Privatisation of government services in Australia: what is known about health and equity impacts.

BACKGROUND: Historically in Australia, all levels of government created collective wealth by owning and operating infrastructure, and managing natural assets, key public goods and essential services while being answerable to the public. This strong state tradition was challenged in the 1980s when privatisation became a widespread government approach globally. Privatisation involves displacing the public sector through modes of financing, ownership, management and product or service delivery. The Australian literature shows that negative effects from privatisation are not spread equitably, and the health and equity impacts appear to be under-researched. This narrative overview aims to address a gap in the literature by answering research questions on what evidence exists for positive and negative outcomes of privatisation; how well societal impacts are evaluated, and the implications for health and equity. METHODS: Database and grey literature were searched by keywords, with inclusion criteria of items limited to Australia, published between 1990 and 2022, relating to any industry or government sector, including an evaluative aspect, or identifying positive or negative aspects from privatisation, contracting out, or outsourcing. Thematic analysis was aided by NVivo qualitative data software and guided by an a-priori coding frame. RESULTS: No items explicitly reflected on the relationship between privatisation and health. Main themes identified were the public cost of privatisation, loss of government control and expertise, lack of accountability and transparency, constraints to accessing social determinants of health, and benefits accruing to the private sector. DISCUSSION: Our results supported the view that privatisation is more than asset-stripping the public sector. It is a comprehensive strategy for restructuring public services in the interests of capital, with privatisation therefore both a political and commercial determinant of health. There is growing discussion on the need for re-nationalisation of certain public assets, including by the Victorian government. CONCLUSION: Privatisation of public services is likely to have had an adverse impact on population health and contributed to the increase in inequities. This review suggests that there is little evidence for the benefits of privatisation, with a need for greater attention to political and commercial determinants of health in policy formation and in research.

The Benefits of Cooperative Inquiry in Health Services Research: Lessons from an Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Study.

Health services research is underpinned by partnerships between researchers and health services. Partnership-based research is increasingly needed to deal with the uncertainty of global pandemics, climate change induced severe weather events, and other disruptions. To date there is very little data on what has happened to health services research during the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper describes the establishment of an Australian multistate Decolonising Practice research project and charts its adaptation in the face of disruptions. The project used cooperative inquiry method, where partner health services contribute as coresearchers. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, data collection needed to be immediately paused, and when restrictions started to lift, all research plans had to be renegotiated with services. Adapting the research surfaced health service, university, and staffing considerations. Our experience suggests that cooperative inquiry was invaluable in successfully navigating this uncertainty and negotiating the continuance of the research. Flexible, participatory methods such as cooperative inquiry will continue to be vital for successful health services research predicated on partnerships between researchers and health services into the future. They are also crucial for understanding local context and health services priorities and ways of working, and for decolonising Indigenous health research.

Evaluating local primary health care actions to address health inequities: analysis of Australia's Primary Health Networks.

BACKGROUND: Meso-level, regional primary health care organisations such as Australia's Primary Health Networks (PHNs) are well placed to address health inequities through comprehensive primary health care approaches. This study aimed to examine the equity actions of PHNs and identify factors that hinder or enable the equity-orientation of PHNs' activities. METHODS: Analysis of all 31 PHNs' public planning documents. Case studies with a sample of five PHNs, drawing on 29 original interviews with key stakeholders, secondary analysis of 38 prior interviews, and analysis of 30 internal planning guidance documents. This study employed an existing framework to examine equity actions. RESULTS: PHNs displayed clear intentions and goals for health equity and collected considerable evidence of health inequities. However, their planned activities were largely restricted to individualistic clinical and behavioural approaches, with little to facilitate access to other health and social services, or act on the broader social determinants of health. PHNs' equity-oriented planning was enabled by organisational values for equity, evidence of local health inequities, and engagement with local stakeholders. Equity-oriented planning was hindered by federal government constraints and lack of equity-oriented prompts in the planning process. CONCLUSIONS: PHNs' equity actions were limited. To optimise regional planning for health equity, primary health care organisations need autonomy and scope to act on the 'upstream' factors that contribute to local health issues. They also need sufficient time and resources for robust, systematic planning processes that incorporate mechanisms such as procedure guides and tools/templates, to capitalise on their local evidence to address health inequities. Organisations should engage meaningfully with local communities and service providers, to ensure approaches are equity sensitive and appropriately targeted.

Logic modelling as hermeneutic praxis: Bringing knowledge systems into view during comprehensive primary health care planning for homelessness in Australia.

