Save the HIA Gateway Campaign - we need your support - 8th UPDATED SUPPORTER LIST- 2nd May 2011

The HIA Gateway which has been funded by the English/UK Department of Health for the last 7-8 years and for those that don't know it can be found at www.hiagateway.org.uk is under threat. Its likely that the pages will remain but there will be no one to update them and as we all know resources that aren't updated increasingly lose their relevance except as a historical archive. Worse, they then tend to disappear as visitors numbers to the web pages declines.

We nearly lost it a few years back when the Health Development Agency was merged into the national Institute of Clinical Excellence.

Support the Campaign by sending an email with your name, organisation and the value of the HIA gateway to savehiagateway (a) gmail.com. You can also add your support in the comments. You can also do both!

We will be sending the following letter with the names of supporters to key people in the UK Government, Department if Health and key professional health associations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Click here to check out the reasons why people want the HIA Gateway to be saved.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OPEN LETTER THAT WILL BE SENT TO KEY INFLUENCERS

Rt Hon Andrew Lansley CBE MP (Secretary of State for Health)
Anne Milton MP (Parliamentary Under Secretary for Public Health)
Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government)
Ed Milliband MP (Leader of the Opposition)
John Healey MP (Shadow Secretary of State for Health)
Diane Abbott MP (Shadow Public Health Minister)
Debbie Abrahams MP (MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth)

Una O’Brien (Permanent Secretary, Department of Health)
Dame Sally Davies (Chief Medical Officer, interim, Department of Health)
Tim Baxter (Head of Public Health Development, Department of Health)
Sunjai Gupta OBE (Deputy Director, Head of Public Health Strategy and Social Marketing, Department of Health, currently overseeing the HIA Gateway)
Mike Kelly (Public Health Excellence Centre Director, National Institute of Clinical Excellence)

Rosemary Marr (Director for Health Improvement, Department of Health)

David Harper (Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Department of Health)

Anita Marsland (Executive Officer, PH England)

Brian Ferguson (Chair, Association of Public Health Observatories)

Alison Patey (Network Director, Association of Public Health Observatories)

David Prout (Director General Localism Group, Department for Communities and Local Government)
Andrew Campbell (Director, Strategy and Programme Team, Department for Communities and Local Government)

Dr Clare Gerada (Chair of The Royal College of General Practitioners)
Professor Lindsey Davies CBE (President of The Faculty of Public Health)
Richard Parish (Chief Executive, Royal Society for Public Health)

Paul Lincoln OBE (Chief Executive of the National Heart Forum)
Modi Mwatsama (International Programme Manager, National Heart Forum)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LETTER SENT : 3rd Feb'2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Sir/Madam,

CONTINUED FUNDING FOR THE HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT GATEWAY: AN INTERNATIONAL RESOURCE AND BEACON OF GOOD PRACTICE

www.hiagateway.org.uk

http://www.apho.org.uk/default.aspx?QN=P_HIA

The UK is an internationally-recognised leader in the theory and practice of health impact assessment (HIA).

HIA is seen by many institutions internationally as an important approach to ensuring Healthy Public Policy and Healthy Development including the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (which last year published a guide on HIA) as well as the World Health Organization (which has a web portal on HIA).

HIA is now practiced across the globe from North America (Canada and very strongly in recent years in the USA), South America (Brazil), across Europe (the devolved nations, Ireland, Spain, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, etc.), Africa ( in particular as part of development bank lending conditions), South East Asia (Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Mongolia and Japan) as well as Australia and New Zealand.

In England, as part of regulatory assessment, it is one of the mandatory Specific Impact Tests for all new policies, plans and programmes across Government. At local level it is widely seen as good practice and many local authorities and primary care trusts/ health boards have embedded HIA into their local policy and development planning processes. It is also an important component of Strategic Environmental Assessment and Sustainability Appraisal.

As with all forms of IA, HIA is fundamentally about spending a small amount of money now to avoid major expenditure at a later date on rectifying problems that could have been foreseen and hence very much needed in these economically difficult times.

