IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v333y2023ics0277953623005063.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Priority setting for non-communicable disease prevention – Co-producing a regulatory agenda informing novel codes of practice in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Heenan, Maddie
  • Jan, Stephen
  • Ralph, Martyn
  • Sacks, Gary
  • Swinburn, Boyd
  • Shanthosh, Janani

Abstract

There are a range of priority setting methods for non-communicable disease (NCDs) prevention. However, existing methods are often designed without detailed consideration of local context and political economy– critical success factors for implementation. In Australia, codes of practice under state government Public Health Acts could be used for NCD prevention. To inform the potential development of codes of practice under Public Health Acts, this study aimed to co-create a priority setting framework that accounts for local context and the prevailing regulatory agenda. A priority setting framework was co-produced by a multidisciplinary technical advisory group consisting of government representatives, public health lawyers and academic experts. It incorporated general prioritisation criteria (evidence, cost-effectiveness, equity, burden of disease) and local contextual criteria (legal compatibility, unmet-needs, political acceptability, structural and technical feasibility, community support). The framework was then applied in practice through surveys and policy dialogue workshops to discuss political economy factors. Policies were limited to nutrition, alcohol and physical activity risk factors. Through the prioritisation process, the most impactful, feasible and acceptable policies for NCD prevention via state government codes of practice were: restrictions on in-store placement of unhealthy products, enhancing data systems and capabilities for health surveillance and implementation monitoring, removal of unhealthy foods and drinks sold and supplied in public institutions, prohibition of marketing of unhealthy foods and drinks on assets controlled by government, and implementation of subsidies or grants to increase fruit and vegetable intake. The process illustrated that explicit consideration of local context, legal compatibility and the political economy had a substantial influence on the prioritised list of actions. The proposed priority setting framework is designed to be flexible and adaptable to varying contexts, can be embedded in government processes or utilised by researchers and practitioners to co-produce a regulatory agenda that is locally relevant.

