Use of health impact assessment in the U.S.: 27 case studies, 1999-2007

OBJECTIVES: To document the growing use in the United States of health impact assessment (HIA) methods to help planners and others consider the health consequences of their decisions. METHODS: Using multiple search strategies, 27 HIAs were identified that were completed in the U.S. during 1999-2007. Key characteristics of each HIA were abstracted from published and unpublished sources. RESULTS: Topics examined in these HIAs ranged from policies about living wages and after-school programs to projects about power plants and public transit. Most HIAs were funded by local health departments, foundations, or federal agencies. Concerns about health disparities were especially important in HIAs on housing, urban redevelopment, home energy subsidies, and wage policy. The use of quantitative and nonquantitative methods varied among HIAs. Most HIAs presented recommendations for policy or project changes to improve health. Impacts of the HIAs were infrequently documented. CONCLUSIONS: These completed HIAs are useful for helping conduct future HIAs and for training public health officials and others about HIAs. More work is needed to document the impact of HIAs and thereby increase their value in decision-making processes.     

Characteristics of health impact assessments reported in Australia and New Zealand 2005–2009

Objective : To describe the use and reporting of Health Impact Assessment (HIA) in Australia and New Zealand between 2005 and 2009. Methods : We identified 115 HIAs undertaken in Australia and New Zealand between 2005 and 2009. We reviewed 55 HIAs meeting the study's inclusion criteria to identify characteristics and appraise the quality of the reports. Results : Of the 55 HIAs, 31 were undertaken in Australia and 24 in New Zealand. The HIAs were undertaken on plans (31), projects (12), programs (6) and policies (6). Compared to Australia, a higher proportion of New Zealand HIAs were on policies and plans and were rapid assessments done voluntarily to support decision‐making. In both countries, most HIAs were on land use planning proposals. Overall, 65% of HIA reports were judged to be adequate. Conclusion : This study is the first attempt to empirically investigate the nature of the broad range of HIAs done in Australia and New Zealand and has highlighted the emergence of HIA as a growing area of public health practice. It identifies areas where current practice could be improved and provides a baseline against which future HIA developments can be assessed. Implications: There is evidence that HIA is becoming a part of public health practice in Australia and New Zealand across a wide range of policies, plans and projects. The assessment of quality of reports allows the development of practical suggestions on ways current practice may be improved. The growth of HIA will depend on ongoing organisation and workforce development in both countries.     

Derby district redevelopment in Colorado: case study on the health impact assessment process

Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a tool that is increasingly utilized in the U.S. to shape policies that may impact the public's health. Domestic examples of HIAs and the process by which they were conducted, however, are rarely documented in the peer-reviewed literature. Through an existing relationship with the planning department in Commerce City, Colorado, Tri-County Health Department (TCHD) was able to identify a proposed redevelopment plan as a candidate for an HIA. The HIA focused on potential effects of the proposed redevelopment of Commerce City's historic Derby District on residents' physical activity and nutrition-related behaviors. This article describes the HIA process used by TCHD. Several sources of data were used, including participatory community input on walkability and safety, local health behavior data, and maps of health-influencing environmental characteristics. Using a variety of information sources including community input and local health behavior data can be useful in conducting HIAs and impacting policies. Local health departments should consider cultivating ongoing collaborative partnerships with municipal planning departments and community groups to conduct HIAs and to implement recommendations.     

Concepts and theory of health impact assessment

Health effects are often overlooked in the planning of policies, programmes or projects, which has led to international and national pressure for evaluation of potential influence. For this reason, Health Impact Assessment (HIA) has been emphasized by many national governments and international organizations such as the European Union and WHO. HIA is a helpful decision-making tool with methodology that was defined as "a combination of procedures, methods, and tools by which a policy, a program or a project may be judged as to its potential effects on health of a population and the distribution of effects within the population" in the WHO Gothenburg paper. In recent decades, many HIAs have been implemented for proposals including building new airports, dams, employment strategy, and housing policy. However, there is very little information on HIA in Japan, even among public health professionals and policy makers. In this review, we introduce basic concepts and theory, and discuss how to improve HIA activities in Japan.     

Evaluating health impact assessment

Health impact assessment (HIA) is a developing approach that assesses the health impacts of a proposal on a population, and produces a practical set of recommendations to inform the decision-making process of the proposal. The purpose is to influence decision makers to increase positive health impacts of a proposal and decrease negative impacts. Most work within the HIA field to date has focused on methodological development and actually carrying out HIAs. Little attention has been paid to the formal evaluation of the HIA approach and whether or not HIA works (if and how the HIA approach informs the decision-making process and, in particular, if it contributes to improving health and reducing inequalities). With the drive towards evidence-informed policy, HIA also needs to show whether it adds value to the decision-making process, given the significant resources often involved in carrying out an HIA. A suggested approach to evaluating HIAs is presented, as well as its relationship with monitoring, drawing on the significant public health evaluation literature that already exists. Methodologies appropriate for use, and examples of indicators suitable for HIA evaluation, are provided. We suggest that typical HIA evaluations should focus on the process of the HIA and the impact that it has on the decision-making process, rather than attempting to evaluate long-term health outcomes or whether predicted impacts actually occurred.     

Health impact assessment in relation to other forms of impact assessment

Health impact assessment (HIA) has many advocates for its use to identify and optimize the health effects of non-healthcare interventions. It is an assessment of the health effects, positive and negative, of a project, programme, or policy. Expertise developed in the United Kingdom from a realization that health impacts are often overlooked during the planning stages of development projects but prior planning can avoid detrimental effects. Considering health impacts is now recommended in all continents; the focus has moved from less to more developed countries and upstream from projects to policies. Health impact assessment shares certain concepts and methods with risk assessment, environmental impact assessment, strategic environmental assessment, social impact assessment, and economic assessments. This paper describes the development of health impact assessment and its relation to these other forms of impact assessment.     

Avenues of Influence: the Relationship between Health Impact Assessment and Determinants of Health and Health Equity

This study aims to identify perceived impacts of Health Impact Assessment (HIA) on decision-making, determinants of health, and determinants of health equity and outline the mechanisms through which these impacts can occur. The research team conducted a mixed-methods study of HIAs in the USA. First, investigators collected data regarding perceived HIA impacts through an online questionnaire, which was completed by 149 stakeholders representing 126 unique HIAs. To explore in greater depth the themes that arose from the online survey, investigators conducted semi-structured interviews with 46 stakeholders involved with 27 HIAs related to the built environment. This preliminary study suggests that HIAs can strengthen relationships and build trust between community and government institutions. In addition, this study suggests that HIA recommendations can inform policy and decision-making systems that determine the distribution of health-promoting resources and health risks. HIA outcomes may in turn lead to more equitable access to health resources and reduce exposure to environmental harms among at-risk populations. Future research should further explore associations between HIAs and changes in determinants of health and health equity by corroborating findings with other data sources and documenting potential impacts and outcomes of HIAs in other sectors.     

Developing principles for health impact assessment.

BACKGROUND: Policies and practice in many sectors affect health. Health impact assessment (HIA) is a way to predict these health impacts, in order to recommend improvements in policies to improve health. There has been debate about appropriate methods for this work. The Scottish Executive funded the Scottish Needs Assessment Programme to conduct two pilot HIAs and from these to develop guidance on HIA. METHODS: Case study 1 compared three possible future scenarios for developing transport in Edinburgh, based on funding levels. It used a literature review, analysis of local data and the knowledge and opinions of key informants. Impacts borne by different population groups.were compared using grids. Case study 2 assessed the health impacts of housing investment in a disadvantaged part of Edinburgh, using published literature, focus groups with community groups and interviews with professionals. RESULTS: Disadvantaged communities bore more detrimental effects from the low transport investment scenario, in the areas of: accidents; pollution; access to amenities, jobs and social contacts; physical activity; and impacts on community networks. The housing investment had greatest impact on residents' mental health, by reducing overcrowding, noise pollution, stigma and fear of crime. CONCLUSION: Although there is no single 'blueprint' for HIA that will be appropriate for all circumstances, key principles to inform future HIA were defined. HIA should be systematic; involve decision-makers and affected communities; take into account local factors; use evidence and methods appropriate to the impacts identified and the importance and scope of the policy; and make practical recommendations.     

Migration and health impact assessment

Government policies, programmes and projects can have a significant impact on health. Health impact assessments (HIAs) seek to estimate this impact, but they often do so by measuring intermediate or proxy indicators and factors that act to determine health. These measures frequently assume a static population. However, regeneration policies can work hard for several years to no apparent effect. One explanation could be migration. Families who have benefited move from the area and other, perhaps more deprived, families move in. Conversely, healthy, prosperous families may move into an improved area, giving the impression that the health of the population has changed, when in fact it is the actual population that has changed. Census data in England and Wales show that a positive correlation exists between migration within wards and deprivation scores. This paper explores the possible implications of migration for HIA. The census, NHS central register, electoral register, labour force survey, central index of the Department of Social Security, council tax database and other data sources are examined to identify what migration data are available at a local level. Factors that determine rates of migration at a local level have been reviewed, with special reference to the differences between population subgroups. The paper concludes with recommendations to take account of residential mobility and changes in migration patterns when carrying out HIAs.     