We, the undersigned, are writing to make a case for the continued funding of the HIA Gateway as a cost-effective use of public money to protect and improve local community health and wellbeing. The funding will help maintain a national and international public health resource through keeping an up-to-date set of electronic HIA resources, contact lists and news and to have a national and international point of contact for questions about English/UK HIA.

The cost of maintaining this resource is dwarfed by the added value that this resource has delivered and will continue to deliver in the future in England and the UK not to mention the international kudos that this resource provides to the Department of Health.

We therefore urge the Department of Health and the Government to ensure that the funding for the HIA Gateway is maintained and protected over the life of this and future parliaments.

We would also welcome the opportunity to have a meeting to discuss the value and future of the HIA Gateway.

Yours sincerely,


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATED SUPPORTERS LIST - 25th Mar' 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UK (50)

Salim Vohra (Institute of Occupational Medicine)

Andy Pennington (University of Liverpool)

Ben Cave (Ben Cave Associates)

Jenny Mindell (University College London)

Mary Mahoney (University of Gloucestershire)

Debbie Fox (University of Liverpool)

Alex Scott-Samuel (University of Liverpool)

Anthea Cooke (Inukshuk Consultancy)

Eva Elliott (Cardiff Institute of Society and Health)

John Kemm, (JK Public Health)

Sue Wright (West Midlands Public Health Observatory)

Marcus Chilaka (University of Salford)

Gifty Amo-Danso (Institute of Occupational Medicine)

Ifeoma Dan-Ogosi (Institute of Occupational Medicine)

Martin Birley (Birley HIA)

Andrew Buroni (RPS)

Liz Green (Wales Health Impact Assessment Support Unit)

Margaret Douglas (NHS Lothian)

Judy Kurth (Stoke-on-Trent City Council)

Stacy Sharman (Stoke-on-Trent City Council)

Collette Taylor (NHS North Lancashire)

Jenny Dunwoody (Arup)

Clare Kingscott (Conwy County Borough Council)

Russell Jones (Glasgow Centre for Population Health)

Martin McKee (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine)

Alex Trouton (NHS Southwark)

Jilla Burgess-Allen (NHS Stockport)

Steven Prosser (NHS South West Essex Community Services)

Jude Stansfield (Government Office North West)

Deborah Harkins (Lancashire Public Health Network)

Heather Catt (Lancashire County Council)

Graham Esson (Perth & Kinross Council)

Dr Ellie Hothersall (University of Birmingham and NHS Stoke)

Kayt Horsley (Lancashire County Council)

Mark Broomfield (AEA Technology)

Alison Farrar (ChaMPS public health network)

Paul Johnson (Arup)

Paul Tomlinson (URS/Scott Wilson)

Nicola Morrow (Sunderland City Council)

Janet Willams (Assoc. of Voluntary Organisations in Wrexham)

Bruce Poole (Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council/NHS Tameside and Glossop)

Lucy Smith (NHS Lambeth)

Matthew Ashton (NHS Knowsley / Knowsley MBC)

Paul Fisher (Solihull NHS Care Trust)

Stephen Watkins (Stockport PCT)

Aamer Raza (Independent HIA and EIA Consultant)

Sandra Husbands (NHS Harrow)

Chimeme Egbutah (Luton Borough Council/NHS Luton)

Jacqui Thompson (NHS North Lancashire)
Emer O'Connell (Public Health Trainee, London)

International (20)

Ben Harris-Roxas (University of New South Wales, Australia)

Samantha McCrea (ERM, Australia)

Rob Quigley (Quigley and Watts, New Zealand)

Carlos Artundo (Andalusian School of Public Health, Spain)

Patrick Harris (University of New South Wales, Australia)

Meri Koivusalo (National Institute for Health and Welfare, Finland)

Marla Orenstein (Habitat Health Impact Consulting, Canada)

Murray Lee (Habitat Health Impact Consulting, Canada)

Jane Branscomb (Georgia State University, USA)

Jonathan Heller (Human Impact Partners, USA)

Jessica Anson (Monash University, Australia)   

Francesca Viliani (International SOS)

Richard Morgan (University of Otago)

Antonio Daponte (Andalusian School of Public Health, Spain)

Alberto Fernandez Ajuria (Andalusian School of Public Health, Spain)

Cathleen Baker, (San Mateo County Health System, USA)

Ame-Lia Tamburrini (Habitat Health Impact Consulting, Canada)         

Mette Winge Fredsgaard (MWF Consult, Denmark)

Mark Divall (SHAPE Consulting, South Africa)
Lee Roberts Thompson (USA)

 

Organised crime and the efforts to combat it: a concern for public health

A very interesting open access article in the journal Globalization and Health at:

http://www.globalizationandhealth.com/content/6/1/21

Read the whole article but to whet your appetite here is their conclusion about the value of a public health perspective in this area:

First, it recognises the importance of looking
upstream, avoiding what has long been termed “victim
blaming” in which existing law enforcement measures
often criminalise the victims, such as those who have
been trafficked, or vulnerable people who have developed
addictions. They are often much easier to identify
than those who control the business, and are unable to
evade the consequences through bribery or intimidation.

Second, it emphasises the importance of evidence of
effectiveness. Unfortunately, there is still limited
research to draw on; the Campbell Collaboration http://
www.campbellcollaboration.org does now contain systematic
reviews of interventions to tackle crime, but so
far most address primarily micro-level issues. Rigorous
and comprehensive evaluation is especially important in
this area given the evidence reviewed above showing the
scope for unintended consequences.

Third, it has long recognised the importance of context.
Organised crime is more common in countries
when the rule of law is weak. An absence of high-level
political interference, strong private sector governance
and regulation, an effective judicial system, and an independent
and honest judiciary all deter corrupt behaviour
and weaken criminal networks [114]. Research on illicit
drug use in both recipient and supplier countries
identifies how “the capacity of the state to maintain a
viable and legitimate presence in local communities
determined the extent to which drug-related activities
developed and consolidated at local level” [14]. Consequently,
it is necessary to take account of the quality of
governance in implementing any measures.

Fourth, a public health approach stresses the importance
of inter-sectoral collaboration. Addressing the
major threats to health today requires inputs from many
sides. Organised crime is no exception. Yet, too often
the relevant experts exist within silos, rarely seeing the
need to engage with each other. The public health community
can play a convening role, helping to break
down these barriers.

To conclude, the tentacles of organised crime have
huge reach, as demonstrated above, and may adversely
impact the health of many millions of people around
the globe. Through fear induced by brutality and corruption,
the perpetrators enjoy not only a high level of
impunity but also extraordinary invisibility. We hope
that, by bringing together a wide range of evidence from
disparate areas of research, we have begun to make the
case for a joined-up, evidence-based approach to addressing
the global health consequences of organised crime.

HIA, ethics, private sector consulting and clients

This is a post I put up on the HIA community wiki website over two years ago. It still has relevance and I have been debating about putting it up on the HIA blog as a much better place for discussion. In the UK there was/is concern and potentially continuing concern among some HIA practitioners about the growing role of large private sector environmental consultancies moving into the HIA field.

The main thrust of the concern is that private sector consultancies do not necessarily have the public health skills and/or public health ethos to do good HIAs and may therefore further their clients interests at the expense of affected communities, in particular, and other stakeholders in general.

This concern can and should be leveled at all practitioners and is something that all practitioners must think about on an ongoing basis whether they are private, public or not-for-profit sector HIA consultants and researchers. There are personal agendas, organisational agendas and politics that impinge on HIA practitioners working in all sectors and professions.

The specific concern about private sector consultancies was I thought then based on a mistaken premise that consultancies do not work by any set of organisational or professional ethics. Unless the argument is that public health has a very special set of ethics which environmental, engineering and planning professionals do not have, cannot share and are unable to foster in themselves and their profession?

Given that private sector consultancies are and will increasingly move into public health consultancy the more urgent question I feel is how to ensure that public health values fit alongside environmental, engineering and other professional values and ethos' such that they complement and do not work in tension with each other.

Not proactively engaging with them will simply create two (or more)  parallel and potentially opposing strands of thinking and doing HIA. More significantly it disrespects the environmental and planning professionals as professional communities who have and continue to grapple with ethical dillemmas that are faced in their areas of work.

Personally, I constantly grapple with ethical dilemmas - both in my personal and professional life - and even over the last year I have had quite a few. These ethical dilemmas have ranged from whether or not to formally critique a fellow HIA practitioners work to whether or not to consider writing a proposal for a HIA of a proposed development because the nature of the development raised conflicts with certain values I held.

For me, ethical dilemmas don't go away because I have a set of implicit/explicit ethical principles; they just bring into sharp relief issues that I need to consider carefully before proceeding. Ultimately, I and we are still the ones who have to make the decision, ethical principles are guides but they can't make decisions for us. Neither are there one set of ethical principles that can work in all contexts; sometimes different ethical principles are at odds with each other and this conflict can only be resolved by making a personal choice to go one way or another. In these situations it is the process of thinking through and making a choice after due reflection and consideration that is the critical step.

So how do we go about fostering a public health ethos in the private sector?

First, by recognising that they already have an ethos that they work by that has been developed from the profession that they are in and upheld by their professional institutes and associations. Just as HIA and public health ethics is developed in public health education and training and upheld by public health colleges, institutes and associations (even if we don't have HIA institutions).

Second, by developing links between these institutions to foster collaborative working and the development of a set of widely held and agreed upon professional ethical principles of HIA practice. For example the Health Good Practice Principles of the International Association for Impact Assessment.

Third, by more collaborative working, thinking and reflection across the not-for-profit, public and private sector HIA practitioners about these kinds of issues.


Do my arguments make sense, have I missed anything crucial or have I got it completely wrong?

2012 International HIA Conference – Hosts Wanted - 28th Feb' 2011 Deadline

The next International  HIA Conference will be held 14-15 April 2011, in Granada, Spain. Meanwhile we are working urgently to find a host and fix a venue and date for the next conference in 2012.

A small working group has taken on the task of searching for and selecting a host for the next International HIA conference. This working group is chaired by the  host of the current conference, Carlos Artundo, and consists of those who have hosted the previous four International HIA Conferences (Eva Elliott, Owen Metcalfe, Alex Scott Samuel, and, Lea den Broeder).

CALL FOR HOST PROPOSALS

The International HIA Conference Working Group invites proposals for hosting of the 2012 International HIA Conference.

Future hosts are asked to:

• Provide evidence that ensures  the support of their organisations ;
• Describe their ability for underwriting the conference;
• Describe the proposed location and date of the conference
• Outline the possible themes of the conference

The proposer selected to host the conference will be asked to

• Make a short presentation on  the location date  and theme of the 2012 International HIA conference at the upcoming conference  in Granada (April 2011);
• Be prepared after hosting the conference to pass on their conference organiser’s report, experiences, registration data, web site, and (if any) rollover budget to the next host;
• Chair the working group looking for the 2013 host.

The working group will be happy to share with anyone considering hosting future conferences the experience built up from previous conferences of what hosting the conference entails, the facilities that have to be provided and the costs.

Future hosts are asked to send their proposal to Carlos Artundo, e-mail c.artundo (at) telefonica.net

The deadline for submitting proposals is 28 February 2011. We will then select the host from among those who have submitted proposals before 15 March 2011 and notify proposers of the outcome. This will allow  a definite venue and date for the next conference to be announced at the  International HIA Conference in Granada in April 2011. 

The Impacts of Health System Reforms: The triumph of hope over experience?

Many health systems around the western world are being restructured, with major implications for preventive health agendas. This also means big changes to the contexts in which health impact assessments are undertaken and supported (or not).

The NHS Confederation in the UK has produced a fascinating report that looks at the available evidence about health system reorganisations and their impacts:

Although there is widespread acknowledgement of the problems of frequent reorganisation, there is still a tendency for it to be enthusiastically advocated as a solution - often with little reference to the problem it is trying to solve...

Even if there had been a more systematic evaluation, the number of changes in the last two decades means that many structures have had little time to settle down and produce results before being reorganised...

Poorly designed organisations and hasty change are likely to result in further restructuring.

Source: Edward N. (2011) The Triumph of Hope Over Experience, NHS Confederation: London.

In Australia, 1 January 2011 heralded the next round in the seemingly endless series of reforms and restructures. There's a lot we can learn from the report.

Public Health Works Seminar Series Presentations

I came across a very interesting website - Public Health Works - while (as usual) searching for something else. I'm not sure if the seminar series presentations are still active but the recent and old ones are worth a look.

The presentations can be found at http://www.publichealthworks.ca/archive.htm

The ones I found interesting were:

• 2009/2010 Series
• January 2010
  R. Lesard
  Built Environment and Health: Montreal Public Health Action Plan
• October 2009
  D. Noble
  The 2degreesC Challenge: Sustainable Inspiration or Climate Catastrophe?

• 2008/2009 Series
• April 2009
  Dr. C. Hertzman
  Successful Interventions in Early Childhood Development
• February 2009
  Dr. L. Frank
  How Does Community Design Impact Public Health (Part 1 | Part 2)
• November 2008
  Dr. T. Barker
  Public Engagement in Risk Communication

• 2007/2008 Series
• June 2008
  D. W. Spady
  Peak Oil and Its Influence on Health
• May 2008
  Dr. B. Poland
  Rethinking the Role of Public Health in Uncertain Times: Environment, Health and Social Equity

• 2006/2007 Series
• February 2007
  V. Manasc
  Healthy Communities by Design
• 2005/2006 Series
• June 2006
  W. Carney
  Risk and Crisis Communications
• 2004/2005 Series
• May 2005
  Dr. J. Dunn
  Metropolitan and Neighbourhood Inequalities in Health
• March 2005
  S. Lewis
  Health Disparities - The Role of Health Systems in Addressing Them

• 2002/2003 Series
• June 2003
  M. Henry
  Improving Public Health Through Policy Change
• May 2003
  Dr. J. Edwards & N. Fraser-Lee
  GIS Mapping on Health Status Indicators - When Trends Lie and Other Fairy Tales
• November 2002
  Dr. S. Hrudey
  Risk Communication in an Uncertain World

Hidden Cities: unmasking and overcoming health inequities in urban settings

The rapid increase of people living in cities is one of the most important global health issues of the 21st century. In this joint WHO/UN-HABITAT report, the latest information on urbanization trends and the pressing need to address health inequities in cities is presented. The report is aimed at unmasking and overcoming these health inequities in urban settings and includes practical examples and recommendations on specific evidence-based interventions.

Photo stories from around the world reflect the hidden realities urban dwellers are facing, further highlighting the need for concerted action.

Through a novel analytical approach, the report outlines the crucial finding that urban averages often mask hidden pockets of ill-health and overlooked populations. Hidden Cities: unmasking and overcoming health inequities in urban settings enables city leaders and urban planners to identify the most deprived populations and target measures to improve their health.

DON'T FORGET to take the urban quiz (Gifty and I didn't do too badly, 70 and 80%, let us know you're scores).

Quote we like:
“Prevention is the heart of public health and equity its soul”M. R. Sukumbhand Paribatra, Governor of Bangkok

Download the report at http://www.hiddencities.org

Health 2020 - new World Health Organization Europe Initiative

International experts in public health met on 14 October 2010 to map out the broad goals and targets of the new European health policy, HEALTH2020, at a meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Discussion focused on four key questions.

