Gender and health promotion: A multisectoral policy approach

Women and men are different as regards their biology, the roles and responsibilities that society assigns to them and their position in the family and community. These factors have a great influence on causes, consequences and management of diseases and ill-health and on the efficacy of health promotion policies and programmes. This is confirmed by evidence on male&ndash;female differences in cause-specific mortality and morbidity and exposure to risk factors. Health promoting interventions aimed at ensuring safe and supportive environments, healthy living conditions and lifestyles, community involvement and participation, access to essential facilities and to social and health services need to address these differences between women and men, boys and girls in an equitable manner in order to be effective. The aim of this paper is to (i) demonstrate that health promotion policies that take women\u27s and men\u27s differential biological and social vulnerability to health risks and the unequal power relationships between the sexes into account are more likely to be successful and effective compared to policies that are not concerned with such differences, and (ii) discuss what is required to build a multisectoral policy response to gender inequities in health through health promotion and disease prevention. The requirements discussed in the paper include i) the establishment of joint commitment for policy within society through setting objectives related to gender equality and equity in health as well as health promotion, ii) an assessment and analysis of gender inequalities affecting health and determinants of health, iii) the actions needed to tackle the main determinants of those inequalities and iv) documentation and dissemination of effective and gender sensitive policy interventions to promote health. In the discussion of these key policy elements, we use illustrative examples of good practices from different countries around the world.<br /

Policies to improve the health and well-being of Roma people: the European experience.

The Roma constitute the largest ethnic minority in the European Region. The many policy initiatives designed over the past two decades to tackle their adverse social conditions in Central and South Eastern Europe, where the Roma population is concentrated, have had limited success. This paper reviews what is being done to improve the health and social situation of Roma communities in the Region and identifies factors that may limit the effectiveness of these policy initiatives. Strong political commitment, measures to overcome prejudices against Roma, inter-sectoral policy coordination, adequate budgets, evidence-based policies, and Roma involvement can be identified as key preconditions for improved health outcomes and well-being. However, developing a sound evidence-based approach to Roma inclusion requires removing obstacles to the collection of reliable data and improving analytical and evaluation capacity. Health policies seeking to reduce health inequalities for Roma people need to be aligned with education, economic, labour market, housing, environmental and territorial development policies and form part of comprehensive policy frameworks allowing for effective integration

Priorities for research on equity and health : towards an equity-focused health research agenda

Piroska Östlin and colleagues argue that a paradigm shift is needed to keep the focus on health equity within the social determinants of health research agenda

Addressing social determinants of health inequities: what can the state and civil society do?

In this Health Policy article, we selected and reviewed evidence synthesised by nine knowledge networks established by WHO to support the Commission on the Social Determinants of Health. We have indicated the part that national governments and civil society can play in reducing health inequity. Government action can take three forms: (1) as provider or guarantor of human rights and essential services; (2) as facilitator of policy frameworks that provide the basis for equitable health improvement; and (3) as gatherer and monitor of data about their populations in ways that generate health information about mortality and morbidity and data about health equity. We use examples from the knowledge networks to illustrate some of the options governments have in fulfilling this role. Civil society takes many forms: here, we have used examples of community groups and social movements. Governments and civil society can have important positive roles in addressing health inequity if political will exists