Cited by 26Environmental and Social Impact AssessmentsPublic Health Policies and EducationPublic Health and Environmental Issues

A Comparative Analysis of Health Impact Assessment Implementation Models in the Regions of Montérégie (Québec, Canada) and Nouvelle-Aquitaine (France)

Open access
Jabot, Françoise, Tremblay, Emile, Rivadeneyra, Ana, Diallo, Thierno Amadou, Lapointe, Geneviève·2020·International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract

Many countries have introduced health impact assessment (HIA) at the national, regional, or local levels. In France and in Québec, there is increasing interest in using HIA to inform decision-makers and influence policies, programs, and projects. This paper aims to compare HIA implementation models in two regions: Nouvelle-Aquitaine (France) and Montérégie (Québec, Canada) using a case study methodology. The objective is to gain a better understanding of the similarities and differences in the approaches used to achieve the operationalization of HIA. The methodological approach involves four steps: (1) design of an analytical framework based on the literature; (2) exchanges within the research team and review of documents concerning the two implementation strategies under study; (3) development of the case studies based on the proposed framework; and (4) cross-comparison analysis of the case studies. The findings show that the two regions share certain similarities, including the strong commitment and political will of the public health organizations involved and a well-established culture of engaging in intersectoral action with municipal partners. Differences mainly concern their different approaches to implementing HIAs in accordance with the regional policies and the organizational and administrative contexts in place. This study identifies potential avenues for supporting the practice of HIA at the municipal level.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/ijerph17186558

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Governance of the HIA process is still insufficiently documented, and the question of leadership is delicate, particularly regarding the place of health authorities.

    “La gouvernance du processus est encore insuffisamment documentée et la question du leadership est un point délicat, s'agissant notamment de la place des autorités de santé[22].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [16]Bhatia R. Farhang L. Heller J. Lee M. Orenstein M. Richerdson M. Wernham A. Minimum Elements and Practice Standards for Health Impact Assessment, Version 3 (September 2014) Available online: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/040d/8ff2749f8ef2ec8b8233b7bffae9f7a38a12.pdf (accessed on 25 August 2020)
  2. [30]Yin R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods 2nd ed. Applied Social Research Methods Series Sage Publications Thousand Oaks, CA, USA 1994

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jabot, F., Tremblay, E., Rivadeneyra, A., Diallo, T. A., & Lapointe, G.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Direction of environmental health and toxicology, Institut National de Santé Publique du Québec, Quebec City, QC G1V 5B3, Canada
  • Université de Bordeaux (FR)
  • National Collaborating Centre for Healthy Public Policy, Montreal, QC H2P 1E2, Canada
Corresponding author
Jabot, Françoise
Venue
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-09-09
Volume
17
Issue
18
Pages
6558
ISSN
1660-4601 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3084110010
Cited by
26
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 10
FWCI
4.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Oskar-Bordeaux (Universite de Bordeaux) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
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
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Public Health and Environmental Issues
Keywords
health impact assessment, intersectoral collaboration, municipal partnerships, public health organizations, political will, cross-national comparison, Montérégie, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
MeSH terms
Canada, France, Health Policy, Humans, Public Health, Quebec, Health Impact Assessment

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