• What is today’s context for health policy in a fast-changing Europe?
• What is the scope of the policy, including its target audiences and main products?
• What values, guiding principles and evidence base should support HEALTH2020?
• What process should be used to develop the policy, which includes involving partners and identifying key milestones?

The policy is being developed to accelerate progress towards achieving the European Region’s health potential by 2020 by addressing key public health and health policy challenges. WHO/Europe seeks to engage and consult with a diverse range of stakeholders to ensure that a spectrum of views informs the development of the policy and can sustain it in the longer term.

A draft policy framework is expected to be presented at the next meeting of the WHO Regional Committee for Europe in 2011, and finalized in 2012.

Health 2020 aims to confirm the underlying values and principles, and provide for an integrated and consistent framework to address the recent challenges to health and health equity in Europe.

A new study on health inequalities in Europe will provide a basis for this health policy. This study will analyze the social determinants of health, in particular as they affect the health divide in Europe, as well as the social gradient in societies, vulnerable population groups, gender and the impact of all these aspects on health policies and actions by governments. It will also address all the other determinants of health, such as lifestyles, the environment and climate change, and food safety.

see WHO Europe news item

see Zsuzsanna Jakab, WHO Regional Director for Europe's speech and presentation on Health 2020 at the World Health Summit

Courtesy of the European Public Health Alliance

Research Priorities for Assessing Health Effects from the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill: A Letter Report

The US National Academy of Sciences has just reported back on what they consider are the key research priorities and issues that need to be taken forward in relation to oil spills and human health.

Click here to go to the page and download a free pdf of the report (after registering).

The 5 research priorities they identified are:

Research priority 1
Evidence about the psychological and behavioral effects of the Gulf of  Mexico oil spill. Policymakers and health officials can use such evidence to guide efforts to improve the health status of individuals affected by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, as well as contribute to the prevention and treatment of similar health outcomes in future disasters. The research should identify factors associated with either vulnerability or resilience to situations such as oil spills and other disasters.

Research priority 2
Obtaining information that is as comprehensive as possible about exposure to the oil, dispersants, and by-products of the controlled burns.

Research priority 3
Assessing seafood safety in both the near term and long term and clearly communicating results to the affected communities.

Research priority 4
Research to evaluate and compare communication and engagement methods to determine which are the most effective for disaster and disaster-preparedness research.

Research priority 5
Research on the framework needed to deploy a rapid research response for future oil spills and other potential disasters.

Image courtesy of Wikipedia from an original NASA photo. Click here to go to the Wikipedia page.

Converting streets into running tracks: 'Ready Steady Go'

'Ready. steady. go!', is an installation by austrian architects Sandra Janser and Elisabeth Koller which is meant to provide a visual frame within the Jakomini district of Graz, Austria.

The intention of the project is to define the streets of jakoministraße and klosterwiesgasse, by marking them as a significant design area within the city.

Check out more photos and details at Designboom by clicking here.

Real world reviews: a beginner’s guide to undertaking systematic reviews of public health policy interventions

Very interesting article  in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health on undertaking useful systematic reviews when time and resources are limited.

Click here to go the JECH webpage and download the whole Editor's Choice article for free.

My Favourite Quotes:

Systematic reviews are interested in locating and synthesising the ‘best available evidence’(not all available evidence); this means that the hierarchy of

evidence does need to be applied albeit in a pragmatic way. 

‘Pragmatist’ systematic reviews therefore focus on a handful of ‘first-line’ health and social science databases, or supplement this with the use of a subject specialist one, while ‘purist’ systematic reviews have tended to search every available and potentially relevant electronic database.

ARTICLE ABSTRACT

Background

The systematic review is becoming an increasingly popular and established research method in public health. Obtaining systematic review skills are therefore becoming a common requirement for most public health researchers and practitioners. However, most researchers still remain apprehensive about conducting their first systematic review. This is often because an ‘ideal’ type of systematic review is promoted in the methods literature.

