Content areas
The NCCHPP has three main content areas. (1) One is healthy public policy itself, and what is known about the potential health impact of specific public policies, in particular those relevant to Canadians. This means synthesizing studies of health risks and other impacts of the determinants of health. (2) However, because promoting healthy public policy cannot be achieved through information alone, an equally important content area for the NCCHPP is the study of public policy. The public health community has expressed a need to understand public policy processes in a more substantive way. Although not part of the public health literature, the study of public policy has its own rich tradition. For the NCCHPP, the challenge is to link public policy knowledge with public health knowledge. (3) This speaks to a third content area for the NCCHPP, which is methodologies for knowledge synthesis and exchange that are appropriate to the field of healthy public policy.
Emphasis on public policy processes and tools
Users put emphasis on the importance of tools, frameworks and processes. They asked for tools and training about public policy processes, wanting to know more about facilitators and barriers to policy adoption. They agreed that health impact assessment tools are important, and asked for policy evaluation, in particular wanting to build the “business case” for healthy public policy. They asked for more on intersectoral and “whole of government” approaches, as well as on community approaches. They noted the importance of including multiple levels of authority in the work, such as municipal and local as well as provincial jurisdictions. Related to this, they identified regionalization both as an area of study and as one for potential collaboration, i.e. with regional health authorities. They noted the need to develop leadership for healthy public policy. Users at these meetings wanted more sharing of information about what others are doing throughout the country and internationally. They asked for an inventory of interventions as well as case studies and illustrative stories. As for the specific subjects on which they would like to have additional research information, the great majority prioritized health disparities and social inequities. Other specific subjects included housing, transportation, obesity, food, education, early childhood interventions and youth at risk. But it was noted that the prioritization of such latter subjects can change over time and that it would be better to help users be equipped as a community, in order to meet future needs in an appropriate and proactive way. The NCCHPP will continue to interact with the user community. Events and collaborative projects are being developed for 2007. One of the first is a user meeting in Ontario in early 2007.
Knowledge synthesis and transfer activities
Currently, the NCCHPP's activities include both knowledge synthesis and transfer activities. We are building an inventory of HIA tools, and preparing tools for potential use in the Canadian context. Related to HIA is our review of Quebec efforts around section 54, as described in "The Quebec Context" above. We are also preparing a review of British Columbia’s efforts around ACTNOW, an intersectoral strategy for prevention of chronic disease. The Quebec and BC initiatives are both examples of whole of government approaches and our documents will elaborate on this emerging strategy. Our work in this area includes examining the contribution of community organizations in healthy public policy. Another activity intended to increase knowledge about public policy processes is building illustrative stories about Canadian public policy developments. Our first “story”, about the tobacco struggle, uses the already prolific literature on this topic to highlight the role of information and its use by different actors throughout the decades, in the process of forming public policy. The NCCHPP has a pilot project on obesity intended to complement the extensive research efforts on this topic. We designed a research protocol to test appropriate methods for knowledge synthesis, including reviews of scientific and other literature, as well as expert opinion and deliberative methods. Methodologies for knowledge synthesis and exchange appropriate to the field of healthy public policy are an important preoccupation for the NCCHPP. We know that important attributes of knowledge transfer, in addition to better, more user-friendly, presentation of information, are an emphasis on context, pertinence, and use, with interactive methods. However, in our view, the knowledge synthesis community should also promote acceptance of a broader approach to “science.” We know that public policy interventions often cannot be evaluated by controlled experimental methods. An approach to science as systematic study will allow additional sources of knowledge to be considered. However, we also know that some methods are more systematic than others. The NCCHPP will add to efforts in the knowledge synthesis community to incorporate methods to optimize both the relevance and trustworthiness of information.