An evaluation of equity and equality in physical activity policies in four European countries

International Journal for Equity in Health

Research

Petru Sandu¹  Ahmed M. Syed²  Riitta-Maija Hämäläinen³  Mette W. Jakobsen⁴ 

[1] Department of Public Health, Babes-Bolyai University, Pandurilor 7, Cluj-Napoca, Romania;National Health Service, 80 London Road, SE1 6LH, London, UK;National Institute for Health and Welfare, Mannerheimintie 166, 00271, Helsinki, Finland;Unit for Health Promotion Research, Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Niels Bohrs Vej 9, 6700, Esbjerg, Denmark;

关键词: Physical activity;    Health equality;    Health equity;    Policy;    Policy making;    REPOPA;    Europe;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12939-016-0481-y

 received in 2016-07-18, accepted in 2016-11-15,  发布年份 2016

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundThere is strong research evidence on the importance of health equity and equality for wellbeing in societies. As chronic non-communicable diseases are widespread, the positive impact of physical activity (PA) on health has gained importance. However, PA at the population level is far from optimal. PA depends not only on individual factors, but also on policies for PA in sport, health, transport, education and other sectors, on social and cultural factors, and on the environment. Addressing health inequalities and inequities in PA promotion policies could benefit from policy development processes based on partnership and collaboration between various sectors, researchers, practitioners and policy makers (= cross-sectoral, evidence-informed policy making). The objective of this article is to describe how equity and equality was addressed in PA policies in four EU member states (Denmark, Finland, Romania and England), who were partners in the REPOPA project (www.repopa.eu, EC/FP7/Health Research/GA 281532).MethodsContent analysis of 14 PA policies and 61 interviews were undertaken between 2012 and 2013 with stakeholders involved in developing PA policies in partner countries.ResultsEven though specific population subgroups were mentioned in the policy documents analysed, they were not necessarily defined as vulnerable populations nor was there a mention of additional emphasis to support such groups from being marginalised by the policy due to inequity or inequality. There were no clear objectives and activities in the analysed policies suggesting commitment of additional resources in favour of such groups. Addressing equity and equality were often not included in the core aims of the policies analysed; these aspects were mentioned in the background of the policy documents analysed, without being explicitly stated in the aims or activities of the policies. In order to tackle health inequities and inequalities and their consequences on the health status of different population subgroups, a more instrumental approach to health equality and equity in PA promotion policies is needed. Policies should include aims to address health inequalities and inequities as fundamental objectives and also consider opportunities to allocate resources to reduce them for identified groups in this regard: the socially excluded, the remote, and the poor.ConclusionsThe inclusion of aspects related to health inequalities and inequities in PA policies needs monitoring, evaluation and transparent accountability if we are to see the best gains in health of socially disadvantaged group. To tackle health inequities and inequalities governance structures need to take into consideration proportionate universalism. Thus, to achieve change in the social determinants of health, policy makers should pay attention to PA and proportionally invest for universal access to PA services. PA promotion advocates should develop a deeper awareness of political and policy structures and require more equity and equality in PA policies from those who they seek to influence, within specific settings for policy making and developing the policy agenda.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2016