PUBH3002 Health Policy in Practice

Week 5 Policy Content Analysis

Dr Judith Dean
School of Public Health
Faculty of Medicine

Acknowledge Drs Ruth Crowther, Julie Dean, Britta Wigginton

Session Objectives
• What is healthy public health polices?

• What is policy analysis?

• Why is policy analysis important ?

• What is policy content analysis?

 Healthy public policies
“Healthy public policies improve the conditions under
which people live: secure, safe, adequate, and sustainable
livelihoods, lifestyles, and environments, including
housing, education, nutrition, information exchange, child
care, transportation, and necessary community and
personal social and health services. Policy adequacy may
be measured by its impact on population health”.

• The language has evolved from ‘healthy public

policy’ to ‘health in all policies’
1. de Leeuw, E., et al. (2014). "Health policy--why research it and how: health political science." Health research policy and systems 12: 55-55.
‘Health in all policies’ HiAP
“a collaborative approach to improving the health of all people by
incorporating health considerations into decision-making across sectors
and policy areas”
• Broad strategy addressing health challenges that systematically takes
into account the health implications of decisions in order to improve
population health and health equity.
• Seeks synergies and avoids harmful health impacts
• Improves accountability of policy-makers at all levels of policy-making
• Emphasis on consequences of public policies on health systems, SDH

• An integrated policy response across different government sectors

• Health, transport, agriculture, housing, education, and public safety etc……
• Departments / ministries responsible for particular areas – with a designated
budget
• Health is often the biggest ministry, however, most money is spent on acute
healthcare & not prevention

WHO, 2015
HEALTH IN ALL POLICIES (HIAP)

• Focus on the social, economic and environmental

determinants of health
• Target inequalities; and
• Promote integration and collaboration across sectors
and other non-government stakeholders
Why is HiAP important
• Health and health equity are critical prerequisites for achieving
other societal goals
• BUT social, environmental & economic determinants of health & health
inequities extend beyond the direct influence of the health sector & policies.

• HiAP tackles social, environmental and economic structural barriers

• Making healthy choice easier
• Protecting the public from risks

• Policies and decisions made in all sectors & at different levels of

governance can have a significant impact on population health &
health equity
• HiAP need to be inherently multi-disciplinary and cross-sectoral
• Health should be a key factor in sectors or government departments not
traditionally aligned with health e.g. housing, education, police etc…
 Globalisation
• Having a huge impact on
public health
• Changes in trade, travel,
communication and
migration
• Posing new challenges for
healthy public policy
• Influences how health
operate on a global scale
• Transcend national
boundaries
Health Impact Pyramid

Frieden, T. (2010). A Framework for Public Health Action: The Health Impact Pyramid.
American Journal of Public Health, 100 (4), 590-595
Issues for action
• How to prioritize which issues to address??
• Consider:
• Is the problem or issue of major public health
importance?
• Is the problem or issue amenable to change and
change is feasible?
• Is there sound evidence that it can be tackled?
• Are potential solutions politically and socially
acceptable?
• Is the Policy effective: meeting is goals and targets?
Working towards better policy
• Researchers need to communicate more broadly to a
variety of audiences beyond ‘other researchers’

• Researchers need to be aware that policy makers have

different priorities

• The ‘real-world’ processes of decision making in

politics, science, and public policy are very different
Brownson et al., (2006). Researchers and Policymakers: Travelers in Parallel Universes. Am J Health Promotion.
Human Rights in Policy
• The WHO Constitution (1946) envisages “…the highest
attainable standard of health as a fundamental right of
every human being.”
• A rights-based approach to health requires health
policy to prioritize the needs of priority groups
• 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and Universal
Health Coverage
• A human rights-based approach to health provides a set
of clear principles for setting and evaluating health
policy
Building healthy public policy - examples
• Banning smoking in public spaces
• Legislative protection of National Parks
• Drink driving laws
• Banning the use of commercial sun tanning beds
• Reducing the speed limits on roads near/around
schools What makes these examples of
healthy public policy?
• Nutrition content on food labels How are they defined as
healthy? Who benefits from
• Anti-bullying policies in schools these policies?

