Skip to main content

Table 4 Replication Logic

From: How and why do win–win strategies work in engaging policy-makers to implement Health in All Policies? A multiple-case study of six state- and national-level governments

IndicatorStrength of commitment to the Health in All Policies (HiAP) mandateClarity/detail of mandate
California (Theoretical replication)Weak
Mandate is an Executive Order with mechanisms in place to ensure accountability; a HiAP Task Force was established to promote the mandate
No public funds available for specific initiatives
Targets and timelines on ad hoc basis benefiting mutual partners through the identification of strategies that address multiple goals at one time while providing ‘co-benefits’; the Department of Health is responsible for implementation, including setting priorities and facilitating ISA; the goal of improving population health through promoting equity and sustainability
Ecuador (Literal replication)Strong
Mandate is a long-term strategy called ‘Buen Vivir’, backed by the 2008 Constitution with specifically provided targets and timelines; the National Secretariat for Planning and Development (SENPLADES) is the entity that promotes the country’s integrated development at the national and sector-wide levels;
funds for initiatives come from the central government
Total of 92 national policies and 138 goals and indicators; HiAP coordinated by SENPLADES at the national level; the National Planning Council (an intersectoral, professional body) serves as the technical secretariat for all levels of government; health is described as an important sector with a work plan (others include green economy, trade, and technology, working together as an overreaching national strategy), helping meet the requirements of “Good Living Objective 3: To Improve the Quality of Life of the Population”
Finland (Theoretical replication)Weak
Mandate is a long-term strategy called ‘Health 2015’; accountability mechanisms are coordinated by the Advisory Board for Public Health and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health
Limited public funds were allocated for initiatives
Health 2015 outlines 8 goals with a 15-year timeline; the Advisory Board for Public Health and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health coordinate the implementation and monitoring; HiAP’s aim of enabling people to live longer and healthier lives while reducing health inequalities within the country
Norway (Literal replication)Strong
Mandate is a long-term strategy called National Strategy to Reduce Social Inequalities in Health; accountability mechanisms include annual review and reporting;
an interministerial committee was created and initiatives were incorporated into the national budget
Objectives clearly stated but without clear timelines; the Directorate of Health is responsible for coordinating sectors and monitoring/reporting on progress; HiAP is framed around social equity but focused on reducing health inequities
Scotland (Theoretical replication)Weak
Mandate were pilot strategies called ‘Equally Well’ and ‘Achieving our Potential’; accountability mechanisms include reporting and evaluation of Equally Well conducted by local test sites and the Ministerial Task Force; a Ministerial Task Force on Health Inequalities was created to support HiAP; limited public grant funding for pilot projects was provided
Achieving our Potential includes specific targets; Equally Well does not provide clear targets and timelines; regular evaluations at a set timeline were laid out, without targets (although the nature of test site work including emergent objectives/activities renders that somewhat irrelevant); each Equally Well test site had a coordinator Ministerial Task Force responsible for evaluation; Equally Well is clear about improving health equity
Thailand (Literal replication)Strong
Mandate derives from the National Health Act; accountability mechanisms derived from the Thai constitution include the public’s right to sue government organisations that fail to comply with regulations about impact assessment; a National Health Assembly and National Health Commission were created to support HiAP
Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a key part of policy coordination in Thailand (however, no clear targets or timelines for the use of HIA were found); the National Health Commission, which is an intersectoral governmental body, approves a budget specific for the National Health Commission Office, which is largely responsible for HiAP-related activities in Thailand; one principle of HIA use in the National Health Act is justice in order to “reduce inequity and injustice in respect of health