|
South West Public Health Observatory |
|
|
|
|
||
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:
|
|
a concept; |
|
|
a process; |
|
|
a tool; |
|
|
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
|
|
Prospective - conducted before the implementation of a proposal |
|
|
Retrospective - conducted after the implementation of a proposal |
|
|
Concurrent - conducted during the implementation of a proposal |
Distinguishing characteristics
|
|
Multidisciplinary |
|
|
Intersectoral |
|
|
Participatory |
|
|
Use of more than one method |
|
|
Use of quantitative and qualitative evidence |
|
|
Focus on health inequalities |
Underpinning values
|
|
Sustainability |
|
|
Promotion of health |
|
|
Democracy |
|
|
Equity |
|
|
Equality |
|
|
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:
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:
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)
|
|
British Columbia |
|
|
Swedish County Councils |
|
|
Merseyside |
|
|
Kirklees Metropolitan Council |
|
|
Bielefeld (Environmental HIA) |
In addition, many local agencies/partnerships are developing their own models of/tools for HIA.
Types of appraisal
|
|
Rapid |
|
|
Intermediate |
|
|
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
|
|
HIA is a relatively young methodology |
|
|
Many different models and tools in circulation/being developed |
|
|
For most models/tools, there is not a long history of use |
|
|
Relatively few evaluations have been performed on models/tools currently available |
|
|
Evaluation of process of HIA in its infancy |
|
|
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
|
|
Resource constraints |
|
|
Overcrowded agenda for public sector agencies |
|
|
For some sectors, tradition of minimal public/community participation |
|
|
Competing interests: within an organisation, between partners, between sectors, and between political parties operating within different jurisdictions |
|
|
Lack of experience and expertise in conducting HIA |
|
|
Lack of tools that have been evaluated/have a long history of use |
|
|
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:
|
|
“off-the-shelf” evidence bases structured for use in HIA, giving information
|
|
|
research to fill gaps in evidence; |
|
|
database of HIAs already undertaken, including evaluation of process and outcomes; |
|
|
specially commissioned intermediate and comprehensive HIAs; |
|
|
networks - real and virtual. |
Rapid appraisal: advantages of a stakeholder workshop
|
|
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
|
|
An effective use of time to achieve added value for a proposal |
General policy outcomes that can be gained using HIA
|
|
Health gain |
|
|
Added value/value for money |
|
|
Use of best available evidence in decision-making |
|
|
Community participation |
|
|
Accountability/transparency |
Introducing HIA into organisations/partnerships
HIA and the development of public health practice - the possibilities
|
|
Learning - as individuals, teams, organisations and partnerships |
|
|
Complementary use of scientific evidence and experience, opinions and perceptions of stakeholders |
|
|
Contribution towards Best Value in the use of resources |
|
|
Transparency and accountability in decision-making |
|
|
Polices and services that better meet the needs of the community for health and well-being |
Advantages of using HIA on proposals
|
|
Provides a structured framework for the investigation and discussion of health impacts of health and non-health proposals |
|
|
Improves the quality of the investigation/discussion: |
|
|
- possible to identify many more impacts than would be the case without it; |
|
|
- highlights the interrelated nature of causes and effects in public health; |
|
|
- clarifies the way in which a proposal needs to be modified to optimise health gain. |
Hallmark of HIA - Flexibility/Adaptability
|
|
Applicable to a policy, programme or project - strategic though to tactical use |
|
|
Applicable to a wide range of subject areas, e.g. housing, regeneration, transport, economic development, health services provision, etc. |
|
|
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 |
|
|
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.
Notes prepared by Erica Ison, Institute of Health Sciences, Oxford
e-mail c/o: