Understanding the unintended consequences of public health policies: the views of policymakers and evaluators
| Autor: | Theodore Eliot Lorenc, Jane Tinkler, Chris Bonell, Kathryn Oliver |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
Public policy Public Policy 030209 endocrinology & metabolism 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Harm Reduction Stakeholder Participation Humans Medicine 030212 general & internal medicine Social policy Government business.industry Unintended consequences lcsh:Public aspects of medicine Public health Social change Administrative Personnel Public Health Environmental and Occupational Health Stakeholder lcsh:RA1-1270 Public relations Research Personnel United Kingdom Public Health business International development Research Article |
| Zdroj: | BMC Public Health, Vol 19, Iss 1, Pp 1-9 (2019) BMC Public Health |
| ISSN: | 1471-2458 |
| Popis: | Background Public health policies sometimes have unexpected effects. Understanding how policies and interventions lead to outcomes is essential if policymakers and researchers are to intervene effectively and reduce harmful and other unintended consequences (UCs) of their actions. Yet, evaluating complex mechanisms and outcomes is challenging, even before considering how to predict assess and understand outcomes and UCs when interventions are scaled up. We aimed to explore with UK policymakers why some policies have UCs, and how researchers and policymakers should respond. Methods We convened a one-day workshop with 14 people involved in developing, implementing or evaluating social and public health policies, and/or evaluating possible unintended effects. This included senior evaluators, policymakers from government and associated agencies, and researchers, covering policy domains from public health, social policy, poverty, and international development. Results Policymakers suggested UCs happen for a range of reasons: poor policy design, unclear articulation of policy mechanisms or goals, or unclear or inappropriate evidence use, including evaluation techniques. While not always avoidable, it was felt that UCs could be partially mitigated by better use of theory and evidence, better involvement of stakeholders in concurrent design and evaluation of policies, and appropriate evaluation systems. Conclusions UCs can be used to explore the mechanisms underpinning social change caused by public health policies. Articulating these mechanisms is essential for truly evidence-informed decision-making, to enable informed debate about policy options, and to develop evaluation techniques. Future work includes trying to develop a holistic stakeholder-led evaluation process. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink