Population health interventions tend to lack links to the emerging discourse on interactive knowledge production and exchange. This situation may limit both a better understanding of mechanisms that impact health lifestyles and the development of strategies for population level change. This paper introduces an integrated approach based on structure-agency theory in the context of 'social practice'. It investigates the mechanisms of co-production of active lifestyles by population groups, professionals, policymakers and researchers. It combines a whole system approach with an interactive knowledge-to-action strategy for developing and implementing active lifestyle interventions. A system model is outlined to describe and explain how social practices of selected groups co-produce active lifestyles. Four intervention models for promoting the co-production of active lifestyles through an interactive-knowledge-to-action approach are discussed. Examples from case studies of the German research network Capital4Health are used to illustrate, how intervention models might be operationalized in a real-world intervention. Five subprojects develop, implement and evaluate interventions across the life-course. Although subprojects differ with regard to settings and population groups involved, they all focus on the four key components of the system model. The paper contributes new strategies to address the intervention research challenge of sustainable change of inactive lifestyles. The interactive approach presented allows consideration of the specificities of settings and scientific contexts for manifold purposes. Further research remains needed on what a co-produced knowledge-to-action agenda would look like and what impact it might have for whole system change.

Enabling is a concept central to health promotion. It is perceived as a mechanism that can help people gain control over determinants of health. Little is known, however, about enabling among policy-makers and professionals. This case study investigates enabling among policy-makers and professionals who engaged in a specific participatory approach, cooperative planning. We define 'enabling' as creating action situations that allow policy-makers and professionals to (i) build individual capacities for health promotion and to (ii) apply these capacities to concrete organizational and political action at the institutional level. This case study followed policy-makers and professionals as they participated in a local physical activity promotion action research project in Germany. We conducted a secondary analysis of qualitative data gathered in that project (2005-2011). Methods included participant observation, document analysis, focus groups and qualitative interviews. All data were revisited for the case study and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Findings include examples of enabling among policy-makers and professionals related to the cooperative planning process. Individual capacities were developed in perceived project roles, interactions with target groups and decision-making procedures. Findings also demonstrated municipal policy changes. Access to physical activity infrastructures improved, and an intersectoral job position was funded to support physical activity promotion among target group participants. Findings were analyzed using a model that links cooperative planning with a framework on policy change from a political science perspective. We conclude that cooperative planning might be a pathway to negotiated agreements that foster systematic enabling and health-promoting policy change.

No abstract

Introduction: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is an effective approach to health promotion, especially in relation to socially disadvantaged groups. However, the long-term implementation of CPBR-based projects on a broad scale is often challenging, and research regarding the sustainable transfer of participatory research is lacking. This limits the scaling-up and public health impact of CBPR. Therefore, this study examines the mechanisms utilized to transfer and sustain the BIG project, a multifaceted CBPR project aimed at promoting physical activity among women in difficult life situations. Materials and Methods: Borrowing from the RE-AIM framework, we analyzed project documentation and conducted a reflection workshop to investigate methods of transferring BIG to new sites as well as strategies from researchers to support project implementation and the maintenance of program activities at those sites. Moreover, we analyzed the reasons for discontinuing program activities at some former BIG sites and the costs involved in transferring BIG. Results: Since its establishment in 2005, BIG was transferred to and implemented at 17 sites. As of the winter of 2019, the program activities were maintained at eight sites. The average duration of sites that continue to offer program activities was more than 9 years. Discontinued sites maintained project activities for an average of 4 years. According to the study findings, the extent of scientific support, the provision of seed funding, and the local project coordinator, the person managing the project at the site, all have a significant impact on the sustainability of the transfer. A patchwork of funding agencies was needed to finance scientific support and seed funding in BIG. The transfer of BIG projects accrued annual costs of approximately EUR20,000 per site; however, long-term project implementation resulted in a decline in the annual transfer costs of BIG. Discussion and Conclusion: The sustainable transfer of CBPR is challenging but possible, and increased support of research and seed funding can facilitate long-term transfer. Nevertheless, other factors in the implementation setting are beyond scientific

This study supports the use of multilevel empowerment approaches to health as they help to identify the ideal characteristics that organizations and communities should possess and the potential structural changes required to support individual empowerment.