Enabling factors and barriers for the use of health impact assessment in decision-making processes
Open accessAbstract
Objective To identify key stakeholders' views of factors that may enable or limit the use of health impact assessment (HIA) in the decision-making processes within their organizations.Methods In-depth interviews were carried out with 14 key informants from local and regional stakeholder organizations.Setting North East of England, 2005.Results Three emergent themes were identified: leadership in HIA; integration of HIA with existing organizational structures; and joint working between key stakeholder organizations.Conclusions With the exception of a 'leadership vacuum' that had not been described previously, the present findings on factors that enable or limit the use of HIA in decision making by organizations in the region are consistent with those reported previously in the literature. In the absence of a nationally defined regulatory and organizational framework for HIA practice, key stakeholders' views on factors that promote or hinder the use of HIA in the decision-making process of their organizations may be pivotal in advancing HIA practice in the region.
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?
Plusieurs facteurs ont été identifiés comme défavorables au succès de l'EIS : politiques ou projets controversés, non-partage des valeurs de l'EIS par les parties prenantes, refus de transparence, écarts importants entre les cultures organisationnelles, non-disponibilité des données, temporalité de l'EIS inadéquate avec la prise de décision, manque de temps, de ressources et de compétences.
“Plusieurs facteurs ont été identifiés comme défavorables, notamment les politiques ou projets controversés, le non-partage des valeurs de l'EIS par les parties prenantes, le refus de transparence, des écarts importants entre les cultures organisationnelles, la non-disponibilité des données, une temporalité de l'EIS inadéquate avec laprise de décision ou encore le manque de temps, de ressources”
From L’évaluation d’impact sur la santé pour scruter et sculpter les politiques (2021) · cites this paper as [35]
Cites
Securing Good Health for the Whole Population
Wanless, D. (2004) · Cited by 664 · see citing works
Environmental Impact Assessment: A Comparative Review
Wood, C. M. (1995) · Cited by 590 · see citing works
Lock, K. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7246.1395 · Cited by 337 · see citing works
Environmental impact assessment, a comparative review
James, V. U. (1996) · Landscape and Urban Planning · doi:10.1016/s0169-2046(96)00347-7 · Cited by 326 · see citing works
Use of health impact assessment in incorporating health considerations in decision making
Davenport, C., Mathers, J., & Parry, J. (2006) · Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health · doi:10.1136/jech.2005.040105 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Integrating health into impact assessment: challenges and opportunities
Ahmad, B. (2004) · Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal · doi:10.3152/147154604781766094 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Self-citationLeu, W.-S., Williams, W. P., & Bark, A. W. (1996) · Project Appraisal · doi:10.1080/02688867.1996.9727013 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Environmental hazards and health
Beeley, J. M., Smith, D., & Oakley, E. (1993) · British Medical Bulletin · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.bmb.a072612 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Kemm, J. R., Parry, J. M., & Palmer, S. (2004) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198526292.003.0022 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Kemm, J. R., Parry, J. M., & Palmer, S. (2004) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198526292.003.0021 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Can health feasibly be considered as part of the planning process in Scotland?
Higgins, M., Douglas, M. J., & Muirie, J. (2005) · Environmental Impact Assessment Review · doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2005.07.005 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Bond, A. (2004) · Oxford University Press eBooks · Cited by 9 · see citing works
HIA and pollution prevention control: What they can learn from each other
Ahmad, B., Pless‐Mulloli, T., & Vizard, C. (2005) · Environmental Impact Assessment Review · doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2005.07.004 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Self-citationAhmad, B., Pless-Mulloli, T., & White, M. (2006) · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Jabot, F., Tremblay, E., Rivadeneyra, A., Diallo, T. A., & Lapointe, G. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17186558 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
L’évaluation d’impact sur la santé pour scruter et sculpter les politiques
Jabot, F. (2021) · Santé Publique · doi:10.3917/spub.211.0007 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ahmad, B., Chappel, D., Pless-Mulloli, T., & White, M.
- Affiliations
- Newcastle University (GB)
- Durham University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Ahmad, B.
- ORCID
- Ahmad, B.
- Venue
- Public Health
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-05
- Volume
- 122
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 452-457
- ISSN
- 0033-3506 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1983662825
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 1.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Public Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
- Funders
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007470/1)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental and Social Impact Assessments
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Services Management and Policy
- Keywords
- health impact assessment, decision-making, enabling factors, barriers, stakeholder perspectives, leadership, organizational integration, inter-organizational collaboration, regulatory framework, North East England
- MeSH terms
- Decision Making, Health Planning, Humans, Interinstitutional Relations, Leadership, Public Health Administration, Organizational Culture, Systems Integration
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
