The Impact Of Health And Social Impact Assessment: An Annotated Bibliography Essay.

The effectiveness of health impact assessment in influencing decision-making

Discuss about the Health and Social Impact Assessment for WHO.
 

The impact of health assessment plays a fundamental role in shaping and improving the health and social care delivery statistics in the present day situation (Birley 2013). According to WHO, health impact assessment serves as a framework that allows a systematic and standardized procedure for estimating the impact of a proposed program or a policy action and the outcome achieved on the selected health or social issues of the determined population (Winkler et al. 2013). Hence, the importance of a health and social impact assessment is huge and it provides the opportunity to the new health and social care professionals to gain a preliminary idea regarding al the internal and external factors associated with real world practice scenario. For this annotated bibliography assignment, the research studies have been searched and accessed via the university library and the research terms that have been selected for the study includes. Other databases that have been utilized for the study includes Google scholar, PubMed, and Cochrane library. 10 research studies that are reliable, authentic and relevant to the topic area of health and social impact assessment have been included in the study.

Haigh, F., Baum, F., Dannenberg, A.L., Harris, M.F., Harris-Roxas, B., Keleher, H., Kemp, L., Morgan, R., Chok, H.N., Spickett, J. and Harris, E., 2013. The effectiveness of health impact assessment in influencing decision-making in Australia and New Zealand 2005–2009. BMC Public Health, 13(1), p.1188.

The first article chosen focuses on the fact that whether health impact assessments have a strong impact on the process of making decisions and how it facilitates change in the procedure. The research methodology for the study has chosen two-step method surveying 55 HIAs and then 11 in-depth case studies. The data collection process has encompassed questionnaires tailed by interviews, and the data had been analyzed using deductive and inductive analysis which enhances the variability and validity of the data. The results indicates that HIAs are effective in directly influencing, changing and widening the areas that have a strong influence on the decision making process (Haigh et al. 2013). This article has been successful in recognizing the changes in relationship, improved interpretation of different health determinants and optimistic working culture as the most impactful factors in health and social care sector as well. 

Harris-Roxas, B., Haigh, F., Travaglia, J. and Kemp, L., 2014. Evaluating the impact of equity focused health impact assessment on health service planning: three case studies. BMC health services research, 14(1), p.371.

Evaluating the impact of equity focused health impact assessment on health service planning

This article focuses on the impact enforced by three equity focused health impact assessments (EFHIA) carried out for health service strategies and use the data findings generated to assess and improve an existent conceptual framework that evaluates the impact the effectiveness of HIAs and EFHIAs. The authors have analyzed three EFHIAs of NSW health sectors plans, and the data had been collected from 14 semi-structured interviews along with evaluation of 7 draft plans and EFHIA reports (Harris-Roxas et al. 2014). The utilization of qualitative data collected from semi-structured interviews and related reports provides an opportunity to incorporate perceptions and attitudes of the employees in this sector which is a key addition to the available literature. The results confirmed the HIAs having a significant impact on changing the process of decision making of the plans and their implementation especially regarding the level of understanding of the participants regarding equity and its importance in health service plans. This article contributes valuable insight on the impact of EFHIAs in changing the access in health and social care industry and the recent approaches can be improved by enhancing focus on personal and organizational retorts to the EFHIA process.

Povall, S.L., Haigh, F.A., Abrahams, D. and Scott-Samuel, A., 2013. Health equity impact assessment. Health Promotion International, 29(4), pp.621-633.

Another article on the influence of health equity impact assessment by Povall et al. (2013) represents an international study clarifying whether the existing HIA procedures are suitable for the global HIAs. The methodology selected for this article had been a three phase study, a scoping review, interview and workshop and the data findings were triangulated to enhance the variability and authenticity of the data. The results indicate that equity or justice is not adequately addressed in the HIAs due to the insufficient guidance, lack of definitions, meagre data and evidence, lack of methods to attest to values like fairness and social justice. Hence, this article has been successful in identifying the key factors associated with lack of equity in global HIA plans and it can be fertile ground for further research to explore the factors hindering adequate internalization of equity in HIAs.

Negev, M., Levine, H., Davidovitch, N., Bhatia, R. and Mindell, J., 2012. Integration of health and environment through health impact assessment: Cases from three continents. Environmental research, 114, pp.60-67.

This article focuses on the implementation benefits of HIAs and how it can eliminate the discrepancies present in the health and urban planning institution that threatens or affects the profound linkage between health and environment. The article has attempted to analyze three case studies belonging to different continents and the results indicate that the HIAs are able to improve the synergy between the environment and health domains in various local contexts that can facilitate changes that are institutional and procedural promoting health, which is a very important new addition to the existing literature focusing the benefits of HIAs (Negev et al. 2012).

Health equity impact assessment

Bond, A. and Pope, J., 2012. The state of the art of impact assessment in 2012.

This editorial paper focuses on presenting the state of the art of the different impact assessment tools. The review selected six impact assessment papers so that a sound judgment regarding the relative importance of the different impact assessments can be made. The results indicate that all impact assessments are flourishing and more and more practitioners are applying the impact assessment process in decision making sectors. Although there are still concerns over the methodological approaches and it is still subjected to lack of confidence among different stakeholders. This review paper explores the success of the HIA process over the 42 years of its introduction and discovers the individual factors that have a detrimental impact on the success (Bond and Pope 2012).

Harris-Roxas, B. and Harris, E., 2011. Differing forms, differing purposes: A typology of health impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 31(4), pp.396-403.