Methods

This brief guide is intended to help dispel these concerns by providing an accessible overview of a ‘real’ approach to conducting systematic reviews. The guide draws upon an extensive practical experience of conducting various types of systematic reviews of complex social interventions.

Results

The paper discusses what a systematic review is and how definitions vary. It describes the stages of a review in simple terms. It then draws on case study reviews to reflect on five key practical aspects of the conduct of the method, outlining debates and potential ways to make the method shorter and smarterdenhancing the speed of production of systematic reviews and reducing labour intensity while still maintaining high methodological standards.

Conclusion

There are clear advantages in conducting the high quality pragmatic reviews that this guide has described: (1) time and labour resources are saved; (2) it enables reviewers to inform or respond to developments in policy and practice in a timelier manner; and (3) it encourages researchers to conduct systematic reviews before embarking on primary research. Well-conducted systematic reviews remain a valuable part of the public health methodological tool box. 

More scepticism about the value of HIA

"In the absence of more information and public policy debate, it is difficult to image how the HIA process can add any value beyond the current environmental process. As currently proposed the methodology and results are likely subjective, qualitative, and ultimately speculative. Neither is it likely that the HIA process will result in any additional mitigation beyond what the ports already provide given the extensive list of regulatory requirements and port adopted mitigation programs, such as the SPBCAAP (San Pedro Bay Clean Air Action Plan), and the WRAP (Water Resources Action Plan)."


A quote from the Vice President, Pacific Merchant Shipping Association in a news item in The Cunningham Report about the US Environmental protection Agency's work on considering whether HIA should also become part of the set of assessments undertaken by developers.


Click here to go to the news item.

While understanding his underlying frustration at onerous and burdensome regulations (as he sees them) particularly in its potential to block further development, given the earlier post on shipping and its emissions I guess I would have to agree to disagree on the value of HIA in such contexts as those listed above. Plus HIA looks for both the positives and negatives and in this context would show both the benefits and costs to human health of port developments e.g. employment, wider economic regeneration and development, air pollution, noise, etc.

HIA of mining article: Of mines and men

A nice short article on the value of Health Impact Assessment in the context of mining projects in the Malaysian newspaper The Sun by Andrew MacKenzie of the International Council on Mining and Metals.

Click here to read the article.

My favourite quote:

"Companies should use health impact assessments with a simple goal in mind: to leave communities healthier than when they found them. A mine cannot be successful without a healthy local workforce and the support of the community in which it operates. Protecting the health of our neighbours around the world isn’t just good business. It’s also the right thing to do."
 
Disclosure: Salim led the writing of the ICMM 2010 guide on HIA. Click here to go to the ICMM HIA guide webpage.

Image courtesy of nanosmile through Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Commons.

US National Health Policy Forum Session on HIA

On the 3rd December 2010, the National Health Policy Forum, at George Washington University had a seminar on "HIA: What, Why, How, Who, Where?"

  Click here to go directly to the site.