Logic modelling is used widely in health promotion planning for complex health and social problems. It is often undertaken collaboratively with stakeholders across sectors that hold and enact different institutional approaches. We use hermeneutic philosophy to explore how knowledge is 'lived' by - and unfolds differently for - cross-sectoral stakeholders during comprehensive primary healthcare service planning. An Organisational Action Research partnership was established with a non-government organisation designing comprehensive primary health care for individuals experiencing homelessness in Adelaide, Australia. Grey literature, stakeholder input, academic feedback, a targeted literature review and evidence synthesis were integrated in iterative cycles to inform and refine the logic model. Diverse knowledge systems are active when cross-sectoral stakeholders collaborate on logic models for comprehensive primary health care planning. Considering logic modelling as a hermeneutic praxis helps to foreground and explore these differences. In our case, divergent ideas emerged in how health/wellbeing and trust were conceptualised; language had different meanings across sectors; and the outcomes and data sought were nuanced for various collaborators. We explicate these methodological insights and also contribute our evidence-informed, collaboratively-derived model for design of a comprehensive primary health care service with populations experiencing homelessness. We outline the value of considering cross-sectoral logic modelling as hermeneutic praxis. Engaging with points of difference in cross-sectoral knowledge systems can strengthen logic modelling processes, partnerships and potential outcomes for complex and comprehensive primary health care services.

Factors that influence evidence-informed meso-level regional primary health care planning: a qualitative examination and conceptual framework.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-informed primary health care (PHC) planning in decentralised, meso-level regional organisations has received little research attention. In this paper we examine the factors that influence planning within this environment, and present a conceptual framework. METHODS: We employed mixed methods: case studies of five Australian Primary Health Networks (PHNs), involving 29 primary interviews and secondary analysis of 38 prior interviews; and analysis of planning documents from all 31 PHNs. The analysis was informed by a WHO framework of evidence-informed policy-making, and institutional theory. RESULTS: Influential actors included federal and state/territory governments, Local Health Networks, Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations, local councils, public hospitals, community health services, and providers of allied health, mental health and aged care services. The federal government was most influential, constraining PHNs' planning scope, time and funding. Other external factors included: the health service landscape; local socio-demographic and geographic characteristics; (neoliberal) ideology; interests and politics; national policy settings and reforms; and system reorganisation. Internal factors included: organisational structure; culture, values and ideology; various capacity factors; planning processes; transition history; and experience. The additional regional layer of context adds to the complexity of planning. CONCLUSIONS: Like national health policy-making, meso-level PHC planning occurs in a complex environment, but with additional regional factors and influences. We have developed a conceptual framework of the meso-level PHC planning environment, which can be employed by similar regional organisations to elucidate influential factors, and develop strategies and tools to promote transparent, evidence-informed PHC planning for better health outcomes.

Illustrating the impact of commercial determinants of health on the global COVID-19 pandemic: Thematic analysis of 16 country case studies.

Previous research on commercial determinants of health has primarily focused on their impact on non-communicable diseases. However, they also impact on infectious diseases and on the broader preconditions for health. We describe, through case studies in 16 countries, how commercial determinants of health were visible during the COVID-19 pandemic, and how they may have influenced national responses and health outcomes. We use a comparative qualitative case study design in selected low- middle- and high-income countries that performed differently in COVID-19 health outcomes, and for which we had country experts to lead local analysis. We created a data collection framework and developed detailed case studies, including extensive grey and peer-reviewed literature. Themes were identified and explored using iterative rapid literature reviews. We found evidence of the influence of commercial determinants of health in the spread of COVID-19. This occurred through working conditions that exacerbated spread, including precarious, low-paid employment, use of migrant workers, procurement practices that limited the availability of protective goods and services such as personal protective equipment, and commercial actors lobbying against public health measures. Commercial determinants also influenced health outcomes by influencing vaccine availability and the health system response to COVID-19. Our findings contribute to determining the appropriate role of governments in governing for health, wellbeing, and equity, and regulating and addressing negative commercial determinants of health.

Reviving health promotion in South Australia: The role of ideas, actors and institutional forces.

Globally health promotion has remained marginalized while biomedical health systems have maintained and even increased their dominance. During 2019-2021 we drew on the local and historical knowledge of actors from multiple sectors through semi-structured interviews and focus groups, to assess the implications of the withdrawal of the state from health promotion in a suburban region of South Australia. Institutional theory enabled in-depth analysis of the ideas, actors, and institutional forces at play in the institutional field, and how these elements come together to maintain the dominance of medicine. We found that the ideas, actors and institutional forces supporting health promotion in the study region have weakened and fragmented. This has happened as biomedicine has increased its dominance in the region's health system, mirroring international trends. The results point to a withdrawal of state and federal governments from health promotion, which has led to severe gaps in leadership and governance, and locally, to a decline in capacity and resources. The state health department reallocated resources to focus on individual behavioural change rather than more structural factors affecting health. While some activities aimed at the social determinants of health or community development strategies remained, these had minimal institutional support. The establishment of a state government wellbeing agency in 2020 prompted an exploration to determine whether the agency and the international wellbeing movement presents an opportunity for a revival of more comprehensive health promotion.

Health promotion has a rich history in South Australia. However, since government withdrew funding and institutional support, health promotion has become increasingly fragmented, unco-ordinated and targeted towards individual behaviour change activities. Analysis of the role of ideas, actors, and institutional forces, such as government policies, found that biomedical approaches to health and health care increasingly dominate the health system and health policy environment in the state and Australia wide. The establishment of a state government wellbeing agency in 2020 prompted optimism from participants that the government may once again take a leadership role in reviving health promotion and prevention strategies.

Explaining health inequalities in Australia: the contribution of income, wealth and employment.