The article explores the considerable diversity that is prevalent in the HIA practice internationally and the historical origin of the HIAs which has facilitated the diversity or the simple dichotomies among HIAs of policies and projects. The paper has attempted to explore three different fields from which the HIAs have emerged, a social view of health, environmental health, and health equity. Along with that, the practice of HIA with mandated, decision making support, advocacy and community led HIAs have been taken into in the paper as well. The argument presented by the authors suggest that these different HIAs serve various different issues allowing a varied range of different health concerns of populations and purposes to be addressed as well (Harris-Roxas and Harris 2011).

Harris-Roxas, B.F., Harris, P.J., Harris, E. and Kemp, L.A., 2011. A rapid equity focused health impact assessment of a policy implementation plan: An Australian case study and impact evaluation. International Journal for Equity in Health, 10(1), p.6.

This paper also discusses the concept of equity focused health impact assessments which is a considerable impact on the health service access all across the world and has a significant impact on the practice scenario. This paper represents a rapid EFHIA case study carried out in Australia on an implementation plan of a health promotion policy. The method of the article had been a rapid EFHIA carried out in 4 days that focused on an expert board and limited literature review (Harris-Roxas et al. 2011). The results indicated that there can be improvements in the HIA of the policy plan implementation and a few ley recommendations have been made which can exceptionally improve the practice scenario.

Integration of health and environment through health impact assessment

Morgan, R.K., 2012. Environmental impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(1), pp.5-14.

Environment is a very important aspect associated with HIA and this paper emphasizes on the aspect of environment impact assessment. The paper has attempted to explore the progress of the environment impact assessment over the 40 years with special focus on the last two decades. The research question attempts to discuss whether the EIA is ready to face the challenges of the future practice scenario and the results indicate that there are persistent issues within the framework of EIA and the poor quality of impact assessment affects the ability to counter future demands and issues (Morgan 2012)

Bond, A., Morrison-Saunders, A. and Pope, J., 2012. Sustainability assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(1), pp.53-62.

In the context of health and wellbeing, it is crucial for the health service plans and programs to be sustainable, and this paper focuses on sustainability assessment, which is a current framing of the impact assessment sector. This paper has attempted to discuss the factors within the sustainability assessment that can be considered as the state of the art. The results indicate that these processes must include sustainable imperatives, establishing a functional concept of sustainability for individual decisions and formal mechanisms managing the tradeoffs (Bond, Morrison-Saunders and Pope 2012). This article is a very important addition to the paper shedding light on the impact of impact assessment within sustainable planning in health and social care.

Hebert, K.A., Wendel, A.M., Kennedy, S.K. and Dannenberg, A.L., 2012. Health impact assessment: a comparison of 45 local, national, and international guidelines. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 34, pp.74-82.

The last paper attempts to compare the global HIA guidelines to arrive at a certain understanding regarding the similarities and differences between the different guidelines and the implementation procedure of all sectors. This narrative review discovered 45 HIA documents of different countries to be similar but not identical, and the practitioners can use the different approaches and model used all over the world to avoid common errors and improve practice. The paper also recommends the amalgamation of all relevant protocols from different countries to develop a common guideline document helping practitioners follow a universal guideline for all (Hebert et al. 2012).

Conclusion:

This had been an excellent opportunity to understand the impact of health impact assessment in modifying and improving the process of making decisions especially to address the lack of equity and sustainability in the health service planning and implementation. The idea gathered from the ten literatures cited above have provided me with a thorough analysis of the influence of the HIAs in health and social care and it will help me implement the guidelines further in my practice.

Birley, M., 2013. Health impact assessment: principles and practice. Routledge.

Bond, A. and Pope, J., 2012. The state of the art of impact assessment in 2012.

Bond, A., Morrison-Saunders, A. and Pope, J., 2012. Sustainability assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(1), pp.53-62.

Haigh, F., Baum, F., Dannenberg, A.L., Harris, M.F., Harris-Roxas, B., Keleher, H., Kemp, L., Morgan, R., Chok, H.N., Spickett, J. and Harris, E., 2013. The effectiveness of health impact assessment in influencing decision-making in Australia and New Zealand 2005–2009. BMC Public Health, 13(1), p.1188.

Harris-Roxas, B. and Harris, E., 2011. Differing forms, differing purposes: A typology of health impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 31(4), pp.396-403.

Harris-Roxas, B., Haigh, F., Travaglia, J. and Kemp, L., 2014. Evaluating the impact of equity focused health impact assessment on health service planning: three case studies. BMC health services research, 14(1), p.371.

Harris-Roxas, B.F., Harris, P.J., Harris, E. and Kemp, L.A., 2011. A rapid equity focused health impact assessment of a policy implementation plan: An Australian case study and impact evaluation. International Journal for Equity in Health, 10(1), p.6.

Hebert, K.A., Wendel, A.M., Kennedy, S.K. and Dannenberg, A.L., 2012. Health impact assessment: a comparison of 45 local, national, and international guidelines. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 34, pp.74-82.

Morgan, R.K., 2012. Environmental impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(1), pp.5-14.

Negev, M., Levine, H., Davidovitch, N., Bhatia, R. and Mindell, J., 2012. Integration of health and environment through health impact assessment: Cases from three continents. Environmental research, 114, pp.60-67.

Povall, S.L., Haigh, F.A., Abrahams, D. and Scott-Samuel, A., 2013. Health equity impact assessment. Health Promotion International, 29(4), pp.621-633.

Winkler, M.S., Krieger, G.R., Divall, M.J., Cissé, G., Wielga, M., Singer, B.H., Tanner, M. and Utzinger, J., 2013. Untapped potential of health impact assessment. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 91, pp.298-305.