Background: Intersectoral action is often presented as essential in the promotion of population health and health equity. In Norway, national public health policies are based on the Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach that promotes whole-of-government responsibility. As part of the promotion of this intersectoral responsibility, planning is presented as a tool that every Norwegian municipality should use to integrate public health policies into their planning and management systems. Although research on implementing the HiAP approach is increasing, few studies apply a planning perspective. To address this gap in the literature, our study investigates how three Norwegian municipalities experience the use of planning as a tool when implementing the HiAP approach. Methods: To investigate planning practices in three Norwegian municipalities, we used a qualitative multiple case study design based on face-to-face interviews. When analysing and discussing the results, we used the dichotomy of instrumental and communicative planning approaches, in addition to a collaborative planning approach, as the theoretical framework. Results: The municipalities encounter several dilemmas when using planning as a tool for implementing the HiAP approach. Balancing the use of qualitative and quantitative knowledge and balancing the use of structural and processual procedures are two such dilemmas. Other dilemmas include balancing the use of power and balancing action and understanding in different municipal contexts. They are also faced with the dilemma of whether to place public health issues at the forefront or to present these issues in more general terms. Conclusion: We argue that the dilemmas experienced by the municipalities might be explained by the difficult task of combining instrumental and communicative planning approaches because the balance between them is seldom fixed.

No abstract

Background: Norway is internationally known today for its political and socio-economic prioritization of equity. The 2012 Public Health Act (PHA) aimed to further equity in the domain of health by addressing the social gradient in health. The PHA’s main policy measures were (1) delegation to the municipal level of responsibility for identifying and targeting underserved groups and (2) the imposition on municipalities of a "Health in All Policies" (HiAP) approach where local policy-making generally is considered in light of public health impact. In addition, the act recommended municipalities employ a public health coordinator (PHC) and required a development of an overview of their citizens’ health to reveal underserved social segments. This study investigates the relationship between changes in municipal use of HiAP tools (PHC and health overviews) with regard to the PHA implementation and municipal prioritization of fair distribution of social and economic resources among social groups. Methods: Data from two surveys, conducted in 2011 and 2014, were merged with official register data. All Norwegian municipalities were included (N=428). Descriptive statistics as well as bi- and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. Results: Thirty-eight percent of the municipalities reported they generally considered fair distribution among social groups in local policy-making, while 70% considered fair distribution in their local health promotion initiatives. Developing health overviews after the PHA’s implementation was positively associated with prioritizing fair distribution in political decision-making (odds ratio [OR] = 2.54; CI: 1.12-5.76), compared to municipalities that had not developed such overviews. However, the employment of PHCs after the implementation was negatively associated with prioritizing fair distribution in local health promotion initiatives (OR = 0.22; CI: 0.05-0.90), compared to municipalities without that position. Conclusion: Development of health overviews — as requested by the PHA — may contribute to prioritization of fair distribution among social groups with regard to the social determinants of health at the local level.

No abstract

All political parties in Norway agree that social inequalities in health comprise a public health problem and should be reduced. Against this background, the Council on Social Inequalities in Health has taken action to provide specific advice to reduce social health differences. Our recommendations focus on the entire social gradient rather than just poverty and the socially disadvantaged. By proposing action on the social determinants of health such as affordable child-care, education, living environments and income structures, we aim to facilitate a possible re-orientation of policy away from redistribution to universalism. The striking challenges of the causes of health differences are complex, and the 29 recommendations to combat social inequality of health demand cross sectorial actions. The recommendations are listed thematically and have not been prioritized. Some are fundamental and require pronounced changes across sectors, whereas others are minor and sector-specific.