An overview of the regulatory planning system in New South Wales: identifying points of intervention for health impact assessment and consideration of health impacts

The experience of health impact assessment (HIA) in NSW has shown that it is possible to incorporate considerations of health impacts into decision-making concerning urban planning. In NSW, the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is the regulatory framework governing urban planning. This legislative system provides opportunities for HIA and the consideration of health impacts as part of developing plans, policies and development proposals within NSW.     

Assessing the unintended health impacts of road transport policies and interventions: translating research evidence for use in policy and practice

Background  

Transport and its links to health and health inequalities suggest that it is important to assess both the direct and unintended indirect health and related impacts of transport initiatives and policies. Health Impact Assessment (HIA) provides a framework to assess the possible health impacts of interventions such as transport. Policymakers and practitioners need access to well conducted research syntheses if research evidence is to be used to inform these assessments. The predictive validity of HIA depends heavily on the use and careful interpretation of supporting empirical evidence. Reviewing and digesting the vast volume and diversity of evidence in a field such as transport is likely to be beyond the scope of most HIAs. Collaborations between HIA practitioners and specialist reviewers to develop syntheses of best available evidence applied specifically to HIA could promote the use of evidence in practice.     

Health impact assessment of housing improvements: incorporating research evidence

BACKGROUND: Health impact assessment (HIA) has been widely recommended for future social policies and investment, such as housing improvement. However, concerns have been raised about the utility and predictive value of an HIA. Use of existing research data would add more weight to forecasts by an HIA. METHODS, RESULTS, and CONCLUSIONS: A recent systematic review of housing intervention studies found a lack of research. The authors recommended that a broader evidence base would be needed to support HIA. In response to consultation with policymakers and HIA practitioners this paper presents a way in which research can be used to inform HIA. Based on the systematic review, the authors have developed a table of synthesised findings indicating the expected health effects of specific housing improvements. The authors also reviewed observational data of housing associated health risks to highlight the key impacts to consider when doing a housing HIA. The findings are presented and the authors discuss how they should be used to inform evidence based housing HIA. In addition to considering the existing research, HIA must consider the local relevance of research. Consultation with local stakeholders also needs to be incorporated to the final assessment. The lack of data and the difficulties in gathering and reviewing data mean that not all HIAs will be able to be informed by research evidence. Well conducted prospective validation of HIAs would contribute to the development of healthy housing investment by informing future housing HIA.     

Rapid versus intermediate health impact assessment of foreshore development plans

OBJECTIVE: To describe the main differences between conducting a rapid health impact assessment (HIA) and an intermediate HIA on foreshore development plans and their feasibility from a health service perspective. METHODS: A rapid HIA and an intermediate HIA were undertaken on two foreshore development plans. RESULTS: The main differences between the two HIAs were in the identification, assessment and decision-making stages of the HIA. CONCLUSION: While the rapid HIA was less resource intensive than the intermediate HIA, there are several factors that affect the feasibility of conducting this type of HIA within a short time period.     

Health impact assessment: an introduction to the what,why and how

It is now widely recognised that policies, programs and projects within the health and other public and private sectors can have significant and often unintended negative impacts on health and well‐being . Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is one way of assessing and addressing these impacts prior to implementation. In many countries, including Australia, HIA has traditionally been undertaken as part of environmental impact assessment and translating the HIA process to this broader focus has raised some important issues, particularly whether the ‘value add’ of HIA outweighs the time and resources required. This paper aims to provide an introduction to HIA, a rationale of why you might use HIA in the project, program or policy development cycle, the steps that are generally followed in undertaking a HIA, and identification of some useful websites. We would encourage you to contribute to the knowledge in this field by ‘learning by doing’.     

Health impact assessment.

There is growing concern about the environmental, social and health consequences of development projects. Environmental impact assessment (EIA), which aims to address this concern, is often conducted with little input from the health sector. Quantifying the health benefits and risks of a project or policy requires an innovative synthesis of socio-demographic, environmental health, epidemiological and health systems data. This article provides a simple framework for health impact assessment (HIA), a method for describing and measuring the impact of a project or policy on health and wellbeing, and designing appropriate interventions. The key components of HIA are: review of available data; research and identification of priority health issues through the use of rapid assessment methods; design of a health action plan with stakeholder consultation; implementation of interventions and the monitoring of long-term health impacts. HIA can assist in ensuring that development and policies are 'health promoting' and that the health sector plays a meaningful role in EIA.     

