Effective strategies and interventions: environmental health and the private housing sector

Effective interventions in environmental health and housing work necessitate a range of methods and approaches to research and understand social and economic issues, how the complexities of peoples’ changing lives are represented in their housing and communities and the involvement of others in their housing, health and social care needs. Developing an evidence base and its application in practice can help deliver available resource to where it is most needed in addressing the complex needs of some of the most vulnerable members of society. This publication, edited by Dr Jill Stewart at the University of Greenwich, draws together a range of methods and good practice in adding to the environmental health and housing evidence base. It showcases examples of innovative environmental health practices, including partnership working to demonstrate the fundamental importance of re-focusing on housing as a social determinant of health and the potential for improved health outcomes and impacts. It draws together practical examples founded on a range of evidence sources from those working at strategic and practitioner level in the private housing sector in demonstrating how early, proactive interventions are successful on both economic and social fronts in supporting the case for additional resource for these fundamental front line services

Effective strategies and interventions: environmental health and the private housing sector

Effective interventions in environmental health and housing work necessitate a range of methods and approaches to research and understand social and economic issues, how the complexities of peoples’ changing lives are represented in their housing and communities and the involvement of others in their housing, health and social care needs. Developing an evidence base and its application in practice can help deliver available resource to where it is most needed in addressing the complex needs of some of the most vulnerable members of society. This publication, edited by Dr Jill Stewart at the University of Greenwich, draws together a range of methods and good practice in adding to the environmental health and housing evidence base. It showcases examples of innovative environmental health practices, including partnership working to demonstrate the fundamental importance of re-focusing on housing as a social determinant of health and the potential for improved health outcomes and impacts. It draws together practical examples founded on a range of evidence sources from those working at strategic and practitioner level in the private housing sector in demonstrating how early, proactive interventions are successful on both economic and social fronts in supporting the case for additional resource for these fundamental front line services

Evidence-based health impact assessment (EBHIA): a situation report

Objective: This article presents and discusses the findings from a primary research to ascertain the different sources of evidence commonly applied to the Health Impact Assessment process within the United Kingdom. Study design: This is a primary study with a mix of both qualitative and quantitative approaches to research data collection and analysis. Method: Questionnaire survey of 52 HIA practitioners in the United Kingdom, who had conducted a total of 103 health impact assessments over a three year period. This was followed by a semi-structured interview of 11 practitioners to gain deeper insights into the findings from the questionnaire findings. Results: Ten (10) different sources of evidence were seen to have been applied to the HIA process. Literature review was discovered to be the most commonly utilised source of evidence, having been used by 37 out of 52 practitioners (71.2%) and in 83.5% of the 103 health impact assessments. Engagement with local residents was second in terms of usage by practitioners (69.2%) and expert opinion was third, having been used by 67.3% of questionnaire respondents. Expert opinion was however discovered to have been applied to the highest number of health impact assessments, having been utilised in 84.5% of the 103 HIAs. Other sources of evidence that were employed by the health impact assessors included community profiling, completed HIA reports, key informants, survey, modelling, and Delphi exercises. Conclusions: The findings from this research point to deliberate efforts to ensure that predictions are grounded on robust sources of evidence. However several issues and challenges need to be adequately addressed in the quest to promote evidence based HIA (EBHIA)