• National HPV vaccination programs

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-KBg6qVAsI
www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9DuxEpcq8w
http://www.sahealth.sa.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/Public+Content/SA+Health+Interne
t/Health+reform/Health+in+All+Policies/
What is policy analysis?
What is policy analysis?
• Determining what governments do, why
they do it, and what difference it makes
(Dye 1976 in Coveney 2010)

• Examining the processes of governance

and policy advocacy, rather than with
purely focusing on government itself.

Coveney, J. (2010). "Analyzing Public Health Policy: Three Approaches." Health Promotion Practice 11(4): 515-521.
Policy Analysis
• Not decision making
• Gathering data & information
• Costs and benefits of policy from a range of different
approaches

• Conducted by policy advisors

• Informs decision makers

• Policy Briefing notes
Why is policy analysis important ?
• Policy is a key concept and instrument to organize and
manage societies - how and why to act, assigning
resources

• Analysis of policy
• Helps identify if issues are not being priorities or resourced
• Helps identify if policy and practice / interventions arising
from its implementation are meeting the evidence and policy
intent / context / political rhetoric
• Is a prerequisite in advocacy work
• Informs Policy Maker
Policy Analysis
• Analysis of the policy process:
• Decision making level - identify who makes the decision & why
• Policy stakeholders ‘actors or players’
• Rational comprehensive, Incremental, mixed scanning ‘compromises’
• Policymaking Process level
• How were problems defined, agendas set, policy formulated
• Structural level
• Policy evaluation
• How was it implemented
• Consider the wider economic, political, technological, social, cultural
and historical context and influences (Palmer & Short 2014)
• Analysis in and for the policy process:
• Use of analytical techniques, research and advocacy in problem
definition, decision-making, evaluation and implementation.
Policy Analysis
• Context and content fundamental components
• Economic
• Cost- benefit analysis or Market analysis
• Achieve economic goals???
• Social
• Social justice – human rights - equity
• Unintended effects
• Environmental
• Impact environment, community
• Legal
• Accountability, human rights, reform needed..
Althaus, C., et al. (2012). The Australian policy handbook. Sydney, Allen & Unwin.
 2. Policy analysis

• Check whether policy goals corresponds to

what was intended and done
1. Analysis of policy process - Policy formulation
2. Analysis of policy content - Policy substance
3. Analysis of major stakeholders and their
influence on decision making (Week 7)
Althaus et al 2018 Chapter 3
Collins T. 2005. Health policy analysis: a simple tool for policy makers. Public health 119:192-196. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2004.03.006.
PUBH3002
Innvær S, etal2002. Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 7:239-244. 20
POLICY DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
What is Document / Content Analysis?
• Process for analyzing a policy issue so that a
decision can be made can easily be used for any
public health policy issue.

• Assess whether policy identifies

• Priority health issues
• Goals to be addressed
• Direction or actions to be taken to meet these goals
Collins, T. (2005). "Health policy analysis: a simple tool for policy makers." Public health 119(3): 192-196.
What is Document / Content Analysis?
• Policy content evaluation examines the
substantive information and material
contained within a policy in relation to:
• The policy’s requirements
• Its similarity to other policies
• The context in which it was developed, or
• Some combination of these.
CDC (Undated). Step by Step – Evaluating Violence and Injury Prevention Policies. Brief 3: Evaluating Policy Content, National Center for Injury Prevention
and Control, CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/injury/pdfs/policy/Brief%203-a.pdf
What is Document / Content Analysis?
• Systematic process for reviewing or evaluating
documents of any kind

“.. advertisements; agendas, attendance registers, and

minutes of meetings; manuals; background papers; books and
brochures; diaries and journals; event programs (i.e., printed
outlines); letters and memoranda; maps and charts;
newspapers (clippings/articles); press releases; program
proposals, application forms, and summaries; radio and
television program scripts; organisational or institutional
reports; survey data; and various public records. Scrapbooks
and photo albums can also furnish documentary material for
research purposes. These types of documents are found in
libraries, newspaper archives, historical society offices, and
organisational or institutional files.”
Bowen 2009
Policy Analysis vs Content Analysis
• Policy Analysis
• Analysis of policy formulation process

• Content analysis is the substance of policy.

