컨텍스트를 바꾸는 프로그램
- 학교 중심의 활동량 증가
- 학교 중심의 폭력 예방
- 등하교길 안전
- 오토바이 사고 예방
- 금연
- 깨끗한 주사기 사용 : 약물중독자 대책
- 알콜 함유 제품에 대한 가격 정책
- 다차원적으로 진행되는 작업장 비만 예방

건강의 사회적 결정요인에 대한 프로그램
- 취학전 아동 조기 교육
- 클린 디젤 버스 운행
- 대중교통 수단 확대
- 저소득층 주거 개선 자금 지원
- 근로장려세제
- 수도물 불소화

자세한 내용은 아래 링크를 참조

Health Impact in 5 Years

Advocacy for Health Equity: A Synthesis Review

Context
Health inequalities are systematic differences in health among social groups that are caused by unequal exposure to—and distributions of—the social determinants of health (SDH). They are persistent between and within countries despite action to reduce them. Advocacy is a means of promoting policies that improve health equity, but the literature on how to do so effectively is dispersed. The aim of this review is to synthesize the evidence in the academic and gray literature and to provide a body of knowledge for advocates to draw on to inform their efforts.

Methods
This article is a systematic review of the academic literature and a fixed-length systematic search of the gray literature. After applying our inclusion criteria, we analyzed our findings according to our predefined dimensions of advocacy for health equity. Last, we synthesized our findings and made a critical appraisal of the literature.

Findings
The policy world is complex, and scientific evidence is unlikely to be conclusive in making decisions. Timely qualitative, interdisciplinary, and mixed-methods research may be valuable in advocacy efforts. The potential impact of evidence can be increased by “packaging” it as part of knowledge transfer and translation. Increased contact between researchers and policymakers could improve the uptake of research in policy processes. Researchers can play a role in advocacy efforts, although health professionals and disadvantaged people, who have direct contact with or experience of hardship, can be particularly persuasive in advocacy efforts. Different types of advocacy messages can accompany evidence, but messages should be tailored to advocacy target. Several barriers hamper advocacy efforts. The most frequently cited in the academic literature are the current political and economic zeitgeist and related public opinion, which tend to blame disadvantaged people for their ill health, even though biomedical approaches to health and political short-termism also act as barriers. These barriers could be tackled through long-term actions to raise public awareness and understanding of the SDH and through training of health professionals in advocacy. Advocates need to take advantage of “windows of opportunity,” which open and close quickly, and demonstrate expertise and credibility.

Conclusions
This article brings together for the first time evidence from the academic and the gray literature and provides a building block for efforts to advocate for health equity. Evidence regarding many of the dimensions is scant, and additional research is merited, particularly concerning the applicability of findings outside the English-speaking world. Advocacy organizations have a central role in advocating for health equity, given the challenges bridging the worlds of civil society, research, and policy.

The 29 initiatives profiled here demonstrate actions to advance health equity and fall under the following groupings:

To adopt better governance for health and development:
- Experiences in applying health impact assessment
- Work across sectors to reduce poverty, improve social protection, advance key determinants, such as housing

To promote participation in policy-making and implementation:
- Reforming government processes to increase openness of data, transparency and participation, and engaging citizens
- Providing approaches to engage and empower Aboriginal peoples for self-governance

To further reorient the health sector towards reducing health inequities:
- Integrate equity, including gender-related considerations, into the design and delivery of programs and services
- Provide capacity and tools to advance health equity

To strengthen global governance and collaboration:
- Provide financial contribution to countries and international organizations
- Foster North-South support in information sharing and technical expertise

To monitor progress and increase accountability:
- Strengthen monitoring systems and methods to report on health inequalities
- Share evidence to inform policy and action

Bringing (domestic) politics back in: global and local influences on health equity

The Lancet-University of Oslo Commission on Global Governance for health correctly concluded that: ‘with globalization, health inequity increasingly results from transnational activities that involve actors with different interests and degrees of power’. At the same time, taking up that Commission’s focus on political determinants of health and ‘power asymmetries’ requires recognizing the interplay of globalization with domestic politics, and the limits of global influences as explanations for policies that affect health inequalities. I make this case using three examples e trade policy, climate change policy, and the domestic politics of poverty reduction and social policy e and a concluding observation about the 2015 UK election.