Just when you thought there was time to take a break, here we are uploading papers 3 & 4 for you to mull over. Remember, please try to avoid printing these off as they will be included in your event pack if you are attending the seminar.
Professor Charles Abraham, University of Exeter Medical School
An intervention mapping approach
to developing effective and useful behaviour change interventions
Translational research is needed to
ensure that evidence-based models of behaviour change are adopted and applied
in health services. The
Intervention Mapping approach will be outlined and its utility explained in
relation to co-creation of behaviour change interventions in health care
contexts. The importance of external validity to behaviour change intervention
design and evaluation will be emphasised as well as the importance of
understanding routine care and variability in such care.
Dr Geof Rayner, City University
The social-behavioural
model of public health: some conundrums
In Ecological Public Health: Reshaping the Conditions for Good Health
Tim Lang and I set out 5 models or traditions of public health.[1] We called
these Sanitary-Environmental, Bio-Medical, Techno-Economic, Social-Behavioural,
and Ecological, the last being newest of these traditions.
In the 1950s, Jerry Morris,
later of the LSHTM, called for attention to the lifestyle components of health.
Subsequently Abdel Omran’s theory of the Epidemiological Transition,[2]
developed in the 1960s, highlighted the rise of chronic diseases. While Omran’s
suggestions seem evidently true today (think of diabetes and obesity) other
data (those of Robert Fogel and Dora Costa [3, 4]) show that many chronic
diseases were in long term decline.
Whatever the resolution of
this conundrum, which relates to the changing causation and form of chronic
disease (or Non-Communicable Diseases, more widely understood), the
Social-Behavioural model of public health is not, in fact, new at all. Rulers
have attempted to influence the behaviour of their people ostensibly for health
reasons for centuries. King James of England and Scotland published a diatribe
against tobacco in 1604[5]. And the model is older yet when religious precepts that
explicitly or implicitly include health, such as towards washing, or choice or
preparation of foods, are included. Ruling groups have attempted to influence
behaviour throughout history, although not entirely for the population’s own
good! In the Elizabethan period Sumptuary Laws (a term which draws from Latin
for expenditure) attempted to establish a means of stratifying social classes
according to occupational dress (applying newly devised 'Statutes of Apparel').
In the modern period Karl Polanyi once remarked that the introduction of the
New Poor Law in 1834, shaped by Malthus’ economics, was the rising bourgeois
state’s attempt to institute social controls over the emergent labouring
class.[6] It could be argued that the DWP’s programme of sanctions represents
much the same thing, albeit without the cost of running a workhouse.
In the modern public health
context the Social-Behavioural model has emerged as the main rival to the Bio-Medical
model. There is a rich history of health education, some of it very effective,
some less so, from early sanitarian booklets on healthy eating to the war-time
use of catchy lines: ‘Coughs and Sneezes Spread Diseases’. Behaviour too was
the point of focus of Tony Blair’s one and only speech on public health, where
unsurprisingly - given his neoliberal perspective - matters like obesity were
seen not as public health problems at all but as diseases of individual
choice.[7]
Whatever the ideological format
of understanding, since the 1950s, smoking, food and nutrition, alcohol use,
and physical activity, and more, are increasingly highlighted as factors in
chronic disease prevention, clinical areas where the biomedical model
struggles. Of course, state rationality is never clear cut. The Labour
government desired to expand the gambling industry but without the problems
such expansion would cause. A forlorn, and to be cynical, unrealisable hope.
Late 19th century pragmatist
philosophy and psychology gave focus to the importance of habit as part of the
social basis of behaviour and identity formation. As William James once put it,
“Habit is ... the enormous flywheel of society, its most precious conservative
agent. It alone is what keeps us all within the bounds of ordinance, and saves
the children of fortune from the envious uprisings of the poor.”[8] Influence
habit, for example by setting or influencing social norms, perceptual cues,
etc. and you have at your disposal an efficient means for regulating social
behaviours. Early 20th century social science focused on the history of
undirected modernization of behavioural rules over matters like eating,
defecating, nasal-blowing, spitting, etc., via the analysis of
social-psychological mechanisms like embarrassment and shame. [9, 10] If the
royal court once decided such rules, increasingly the state, commerce and civil
society assumed this role, and in a more intentionally directive manner. The
Social-Behavioural model is not just a function of the state because the state (through
education or public information) might not – and in fact is not - the principal means by which we obtain information about
health-related behaviours or cues for habit formation. From the late 19th
century, newly mass-manufactured products were marketed with health messages, catering
to an increasingly segmented consumer marketplace, like products for women.
