment Conference  held at Lyngford House, Taunton 19 June 2001

What is HIA?

HIA can be viewed as, and the term used to describe:

bullet  a concept;
bullet  a process;
bullet  a tool;
bullet  a complex of methodologies.

 The development and use of HIA has been lead by the Canadians, who developed the methodology in the context of the assessment of non- health policies.

  Definition

 “a combination of procedures or methods by which a policy, program or project may be judged as to the effects it may have on the health of a population”

The Gothenburg Consensus Paper, European Centre for Health Policy, WHO Regional Office for Europe

  Types of HIA

bullet  Prospective - conducted before the implementation of a proposal
bullet  Retrospective - conducted after the implementation of a proposal
bullet  Concurrent - conducted during the implementation of a proposal

  Distinguishing characteristics

bullet  Multidisciplinary
bullet  Intersectoral
bullet  Participatory
bullet  Use of more than one method
bullet  Use of quantitative and qualitative evidence
bullet  Focus on health inequalities

  Underpinning values

bullet  Sustainability
bullet  Promotion of health
bullet  Democracy
bullet  Equity
bullet  Equality
bullet  Ethical use of evidence

  Process

Screening: The role of this step in the process is to select those proposals that should be subjected to HIA. It is best if this step is performed with the support of a screening tool. During screening, proposals are filtered out if:

 they have a negligible impact on health;
 the impacts on health are well known and documented, as are the mechanisms to enhance the positive impacts and minimise the negative impacts.

This step enables resources to be targeted on those proposals the potential impacts of which require further  investigation, and/or on those proposals that may need modification because of the impacts they have on health.

Scoping

alternative terms: Setting the Terms of Reference

The role of this step in the process is to establish the foundations for the next three steps, by establishing the boundaries for the appraisal of the health impacts, by identifying the stakeholders, by determining the type of appraisal and the way in which it will be managed, by defining the line of accountability/reporting with the decision-makers, and by outlining the parameters and processes for monitoring and evaluation. At this stage, it is important to initiate work on a baseline profile of the community/population affected by the proposal including any relevant local circumstances, and an evidence base of the potential impacts of the proposal.

Appraisal

alternative terms: risk assessment; data collection, collation and analysis

This step is pivotal to the whole process. At this stage, it is important to do a proposal analysis, complete the profile of the affected population, identify the potential health impacts and characterise them ideally in conjunction with stakeholders and key informants and using the evidence base, and identify the ways in which the proposal can be modified to optimise health gain also with the support of the evidence base. A report and recommendations is prepared for decision-makers.

Decision-making

Decision-making must be seen as integral to the HIA process, and it is advisable for decision-makers to be involved in the whole process. If this is not possible, then it is important that they are committed to the principles of HIA, and are prepared to consider the results of appraisal and the recommendations arising from it.

Monitoring and evaluation

This involves the following:

 monitoring whether recommendations that were accepted are actually implemented;
 monitoring trends in health determinants and health outcomes;
 evaluation of the process of HIA;
 evaluation of health trends and outcomes.

  Approaches to HIA

There are two basic approaches to HIA - broad and tight perspective (see Table below) 

 

Broad perspective

Tight perspective

View of health

 Holistic

 Emphasis on defined and observable aspects

Disciplinary roots

 Sociology

 Epidemiology; toxicology

Ethos

 Democratic

 Technocratic

Quantification

 In general terms

 Towards measurement

Types of evidence

 Key informants; popular concern

 Measurement

Precision

 Low

 High

From: Developing Health Impact Assessment in Wales

  Models of HIA (examples)

bullet  British Columbia
bullet  Swedish County Councils
bullet  Merseyside
bullet  Kirklees Metropolitan Council
bullet  Bielefeld (Environmental HIA)

In addition, many local agencies/partnerships are developing their own models of/tools for HIA.

  Types of appraisal

bullet

 Rapid

bullet

 Intermediate

bullet

 Comprehensive

  Policy drivers for the introduction of HIA

1. Saving Lives: Our Healthier Nation (D o H, 1999)

 “Local decision-makers must think about the effect which their policies may have on health, and in particular how they can reduce health inequality. In most cases this will require a change in the way that health authorities, local authorities and other local agencies see their role. They will in future need to act much more as health champions at a local level and ensure health is on the agenda of all local organisations and agencies outside the health field. An important part of their role will be to encourage all local agencies to make local health impact assessments when planning investment in, for example, amenities, buildings or local communities and in the location of services.” (Paragraph 4.47)

2. National Service Framework for Coronary Heart Disease (NSF for CHD)

3. Research and Development Strategy for Public Health

  Context in the UK

bullet  HIA is a relatively young methodology
bullet  Many different models and tools in circulation/being developed
bullet  For most models/tools, there is not a long history of use
bullet  Relatively few evaluations have been performed on models/tools currently available
bullet  Evaluation of process of HIA in its infancy
bullet  There have been relatively few evaluations of health outcomes following the implementation of HIA-modified proposals

  Restraints to the introduction of HIA at a local level

bullet  Resource constraints
bullet  Overcrowded agenda for public sector agencies
bullet  For some sectors, tradition of minimal public/community participation
bullet  Competing interests: within an organisation, between partners, between sectors, and between political parties operating within different jurisdictions
bullet  Lack of experience and expertise in conducting HIA
bullet  Lack of tools that have been evaluated/have a long history of use
bullet  Lack of/poor-quality evidence of impacts on health in some subject areas

  Implementation of HIA at a local level

Majority of HIAs will be based around rapid appraisal, supported by:

bullet

  “off-the-shelf” evidence bases structured for use in HIA, giving information
on impacts on health and which interventions work;

bullet

  research to fill gaps in evidence;

bullet

database of HIAs already undertaken, including evaluation of process and outcomes;

bullet

specially commissioned intermediate and comprehensive HIAs;

bullet

networks - real and virtual.