Qualitative and quantitative approaches to health impact assessment: An analysis of the political and philosophical milieu of the multi-method approach

Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a relatively new, but increasingly important, contributor to both local and national decision-making processes. Adopting a multi-method approach, it incorporates qualitative and quantitative analyses to determine the various health impacts of policies and projects. HIA thus reflects recent developments in sociological theory, which have promoted qualitative techniques and challenged the dominance of quantitative methods. HIA embodies a particular renegotiation of the qualitative/quantitative opposition; each individual HIA represents an empirical instance of this renegotiation. As such, HIA can be conceptualized as a kind of ‘political space’, in which the opposition in question is structured by various social forces and plays out in concrete ways. Moreover, and notwithstanding the supposed methodological rapprochement, an analysis of a number of HIAs claims to expose a continuing, but perhaps unsurprising, privilege in favour of quantitative methods. In the first place, the paper contends that closer examination reveals this privileging to be unjustified, both empirically and theoretically, and alternative methodological and epistemological configurations are suggested accordingly. Specific gestures are made in this respect toward the work of Martin Heidegger and Jacques Derrida. In particular, the paper argues for a broad hermeneutic approach that both encompasses and situates the methodological tensions HIA stages. Second, attention is drawn to the fact that various and particular sociopolitical conditions maintain the characteristic architecture of the opposition. The political importance of HIA across a series of key issues is underscored in support of a more radical interpretation. For once situated within its wider cultural context, HIA ceases to resemble some straightforwardly neutral technology for health protection and delivery. If, instead, one reads it as an indicative micropolitical phenomenon, then one can begin to interrogate this simple policy tool in more complex ways. HIA both reveals, and is implicated in, a more fundamental and diffuse process that is presently resisting, undermining and regenerating traditional power distributions within the administration of health and beyond. The paper implicitly argues that HIA can only be properly understood within this context and, equally, allows one a certain analytical access to this context.     

Housing,health and master planning: rules of engagement

Objectives

Knowledge about health focussed policy collaboration to date has been either tactical or technical. This article focusses on both technical and tactical issues to describe the experience of cross-sectoral collaboration between health and housing stakeholders across the life of a housing master plan, including but not limited to a health impact assessment (HIA).

Study design

A single explanatory case study of collaboration on a master plan to regenerate a deprived housing estate in Western Sydney was developed to explain why and how the collaboration worked or did not work.

Methods

Data collection included stakeholder interviews, document review, and reflections by the health team. Following a realist approach, data was analysed against established public policy theory dimensions.

Results

Tactically we did not know what we were doing. Despite our technical knowledge and skills with health focussed processes, particularly HIA, we failed to appreciate complexities inherent in master planning. This limited our ability to provide information at the right points. Eventually however the HIA did provide substantive connections between the master plan and health. We use our analysis to develop technical and tactical rules of engagement for future cross-sectoral collaboration.

Conclusions

This case study from the field provides insight for future health focussed policy collaboration. We demonstrate the technical and tactical requirements for future intersectoral policy and planning collaborations, including HIAs, with the housing sector on master planning. The experience also suggested how HIAs can be conducted flexibly alongside policy development rather than at a specific point after a policy is drafted.     

Health impact assessment: the state of the art

Health impact assessment (HIA) is being increasingly used due to governments' growing interest in putting health high on their agendas. HIA provides a structured framework to estimate the potential consequences of non-health sector policies in community health. The ultimate goal of this framework is to maximize health gains and, as far as possible, to reduce health inequalities. HIA is believed to have significant potential to address health determinants and to promote intersectorial action in health. Challenges for the future include the need to strengthen its methodological bases, particularly those concerning the process of impact prediction, and the need to promote its progressive incorporation into decision-making processes, either independently or integrated within other impact assessment tools. The strategic affinity of HIA with the European strategy strengthens current opportunities for the implementation of this tool in Spain, especially in the context of the ongoing debate on the future of public health and the need to give public health higher priority in political-institutional agendas. To move forwards, we should promote debate on HIA, as well as research and the practice of this tool in Spain, where only some pioneer experiences exist. The public health sector should lead the development of HIA pilot studies in order to assess its current contribution to the formulation of healthy public policies. In addition, HIA should be promoted among policy makers and other stakeholders in order to facilitate its adoption and integration into strategic planning and relevant agencies and decision-making structures. The ultimate goal is to find new formats for intersectorial collaboration and new tools for putting the principles of into practice, thus successfully achieving health and public health goals.     

The challenges of evaluating a health impact assessment

Despite Health Impact Assessment (HIA), and its subsequent evaluation, forming a vital part of the planning process, there is a need to address issues of effectiveness. This was an evaluation of an HIA exploring the regenerative impacts of a major health service development in an urban area of the UK. Evaluation was carried out by using published criteria, a process of reflection by the assessors and an email questionnaire to members of the steering group to elicit their views of the HIA. The HIA made a useful contribution to raising awareness amongst the decision-makers of the positive and negative impacts of the proposals and wide-ranging health determinants that could influence these impacts. Whilst the decision-makers said that HIA was helpful, there was some uncertainty over how much influence it had. There is some way to go towards the effective evaluation of HIAs to an extent that they are helpful. The challenges and outcomes of evaluation are described.