[11] Personal health habits were changed by messages such as the value of
regular bathing of bodies, cleanliness of the home, and about women’s domestic
responsibilities and work. These were salutary. Today the marketing firepower
of transnational corporations is massive. In work for the World Health Organization,
Tim Lang and I showed that Coca Cola can spend more annually on its marketing
of soft drinks than the entire biannual budget of the World Health
Organization[12]. And yet, when modern corporate influences seem both powerful
and baleful, there has been an increasingly vented argument that public health
advocates should enter into alliance with these same forces, for examples
through Public Private Partnerships, [13] Healthy Alliances,[14] or Corporate
Social Responsibility and Responsibility Deals. [15] The press epithet ‘Nanny
Statism’ misses its mark in many respects. Increasingly commerce is used to
regulate or influence behaviour, even while it is approved or sanctioned by
state strategy (in the case of Responsibility Deals, Change4Life, etc).
Oddly too, the recent analytic
focus on behaviour reunites public health and economics (the latter as
‘behavioural economics’),
which begets the latest fad, ‘nudge’, with the hidden ideological charm being
that the State should do something (warn people, edit choices), but not
much[16, 17]. Ranged against the power and finance of commerce, what leverage
do public health advocates possess?
What methods do they use? Is
it psychology, marketing – reborn as social marketing (with pitiful budgets)?
Or is it law? Furthermore, if we wish to make efforts to get people to cycle
more, to use their car less, etc – all with ecological public health gain – how
can we realistically achieve this aim when other public institutions promote
the opposite (eg. the BBC’s Top Gear – which seemingly has the aim of inducing
laughter at any suggestion that movement should be undertaken through human
effort alone?)
The Canadian public health
writer Nancy Milio expressed it well in the mid-1970s. It could only be a ‘minimal
aim’, she said, to make healthy choices easier: the unhealthy choices must also
be blocked.
And for the most widespread
impact the focus should be on ‘national-level policy-making’ which would in
turn change ‘the range of options for the largest number of people’ [18]. She
was right although her argument was insufficient. And where are the forces to
make this happen today? Or, alternatively, do public health advocates instead
realign their careers according to the latest neoliberal guidance of the day,
or, a further option, do we enlist celebrities with a passing health interest
to tell us what do instead? [19] Sadly, too often this is what the
Social-Behavioural model has become.
1. Rayner, G. and T. Lang,
Ecological Public Health: reshaping the conditions for good health.
2012, Abingdon: Routledge /
Earthscan.
2. Omran, A., R, The
Epidemiologic Transition: A Theory of the Epidemiology of Population
Change. Milbank Memorial Fund
Quarterly, 1971. 49.(4): p. 509-538.
3. Costa, D.L. and M.E. Kahn,
Public Health and Mortality: What Can We Learn from the Past?,
in Berkeley Symposium on
Poverty, the Distribution of Income and Public Policy. 2003.
4. Fogel, R.W. and D.L. Costa,
A theory of technophysio evolution, with some implications for
forecasting population, health
care costs, and pension costs. Demography, 1997. 34(1): p.
49-66.
5. Stuart, J.K., A
Counter-blaste to Tobacco. 1604, London: R.B. CHECK.
6. Polanyi, K., The Great
Transformation. 1957, Boston: Beacon Press.
7. Blair, T., Our Nation's Future:
Public Health. Speech by the Prime Minister on healthy living.
Nottingham. July 26. 2006,
Prime Minister's Office, London: http://www.number-
10.gov.uk/output/Page9921.asp,
accessed 7 May 2009.
8. James, W., The Principles
of Psychology. 1890, New York: Dover Publications.
9. Elias, N., The Civilizing
Process Vol.I. The History of Manners. 1969, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
10. Elias, N., The Civilizing
Process, Vol.II. State Formation and Civilization. 1982, Oxford:
Blackwell.
11. Mokyr, J., The Gifts of
Athena: Historical Origins of the Knowledge Economy. 2002, Princeton,
New Jersey: Princeton
University Press.
12. Lang, T., G. Rayner, and
E. Kaelin, The Food Industry, Diet, Physical Activity and Health: a
Review of Reported Commitments
and Practice of 25 of the World's Largest Food Companies.
Report to the World Health
Organisation. 2006, London: City University Centre for Food
Policy.
13. Simon, P.A. and J.E.
Fielding, Public health and business: a partnership that makes cents.
Health Aff (Millwood), 2006.
25(4): p. 1029-39.
14. Andreasen, A.R. and P.
Kotler, Strategic marketing for nonprofit organizations. 6th ed. 2003,
Upper Saddle River, N.J.:
Pearson Prentice Hall. vii, 536 p.
15. Lang, T. and G. Rayner,
Corporate responsibility in public health. BMJ, 2010. 341: p. c3758.
16. Rayner, G. and T. Lang, Is
nudge an effective public health strategy to tackle obesity? No.
BMJ, 2011. 342: p.
d2168-d2168.
17. Thaler, R. and C.
Sunstein, Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness.
2008, New Haven CT: Yale
University Press.
18. Milio, N., A framework for
prevention: changing health-damaging to health-generating life
patterns. American Journal of
Public Health, 1976. 66(5): p. 435-439.
19. Rayner, G., Does celebrity
involvement in public health campaigns deliver long term benefit?
No. BMJ, 2012. 345.
No comments:
Post a Comment