The emergence of the social determinants of health on the policy agenda in Britain: A case study, 1980--2003

Numerous theories have been advanced in the effort to explain how a given policy issue manages to take root in the public sphere and subsequently move forward on the public legislative agenda—or not. This study examined how the social determinants of health (SDOH) came to be part of the legislative policy agenda in Britain from 1980 to 2003. ^ The specific objectives of the research were: (1) to conduct a sociopolitical analysis grounded in alternative agenda-setting theories to identify the factors responsible for moving the social determinants health perspective onto the British policy agenda; and (2) to determine which of the theories and related dimensions best accounted for the emergence of this perspective. ^ A triangulated content and context analysis of British news articles, historical accounts, and research commentaries of the SDOH movement was conducted guided by relevant agenda-setting theories set within a social movement framework to chronicle the emergence of the SDOH as a significant policy issue in Britain. ^ The most influential social movement and agenda setting elements in the emergence of the SDOH in Britain were issue generation tactics, framing efforts, mobilizing structures, and political opportunities grounded in social movement and agenda setting theories. Policy content or the details of the policy had comparatively little impact on the successful emergence of the SDOH. Despite resistance by the government, from 1980 to 1996 interest groups created a political understanding of the SDOH utilizing a framing package encompassing notions of inequality, fairness, and justice. This frame transmitted a powerful idea connected to a core set of British values and beliefs. After 1996, a shift in political opportunities cemented the institutional arrangements needed to sustain an environment conducive to the development and implementation of SDOH policies and programs. ^ This research demonstrates that the U.S. emergence of the SDOH on the policy agenda will depend upon: (1) U.S. ideals and values regarding poverty, inequality, race, health, and health care that will determine issue framing; (2) political opportunities that will emerge—or not—to advance the SDOH policy agenda; and (3) the mobilizing structures that support or oppose the issue. ^

Community participation in health services

This study critically analyzes and synthesizes community participation (CP) theory across disciplines, defining and beginning to map out the elements of CP according to a preliminary framework of structure, process, intermediate outcomes, and ultimate outcomes. The first study component sought to determine the impact of Sight N' Soul, a CP project utilizing neighborhood health workers (NHWs), on appointment missing in an indigent urban African-American population. It found that persons entering the vision care system through contact with an NEW were about a third less likely to miss an appointment than those persons entering the system through some other avenue. While theory in this area remains too poorly developed to hypothesize causal relationships between structure, process, and outcomes, a summary of the elements of Sight N' Soul's structure and process both developed the preliminary framework and serves as a first step to mapping these relationships. The second component of the study uncovered the elements of structure and process that may contribute to a sustained egalitarian partnership between community people and professionals, a CP program called Project HEAL. Elements of Project HEAL's structure and process included a shared belief in the program; spirituality; contribution, ownership, and reciprocation; a feeling of family; making it together; honesty, trust, and openness about conflict; the inevitability of uncertainty and change; and the guiding interactional principles of respect; love, care, and compassion; and personal responsibility. The third component analyzed the existing literature, identifying and addressing gaps and inconsistencies and highlighting areas needing more highly developed ethical analysis. Focal issues include the political, economic, and historical context of CP; the power of naming; the issue of purpose; the nature of community; the power to muster and allocate resources; and the need to move to a systems view of health and well-being, expanding our understanding of the universe of potential outcomes of CP, including iatrogenic outcomes. Intermediate outcomes might include change in community, program, and individual capacity, as well as improved health care delivery. Ultimate outcomes include increased positive interdependencies and opportunities for contribution; improved mental, physical, and spiritual health; increased social justice; and decreased exploitation. ^