• Examines a significant policy issue
• Explores the options to tackle this issue
• Component of broader policy analysis
Policy content analysis focus
• The core components and implementation
requirements of Policy content evaluation may focusthe
policy.
• The evidence base supporting the policy’s strategy.
• The context of the policy’s development and passage.
• The stakeholders’ roles and responsibilities. (CDC
Document / Content Analysis Steps
1. Defines context: background, contextual & situational
factors………
2. States the policy issue or problem: potential adverse
effects, solutions discrepancy between what currently
exists and what is needed…
3. Includes evidence: identifying policy problem
4. Considers different policy options: alternative courses of
action, potential interventions required.
5. Projects outcomes: potential conclusions or consequences
6. Applies evaluative criteria: Progress, efficiency including
cost and monetary output, effectiveness in attaining
proposed objectives, overall impact for population health.
7. Consider or Weigh the projected outcomes
Collins, T. (2005). "Health policy analysis: a simple tool for policy makers." Public health 119(3): 192-196.
WHAT ARE HEALTH POLICY DOCUMENTS?
• A health policy is a plan that steers the direction of
investment and action designed to alleviate inequity,
improve health care or prevent illness.

• Can manifest as laws, bureaucratic edicts, practice

guidelines or, more vaguely, simply as guiding principles

• Health policy documents provide a framework for

considering initiatives
• Understand “goals, opportunities, obligations and resources
Cheung, K. K., et al. (2010). "Health policy analysis: a tool to evaluate in policy documents the alignment between policy statements
and intended outcomes." Australian Health Review 34(4): 405-413.
Policy and document analysis
• Can guide health policy makers to navigate a path
between competing interests, evidence and demands
to develop a pragmatic policy response to one or more
health problems

• Improves chances of
• Successful implementation
• Achieving policy goals
• Ongoing funding options

• Embedded evaluation into policy development and

implementation assists the policy analysis process
HOW ARE POLICY DOCUMENTS RELEVANT?
• Document analysis is suitable for analysing policies and
procedures in any organisations or institutions:
Government, not for profit, private……

• Policy analysis phase - provide guidance to ensure initiatives

fulfil policy goals
• Implementation phase - to monitor progress and ensure all is
“on track”
• Evaluation phase – consider whether outcomes are aligned to
policy goals, and inform changes to future policy and action

• Detailed policy analysis helps identify area for

improvement to policies
Team work!
You are working for an organisation that
supports homeless men, and been asked to
develop a report on how the organisation can
help reduce HIV-related harm. The
organisation will apply for government
funding for this.
• You start by looking at current government
policy: HIV Action plan 2016-2021
• How would you start to make sense of this
text in a systematic way?

• https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0032/60
1889/qh-hiv-action-plan.pdf
• https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/60
1935/qh-sexual-health-strategy.pdf
Policy Analysis: Asking the Right
Questions
• What is the present policy?
• How, when, why did the policy come into being?
• Who are the policy makers?
• What have been the stages & methods used in the policy
making process?
• Is this the best process for this policy?
• Is it a good policy, what has it achieved?
• Does the present policy need to be changed?
Need a framework or a systematic approach
Palmer & Short 2010 p. 27-28
 CDC Policy Evaluation Questions

CDC (Undated). Step by Step – Evaluating Violence and Injury Prevention Policies. Brief 3: Evaluating Policy Content, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control,
CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/injury/pdfs/policy/Brief%203-a.pdf
ANALYTIC PROCEDURE – HOW TO DO IT!
• Phase 1: Selecting data / documents
• Phase 2: Appraising (making sense of) data
• Phase 3: Synthesising data

• Data from the documents – phrases, quotations,

passages – are organised into categories, themes
and examples through analysing the content

Brown 2009
FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS
1. Familiarization
2. Identifying a thematic framework
3. Indexing – applying codes from the framework
4. Charting – entering the summarized data into a
framework matrix
5. Mapping and interpretation

Gale et al. 2013

STAGES OF FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS
1. Familiarisation
• Overview of data by listening/watching/
reading

• Aware of key ideas and recurrent themes.