 

Rapid appraisal: advantages of a stakeholder workshop

bullet  The added value of being together:
 - learning as individuals and teams in partnerships and organisations
 - developing a greater understanding of other viewpoints, perspectives, professions, the community, etc.  
 - contributing, and building on the contributions of others
 - reaching a consensus about priorities in terms of health impacts and how to modify proposals
bullet  An effective use of time to achieve added value for a proposal

 

General policy outcomes that can be gained using HIA

bullet  Health gain
bullet  Added value/value for money
bullet  Use of best available evidence in decision-making
bullet  Community participation
bullet  Accountability/transparency

 

Introducing HIA into organisations/partnerships

 Gain commitment to the principles of HIA at a strategic policy level
 Integrate HIA into organisation’s/partnership’s usual planning and development cycle
 Identify suitable policy and/or strategic frameworks suitable for the initial introduction and piloting of HIA in organisation/partnership
 Develop or select a screening tool for HIA
 Build the capacity to undertake HIA

 

HIA and the development of public health practice - the possibilities

bullet

Learning - as individuals, teams, organisations and partnerships

bullet

Complementary use of scientific evidence and experience, opinions and perceptions of stakeholders

bullet

Contribution towards Best Value in the use of resources

bullet

Transparency and accountability in decision-making

bullet

Polices and services that better meet the needs of the community for health and well-being

 

Advantages of using HIA on proposals

bullet

 Provides a structured framework for the investigation and discussion of health impacts of health and non-health proposals

bullet

 Improves the quality of the investigation/discussion:

bullet

 - possible to identify many more impacts than would be the case without it;

bullet

 - highlights the interrelated nature of causes and effects in public health;

bullet

 - clarifies the way in which a proposal needs to be modified to optimise health gain.

  Hallmark of HIA - Flexibility/Adaptability

bullet

 Applicable to a policy, programme or project - strategic though to tactical use

bullet

 Applicable to a wide range of subject areas, e.g. housing, regeneration, transport, economic development, health services provision, etc.

bullet

 Encompasses a range of types of appraisal, models, tools and techniques (e.g. for data collection and community participation) which means it can be adapted to fit a range of different situations and circumstances

bullet

 Involvement of a diversity of stakeholders

  Development of a rapid appraisal tool for HIA in Four Counties

DsPH of the Four Counties (Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Northamptonshire, and Oxfordshire) commissioned the Public Health Resource Unit to develop a rapid appraisal tool, a project that is also receiving support from the Faculty of Public Health Medicine. The tool will be launched on 8 November 2001. It has been developed in conjunction with users through a series of rapid appraisal workshops, based on the WHO model. It is hoped that a training package can be developed, but funding has yet to be secured.

 

Policy and strategy frameworks in which HIA can be applied at a local level (examples - see Table below)

 

Partnerships

Local government

Health services

 HAZs, Education Action Zones, Employment Action Zones

 Best Value

 OHN priority areas

 Health Improvement Programmes (HImPs)

 Unitary Development Plan

 NSFs

 Local Agenda 21 (LA21)

 Local Plan

 Access to services

 Single Regeneration Budget (SRB)

 Sustainability appraisal

 Provision of services

 New Deal for Communities (NDC)

 Environmental impact assessment (EIA)

 Location of services

 Neighbourhood Renewal Schemes

   

 Reconfiguration of services

 Sure Start initiatives

 Social impact assessment (SIA)

 New build

 Drug Reference Group-Drug Action Teams

 Local Transport Plan

 Development of PCTs and Care Trusts

 Joint Investment Plans

 Housing Investment Plan (HIP)

 Health promotion

 Community Safety Plans

 Anti-poverty strategy

 

 Healthy Living Centre (HLC) initiatives

 

 

 Health For All (HFA) initiatives

 

 

 Healthy Cities initiatives

 

 

References to Key Documents/Websites for HIA

Department of Health (1999) Health Impact Assessment.
Report of a Methodological Seminar.
    A vailable at http://www.doh.gov.uk/research/healthimpact.htm
 
Health Promotion Division (1999) Developing health impact assessment in Wales.
National
Assembly for Wales.
    Available at
 
Ison, E. (2000) Resource for Health Impact Assessment. NHS Executive London.
Available at
www.londonshealth.gov.uk
 
Lock, K (2000) Health Impact Assessment. Br Med J 320; 1395-8.
    U niversity of Liverpool website:
    http://www.liv.ac.uk/~mhb/index.htm
 
Various publications from IMPACT, including Merseyside Guidelines for health impact assessment
 
  
www.liv.ac.uk/~mhb/publicat/merseygui/index.html
 
European Centre for Health Policy website:
www.who.dk/hs/ECHP/index.htm

Follow links to HIA - includes Gothenburg Consensus Paper
 
Scottish Needs Assessment Programme (SNAP)
   www.gla.ac.uk/Inter/OPHIS/Index.htm
       Click on SNAP: contains 3 reports, 1 piloting HIA in Scotland, 2 on particular HIAs
 
Federation of Swedish County Councils website
   www.lf.se/hkb/engelskversion/enghkb.htm

Notes prepared by Erica Ison, Institute of Health Sciences, Oxford

e-mail c/o: