Beyond leadership: Political strategies for coordination in health policies
Abstract
Health in All Policies (HiAP) promises to improve population health by harnessing the energies and activities of various sectors. Nevertheless, it faces well-documented bureaucratic obstacles and appears to require intersectoral governance if it is to be established. The basic problems of establishing intersectoral governance for HiAP are known to public administration and political science. On reading that literature, we find that the difficulty of establishing intersectoral governance for HiAP breaks down into two kinds of problems: that of establishing coordinated actions at all (coordination); and ensuring that they endure in changed political circumstances (durability). We further find that policymakers' solutions fall into three categories: visible ones of political will (e.g., plans and targets); bureaucratic changes such as the introduction of Health Impact Assessment or reorganization; and indirect methods such as data publication and support from outside groups to put pressure on the government. It can seem that Health in All Policies, like much of public health, depends on effective and committed policymakers but is vulnerable to changing political winds. The three kinds of strategies suggest how policymakers can, and do, create intersectoral governance that functions and persists, expanding the range of effective policy recommendations.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The collaborative whole-of-government approach minimised conflicting departmental objectives.
“This collaborative approach minimised conflicting departmental objectives, enhanced policy coherence and accountability (Greer & Lillvis, 2014), and incorporated health considerations into the decision-making process across all sectors (Wilkins, 2002).”
From Advancing progressive health policy to reduce NCDs amidst international commercial opposition: Tobacco standardised packaging in Australia (2018) · cites this paper as Greer & Lillvis, 2014
Whole-of-government approaches to regulation should help minimise commercial pressures through policy coherence and coordination.
“Nevertheless, whole-of-government approaches to regulation should help minimise commercial pressures through policy coherence and coordination (Greer & Lillvis, 2014).”
From Advancing progressive health policy to reduce NCDs amidst international commercial opposition: Tobacco standardised packaging in Australia (2018) · cites this paper as Greer & Lillvis, 2014
The collaborative whole-of-government approach enhanced policy coherence and accountability.
“This collaborative approach minimised conflicting departmental objectives, enhanced policy coherence and accountability (Greer & Lillvis, 2014), and incorporated health considerations into the decision-making process across all sectors (Wilkins, 2002).”
From Advancing progressive health policy to reduce NCDs amidst international commercial opposition: Tobacco standardised packaging in Australia (2018) · cites this paper as Greer & Lillvis, 2014
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Crosbie, E., Thomson, G., Freeman, B., & Bialous, S. (2018) · Global Public Health · doi:10.1080/17441692.2018.1443485 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
- Authors
- Greer, S. L., & Lillvis, D. F.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lillvis, Denise F.
- Venue
- Health Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-05
- Volume
- 116
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 12-17
- ISSN
- 0168-8510 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1975390957
- Cited by
- 90
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 11.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Health Policy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (T-32HS000053-20)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
- Keywords
- Health in All Policies, intersectoral governance, intersectoral coordination, political strategy, policy durability, political will, health impact assessment, bureaucratic change, public health policy, population health
- MeSH terms
- Government, Health Policy, Humans, Leadership, Politics, Public Health
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review