	Health Impact Assessments: What, Why, How, Who, Where?
	Michele J. Orza, ScD (Coordinator)
	Summary: Increasingly, a wide range of people from economists to epidemiologists are taking a broad-based, comprehensive approach to improving the public’s health and working on many fronts simultaneously.  An important means for implementing this approach, often characterized as "health in all policies," is the health impact assessment (HIA). These assessments are intended to bring a health focus to policies, programs, and projects in other sectors, such as agriculture, energy, and transportation, where the effects of the proposed action on health might not be adequately considered—or considered at all.  HIAs are a vehicle for supporting policymaking intended to advance the public's health by making explicit the health effects of the various alternatives under consideration. This Forum session provided an introduction to health impact assessments, examined several examples and their effect on policy and health outcomes, and discussed future opportunities and challenges for this burgeoning health policy practice. Speakers:
	Aaron Wernham, MD, Director, The Health Impact Project, The Pew Health Group, The Pew Charitable Trusts; Catherine L. Ross, PhD, Director, Center for Quality Growth and Regional Development, Harry West Professor, School of City and Regional Planning, Georgia Tech College of Architecture; Suzanne K. Condon, MSM, Associate Commissioner for Health, Director, Bureau of Environmental Health, Massachusetts Department of Public Health Slides from the presentations by Dr. Wernham, Dr. Ross, and Ms. Condon are available for download (click on the names). Related materials:
	The Health Impact Project brief "Health Impact Assessment: Bringing Public Health Data to Decision Making" was distributed at the session. AcademyHealth also provides a brief, "Research Informing Policy: The Potential of Health Impact Assessments." And the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's web page on Health Impact Assessment provides basic background and links to a variety of resources. See also other Forum products, including "High Hopes: Public Health Approaches to Reducing the Need for Health Care" (Background Paper No. 78, September 27, 2010); "Unusual Suspects: Focusing on Nonmedical Determinants to Improve the Nation's Health" (Forum Session, November 5, 2010); and "Getting Real: Data Sources, the Evidence Base, and Strategies for Improving the Health of Communities" (Forum Session, September 24, 2010).

Health impacts of shipping pollution have been 'underestimated'

This is an interesting Guardian article that I've only just come across on the underestimation of the health impacts of shipping (which of course ferries all the goods we want and need from oil and gas to electronics and food.

Read the full article by clicking here.

KEY POINTS:

• One giant ship can emit air pollution equivalent to 50 million cars.
• US academic research shows that pollution from the world's 90,000 cargo ships leads to 60,000 deaths a year in the US alone and costs up to $330bn per year in health costs from lung and heart diseases. The US Environmental Protection Agency estimates the buffer zone [of 230 miles], which could be in place by next year, will save more than 8,000 lives a year with new air quality standards cutting sulphur in fuel by 98%, particulate matter by 85% and nitrogen oxide emissions by 80%.
• Danish government environmental agency suggests that shipping emissions cost the Danish health service almost £5bn a year, mainly treating cancers and heart problems. A previous study estimated that 1,000 Danish people die prematurely each year because of shipping pollution.

KEY SHIPPING STATISTICS:

• The world's biggest container ships have 109,000 horsepower engines which weigh 2,300 tons.
• Each ship expects to operate 24hrs a day for about 280 days a year
• There are 90,000 ocean-going cargo ships
• Shipping is responsible for 18-30% of all the world's nitrogen oxide (NOx) pollution and 9% of the global sulphur oxide (SOx) pollution.
• One large ship can generate about 5,000 tonnes of sulphur oxide (SOx) pollution in a year
• 70% of all ship emissions are within 400km of land.
• 85% of all ship pollution is in the northern hemisphere.
• Shipping is responsible for 3.5% to 4% of all climate change emissions

Courtesy of Slashdot.com

Beauty is a part of healthy urban planning

One of the things I learned in medicine was that form follows function and that some of the most aesthetically elegant and beautiful biological objects, processes and organisms occur when physical biological structures are closely aligned to function.

Similarly, as a new report by  the UK Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment found, people want and need beauty in their physical environment - both built and natural. there is potentially innate aesthetic sensibility which is attracted to beautiful things (though these differ between individuals, communities and societies).

Check out the video and the series of essays and online discussions at the CABE website by clicking here or the links below.

• Beautiful Sheffield? video
• People and places: public attitudes to beauty.

Seven essays on beauty

• Beauty and public policy - Glenn Parsons
  
• Beauty, localism and deprivation - Irena Bauman
• The X factor: beauty in planning - Matthew Kieran
• Beauty and a love of life - Diana Athill
• Beauty: value beyond measure? - Hasan Bakhshi
• Beauty: a short history - Alan Powers
• Beauty, well-being and prosperity - Bonnie Greer

Check out the other useful healthy urban planning related work of CABE at www.cabe.org.uk