• Immersion through reading the document.

STAGES OF FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS
2. Identifying a thematic framework
• Identifying emerging themes, concepts or issues from
the data.
• Involves both logical and intuitive thinking, judgements
about relevance and importance, and making
connections between ideas
• Criteria for the framework may be:
• Developed during the analysis, tailored to the project
• Pre-defined – may be validated by others Criteria Illustrative
excerpts
Policy background

Policy evidence

Implementation
Monitoring and evaluation

Stakeholder engagement
STAGES OF FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS
3 Indexing
• Identify relevant, meaningful, passages of text or data
that are linked to a particular theme.

4 Charting
• Lifting the specific pieces of data it from its original
context in the text and placing in charts that consist of
headings and subheadings
STAGES OF FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS
5 Mapping and interpretation
• Analysis of key characteristics laid out in
the charts.
• Consider documents with a critical eye
• e.g. they are not necessarily “precise,
accurate or complete”
 Activity!
• Queensland sexual health strategy – PRISONERS
• https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0025/442681/sexual-health-strategy-
consult.pdf
Criteria Illustrative excerpts
Policy background Briefly summarise the background / stats specific to the
population of prisoners in Qld.
Policy evidence
Implementation This section should describe the implementation processes for
your policy. What policy tools and processes for implementation
does the policy describe? What financial, human and/or
organisational resources for implementation are identified by
the policy? What facilitators and/or barriers to implementation
does the policy describe?
Monitoring and
evaluation
Stakeholder
engagement
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
“Documents of all types can help the researcher uncover
meaning, develop understanding, and discover insights
relevant to the research problem”
Merriam, 1988 in Bowen, 2009

• Qualitative analysis can help in “defining concepts,

mapping range and nature of phenomena, creating
typologies, finding associations, providing explanations,
and developing strategies” (Ritchie and Spencer,
1994:186).
USES OF RESEARCH IN DOCUMENTS?
• Context, background information, historical insight
• Suggest questions and gaps in a field
• Complementary research data – capture different
aspects
• Tracking change over time
• Verify or corroborate findings from other sources -
triangulation
• May be the only data available if the event occurred a
long time ago
• BUT you still need to critique the data used to develop,
support, implement policy
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
• Ask critical questions
1. How accurate, representative, credible, authentic is
the document/content?
2. Is it comprehensive or selective in covering the topic?
Is it balanced or uneven?
3. What aspects have not been addressed fully? What
are the gaps or limitations? What are some other
ways of considering the topic?
4. Who is advantaged or disadvantaged? Whose voice is
presented or not represented?
Bloom’s Taxonomy
DOCUMENT ANALYSIS IN QUALITATIVE
RESEARCH
• Applied policy research can:
• Consider context (form and nature of what exists)
• Diagnose the reasons for what exits
• Evaluate effectiveness of what exists

• Develop strategy - identifying new theories,

policies, plans and actions

Gale, N. K., et al. (2013). "Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research." BMC Medical Research
Methodology 13(1): 1-8.

Srivastava, A. and S. B. Thomson (2009). "Framework analysis: a qualitative methodology for applied policy research." Journal of Administration and Governance
4(72)
Srivastava and Thomson (2009). "Framework analysis: a qualitative methodology for applied policy research." Journal of Administration and Governance 4(72).
Document analysis criteria – Cheung 2010
1. Accessibility.
• Facilitator or barrier to usefulness and implementation of policy.
• Who are identified as the intended audience for this program
2. Policy background.
• Consideration of scientific results
• Difference sources of evidence
3. Goals: Clear and precise
4. Resources: Financial resource, organisational capacity
5. Monitoring and evaluation:
• Independent evaluation strengthens the analyses’ credibility.
• Data collection before and after implementation also increases the
credibility of the evaluation.
6. Political opportunities. Assessment of political opportunities is
difficult using document analysis. Thus, this criterion was
excluded from analysis.
7. Public opportunities: stakeholder involvement
8. Obligations. Development of explicit objectives and obligations
Cheung, K. K., et al. (2010). "Health policy analysis: a tool to evaluate in policy documents the alignment between policy statements and intended outcomes." Australian Health Review 34(4): 405-413.
Summary of document analysis
• Document mapping proved to be vital in obtaining a
complete picture of the policy documents
• Identify where policies are not consistent with their
intended outcomes
PROS OF DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
• ‘Triangulation’ – using different methodologies to study the same
phenomenon i.e. convergence and corroboration to reduce
potential bias in a single study
• Efficient – data selection not data collection!
• Available, original textual material can be easily accessed
• Cost-effective
• Documents are not affected by the research process, stable
• May cover long span of time, different events and settings
• Systematic and comprehensive– methodical analysis of the data
• Enables comparisons between and associations within different
policy cases, documents, issues
• Analyses and interpretations can be judged by others
• (Gale et al. 2013; Bowen, 2009)
CONS OF DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
• They may not hold the detail you need
• Sometimes hard to access
• May be biased if specific documents selected
• Role of the researcher
• Documents do not necessarily reflect what happens ‘on
the ground’
• (Bowen, 2009)
CHALLANGES OF DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
• Not all policy and implementation strategies are
grounded in evidence
• How do you assess
• Policy grounded in values based
• Policy based on a symbolic government concern or platform
• Address an insignificant element of complex real problem.
• Systematic assessment of the policy process and its
assumptions helps to expose such limitations
• Responsibility of the policy analyst
• (De Leeuw 2014)
 CHALLANGES OF DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
“the causal and final chains of drivers and consequences
of policies and their contexts are hard to map, and many
policies fail to include specific performance criteria or
direct intervention parameters” (UNEP 2014)
• Setting the boundaries of a policy analysis therefore
becomes a negotiated process between many
stakeholders
• Recognises the uniqueness of each policy issue and
context
• Focus on intermediate policy effects rather than end-
point health impact
de Leeuw, E., et al. (2014). "Health policy--why research it and how: health political science." Health research policy and systems 12: 55-55.
UNEP: Training Manual - Module 5–6.5.1 Understanding Policy Effects and Policy Effectiveness; 2014. [http://www.unep.org/ieacp/iea/training/manual/
module5/1236.aspx].
Team Work
• Create a list of National and Queensland
Sexual health related strategies.
• Compare
• The goals or visions
• Strategic directions and priority actions
• Compare the content of the policies to
identify major similarities and differences
between them.
Task 2: Health Policy Document Analysis
• Step 1: Select a policy document for your document
analysis
• Step 2: Extract data and compile illustrative excerpts
from your chosen policy document
• Step 3: Analyse and synthesise the findings from your
consideration of the content of the policy.
• This section makes up the main body of your assessment
• Maximum word count 2000 not including title, reference list
or Appendix, Table 1
 Task 2: Health Policy Document Analysis
Data extraction tool
Criteria Illustrative excerpts
Policy background Provide a clear background to your policy, including the population(s) to whom the policy is meant to
apply, and the main aims and proposed actions of your policy.

Policy evidence Discuss the evidence base for your policy. To what extent was the policy informed by ‘evidence’ from
credible sources? What contextual factors that impact on health (e.g., social, cultural and ecological
determinants of health) were identified in the policy?

Implementation Describe the implementation processes for your policy. What policy tools and processes for
implementation does the policy describe? What financial, human and/or organisational resources for
implementation are identified by the policy? What facilitators and/or barriers to implementation does
the policy describe?

Monitoring and Outline the monitoring and evaluation processes for your policy.
evaluation

Stakeholder Describe the policy stakeholders and the processes used to engage them. List stakeholders identified in
engagement the policy and briefly consider their role in the development or implementation of the policy. Does the
document mention cooperation between different levels of government (federal, local, state)? Was the
policy externally reviewed or evaluated by stakeholders? What was the outcome of this process? Were
the views and preferences of the target population sought? Does the document identify the
advantages/disadvantages the policy may bring to particular stakeholder group(s)?
Task 2: Health Policy Document Analysis
Data extraction tool
Questions

Judith Dean
Level 0 Room 022
School of Public Health
Ph: + 61 7 3346 4876
j.dean4@uq.edu.au
REFERENCES
• Bowen, G.A. (2009),"Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method",
Qualitative Research Journal, Vol. 9, 2, pp. 27 - 40.
• Broom, A. and Adams, J. (2012) Evidence-based health care in context: Critical
social science perspectives. Ashgate, Surrey England.
• Cheung, K., Mirzaei, M., and Leeder, S., (2009). Health policy analysis: a tool to
evaluate in policy documents the alignment between policy statements and
intended outcomes. Australian Health Review 34(4) 405-413.
• Farrer et al. 2015. Advocacy for health equity. The Milbank Quarterly, 93(2),
392-437.
• Frieden, T. R. (2010). A framework for public health action: The health impct
pyramid. Am J Public Health. 100(4): 590–595.
• Freudenberg N, Franzosa E, Chisholm J, Libman K. 2015. New Approaches for
Moving Upstream: How State and Local Health Departments Can Transform
Practice to Reduce Health Inequalities. Health Education & Behavior, Vol.
42(1S) 46S–56S.
• Frolich, K. and Potvin, L. (2008) Transcending the Known in Public Health
Practice. The Inequality Paradox: The Population Approach and Vulnerable
Populations. Am J Public Health. 98(2): 216–22.
• Gale, N., Heath, G., Cameron, E., Rashid, S., and Redwood, S. (2013). Using the
framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary
health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology201313:117.
REFERENCES
• Golden S, Earp, J-A. 2012. Social ecological approaches to individuals and their
contexts. Twenty Years of Health Education & Behavior Health Promotion
Interventions. Health Educ Behav, 39(3), 364-372.
• Lieberman L, Golden S, Earp J-A (2014). Structural Approaches to Health Promotion.
What Do We Need to Know About Policy and Environmental Change? Health Education
and Behavior, 40(5):520-5.
• Broom, A. and Adams, J. (2012) Evidence-based health care in context: Critical social
science perspectives. Ashgate, Surrey England.
• Farrer et al. 2015. Advocacy for health equity. The Milbank Quarterly, 93(2), 392-437.
• Freudenberg N, Franzosa E, Chisholm J, Libman K. 2015. New Approaches for Moving
Upstream: How State and Local Health Departments Can Transform Practice to Reduce
Health Inequalities. Health Education & Behavior, Vol. 42(1S) 46S–56S.
• Frolich, K. and Potvin, L. (2008) Transcending the Known in Public Health Practice. The
Inequality Paradox: The Population Approach and Vulnerable Populations. Am J Public
Health. 98(2): 216–22.
• Golden S, Earp, J-A. 2012. Social ecological approaches to individuals and their
contexts. Twenty Years of Health Education & Behavior Health Promotion
Interventions. Health Educ Behav, 39(3), 364-372.
 REFERENCES
• Lin V, Smith J & Fawkes S (2014) Chapter 6 Public health interventions: From
quarantine to the rise of ‘evidence-based practice’. Public Health Practice in
Australia. The Organised Effort. Allen & Unwin, Australia.
• Pons-Vigués M, Dies E, Morrison H, Salas-Nicás S, Hoffman R et al. 2014. Social
and health policies or interventions to tackle health inequalities in European
cities: a scoping review. BMC Public Health, 14:198.
• Rasanathan, K, Montesinos, E, Matheson, D, Etiene, C,, Evans, T. 2011. Primary
health care and the social determinants of health: essential and complementary
approaches for reducing inequities in health. Journal of Epidemiology and
Community Health, 65(8):656-60.
• Ritchie, J. & Spencer, L. 1994. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy
research" by Jane Ritchie and Liz Spencer in A.Bryman and R. G. Burgess [eds.]
“Analyzing qualitative data”, 1994, pp.173-194.
• Solar O, Irwin A. A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants
of health. Social Determinants of Health Discussion Paper 2 (Policy and Practice).
• Srivastava, A. & Thomson, S.B. (2009). Framework analysis: A qualitative
methodology for applied policy research. Journal of Administration and
Governance, 4, 72.
• World Health Organization (2015). Health in All Policies Training Manual.
Available at URL:www.who.int/social_determinants/publications/health-policies-
manual/en/