Suggested Citation

  • Heenan, Maddie & Jan, Stephen & Ralph, Martyn & Sacks, Gary & Swinburn, Boyd & Shanthosh, Janani, 2023. "Priority setting for non-communicable disease prevention – Co-producing a regulatory agenda informing novel codes of practice in Australia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 333(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:333:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623005063
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953623005063
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116149?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Angell, Blake & Pares, Jennie & Mooney, Gavin, 2016. "Implementing priority setting frameworks: Insights from leading researchers," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(12), pages 1389-1394.
    2. Phulkerd, Sirinya & Sacks, Gary & Vandevijvere, Stefanie & Worsley, Anthony & Lawrence, Mark, 2017. "Barriers and potential facilitators to the implementation of government policies on front-of-pack food labeling and restriction of unhealthy food advertising in Thailand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 101-110.
    3. Neale Smith & Craig Mitton & Stuart Peacock, 2009. "Qualitative methodologies in health‐care priority setting research," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(10), pages 1163-1175, October.
    4. Mitton, Craig R. & Donaldson, Cam, 2003. "Setting priorities and allocating resources in health regions: lessons from a project evaluating program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA)," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 335-348, June.
    5. Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne & Cam Donaldson, 2014. "Managing Healthcare Budgets in Times of Austerity: The Role of Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 95-102, April.
    6. Jaithri Ananthapavan & Gary Sacks & Vicki Brown & Marj Moodie & Phuong Nguyen & Lennert Veerman & Ana Maria Mantilla Herrera & Anita Lal & Anna Peeters & Rob Carter, 2020. "Priority-setting for obesity prevention—The Assessing Cost-Effectiveness of obesity prevention policies in Australia (ACE-Obesity Policy) study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-19, June.
    7. Baker, P. & Hawkes, C. & Wingrove, K. & Demaio, A. & Parkhurst, Justin & Thow, A.M. & Walls, H., 2018. "What drives political commitment for nutrition? A review and framework synthesis to inform the United Nations Decade of Action on Nutrition," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86630, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Angell, Blake & Pares, Jennie & Mooney, Gavin, 2016. "Implementing priority setting frameworks: Insights from leading researchers," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(12), pages 1389-1394.
    2. Hipgrave, David B. & Alderman, Katarzyna Bolsewicz & Anderson, Ian & Soto, Eliana Jimenez, 2014. "Health sector priority setting at meso-level in lower and middle income countries: Lessons learned, available options and suggested steps," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 190-200.
    3. Kapiriri, Lydia & Razavi, Donya, 2017. "How have systematic priority setting approaches influenced policy making? A synthesis of the current literature," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(9), pages 937-946.
    4. Leah Salm & Nicholas Nisbett & Katie Cuming & Tabitha Hrynick & Alexandra Lulache & Hayley MacGregor, 2023. "A whole system approach to childhood obesity: how a supportive environment was created in the city of Brighton and Hove, United Kingdom," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 15(4), pages 919-935, August.
    5. Choi, Seul Ki & Frongillo, Edward A. & Blake, Christine E. & Thrasher, James F., 2019. "Why are restricted food items still sold after the implementation of the school store policy? the case of South Korea," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 161-169.
    6. SeeHoe Ng & Bridget Kelly & Heather Yeatman & Boyd Swinburn & Tilakavati Karupaiah, 2021. "Policy Inertia on Regulating Food Marketing to Children: A Case Study of Malaysia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-18, September.
    7. Tanita Northcott & Mark Lawrence & Christine Parker & Phillip Baker, 2023. "Ecological regulation for healthy and sustainable food systems: responding to the global rise of ultra-processed foods," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 1333-1358, September.
    8. Brian Reddy & Praveen Thokala & Alison Iliff & Kerry Warhurst & Helen Chambers & Lynsey Bowker & Stephen J. Walters & Alejandra Duenas & Michael P. Kelly, 2016. "Using MCDA to generate and interpret evidence to inform local government investment in public health," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 4(3), pages 161-181, November.
    9. Jinxia Zhu & Qian Xu & Yi Pan & Lefeng Qiu & Yi Peng & Haijun Bao, 2018. "Land-Acquisition and Resettlement (LAR) Conflicts: A Perspective of Spatial Injustice of Urban Public Resources Allocation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Ahumada-Canale, Antonio & Jeet, Varinder & Bilgrami, Anam & Seil, Elizabeth & Gu, Yuanyuan & Cutler, Henry, 2023. "Barriers and facilitators to implementing priority setting and resource allocation tools in hospital decisions: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    11. Jonathan Karnon & Andrew Partington, 2015. "Cost-Value Analysis and the SAVE: A Work in Progress, But an Option for Localised Decision Making?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(12), pages 1281-1288, December.
    12. Julie A. Campbell & Douglas Ezzy & Amanda Neil & Martin Hensher & Alison Venn & Melanie J. Sharman & Andrew J. Palmer, 2018. "A qualitative investigation of the health economic impacts of bariatric surgery for obesity and implications for improved practice in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(8), pages 1300-1318, August.
    13. Barlow, P. & Thow, A.M., 2021. "Neoliberal discourse, actor power, and the politics of nutrition policy: A qualitative analysis of informal challenges to nutrition labelling regulations at the World Trade Organization, 2007–2019," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).
    14. Lacy-Nichols, Jennifer & Scrinis, Gyorgy & Carey, Rachel, 2020. "The evolution of Coca-Cola Australia’s soft drink reformulation strategy 2003–2017: A thematic analysis of corporate documents," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    15. Virginia Wiseman & Craig Mitton & Mary M. Doyle‐Waters & Tom Drake & Lesong Conteh & Anthony T. Newall & Obinna Onwujekwe & Stephen Jan, 2016. "Using Economic Evidence to Set Healthcare Priorities in Low‐Income and Lower‐Middle‐Income Countries: A Systematic Review of Methodological Frameworks," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(S1), pages 140-161, February.
    16. Nicholas Nisbett & Jody Harris & Derek Headey & Mara den Bold & Stuart Gillespie & Noora-Lisa Aberman & Olutayo Adeyemi & Richmond Aryeetey & Rasmi Avula & Elodie Becquey & Scott Drimie & Elyse Iruhir, 2023. "Stories of change in nutrition: lessons from a new generation of studies from Africa, Asia and Europe," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 15(1), pages 133-149, February.
    17. Brydie Clarke & Boyd Swinburn & Gary Sacks, 2018. "Understanding Health Promotion Policy Processes: A Study of the Government Adoption of the Achievement Program in Victoria, Australia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-19, October.
    18. Neale Smith & Craig Mitton & Mary-Ann Hiltz & Matthew Campbell & Laura Dowling & J. Fergall Magee & Shashi Ashok Gujar, 2016. "A Qualitative Evaluation of Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis in a Canadian Pediatric Tertiary Care Institution," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 559-568, October.
    19. Cornelissen, Evelyn & Mitton, Craig & Davidson, Alan & Reid, Colin & Hole, Rachelle & Visockas, Anne-Marie & Smith, Neale, 2014. "Determining and broadening the definition of impact from implementing a rational priority setting approach in a healthcare organization," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-9.
    20. Clarke, Brydie & Swinburn, Boyd & Sacks, Gary, 2020. "Understanding the LiveLighter® obesity prevention policy processes: An investigation using political science and systems thinking," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:333:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623005063. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.