BACKGROUND: Studies show widespread widening of socioeconomic and health inequalities. Comprehensive primary health care has a focus on equity and to enact this requires more data on drivers of the increase in inequities. Hence, we examined trends in the distribution of income, wealth, employment and health in Australia. METHODS: We analysed data from the Public Health Information Development Unit and Australian Bureau of Statistics. Inequalities were assessed using rate ratios and the slope index of inequality. RESULTS: We found that the social gradient in health, income, wealth and labour force participation has steepened in Australia, and inequalities widened between the quintile living in the most disadvantaged areas and the quintile living in the least disadvantaged areas. CONCLUSION: Widening income, wealth and employment inequalities have been accompanied by increasing health inequalities, and have reinforced and amplified adverse health effects, leading to increased mortality inequality. Effective comprehensive primary health care needs to be informed by an understanding of structural factors driving economic and health inequities.

Deindustrialising economies, plant closures and affected communities: Identifying potential pathways to health inequities.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: Deindustrialisation and transitions from traditional manufacturing to new technologies and service industries in many high-income countries including Australia has resulted in rising employment insecurity, unemployment and increased income and health inequities. In this paper, we explore potential impacts of an automotive plant closure on health in a disadvantaged area of South Australia. Our aim was to examine how prevailing factors affecting social and health inequity might be further affected following the plant closure and to identify levers for potential policy responses. METHODS: In workshop discussions with 28 policy and 14 community stakeholders through an iterative process participants discussed how existing factors contributing to community social and health inequity might be worsened (or remediated) by the looming economic shock from the plant closure. RESULTS: We identified eight key themes highlighted in the workshops. In particular local economic investment, availability of job opportunities, and appropriate training were identified as key factors influencing individual financial security, which was in turn linked to social and health impacts. CONCLUSIONS: The pathways mapped between the plant closure and social and health equity impacts highlighted differential potential impacts on individuals and the community, and identified policy levers to reduce adverse health outcomes resulting from economic shocks such as the closure of a major employer. SO WHAT?: The study highlighted a broad range of intersecting factors affecting the health of the local community that policy responses to the plant closure needed to address to promote health and health equity. This included novel factors identified by community members, reinforcing the importance of including community perspectives when constructing policy responses.

Implementing Universal and Targeted Policies for Health Equity: Lessons From Australia.

BACKGROUND: Debate continues in public health on the roles of universal or targeted policies in providing equity of access to health-related goods or services, and thereby contributing to health equity. Research examining policy implementation can provide fresh insights on these issues. METHODS: We synthesised findings across case studies of policy implementation in four policy areas of primary healthcare (PHC), telecommunications, Indigenous health and land use policy, which incorporated a variety of universal and targeted policy structures. We analysed findings according to three criteria of equity in access - availability, affordability and acceptability - and definitions of universal, proportionate-universal, targeted and residual policies, and devolved governance structures. RESULTS: Our analysis showed that existing universal, proportionate-universal and targeted policies in an Australian context displayed strengths and weaknesses in addressing availability, affordability and acceptability dimensions of equity in access. CONCLUSION: While residualist policies are unfavourable to equity of access, other forms of targeting as well as universal and proportionate-universal structure have the potential to be combined in context-specific ways favourable to equity of access to health-related goods and services. To optimise benefits, policies should address equity of access in the three dimensions of availability, affordability and acceptability. Devolved governance structures have the potential to augment equity benefits of either universal or targeted policies.

Conducting a rapid health promotion audit in suburban Adelaide, South Australia: Can it contribute to revitalising health promotion?

ISSUES ADDRESSED: How health promotion is implemented varies and it is often not clear what activities are in place in a region. Understanding the extent of health promotion activities helps planning activities. METHODS: This research involved a rapid audit of the types of health promotion activities in a suburban region of South Australia. This analysis was guided by the WHO Ottawa Charter's principles. To better understand population needs and which health promoting activities may help, an epidemiological, demographic and social determinants of health profile of southern Adelaide described disease patterns and health inequities. RESULTS: While there was evidence of a range of health promoting activities, most concerned individual or behavioural services. A key finding was the small number of activities that the state health department and local health system were responsible for. Alongside local government, NGOs provided the bulk of health promotion activities. In addition, there were no overarching health promotion strategies or coordinating bodies to evaluate the activities. The epidemiological, demographic and social determinants of health profile found persistent health and social inequities. CONCLUSION: This rapid audit of health promotion in a region enabled a quick assessment of the current health promotion situation and provided evidence of gaps and areas where policy change should be advocated. SO WHAT?: The key findings distilled from this research were designed to inform policy priorities to shift health promotion in southern Adelaide onto a trajectory consistent with the Ottawa Charter and prevent further focus on individualised behaviour change strategies known as 'lifestyle drift'.

Why Community Health Systems Have Not Flourished in High Income Countries: What the Australian Experience Tells Us.

BACKGROUND: Despite the value of community health systems, they have not flourished in high income countries and there are no system-wide examples in high income countries where community health is regarded as the mainstream model. Those that do exist in Australia, Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom provide examples of comprehensive primary healthcare (PHC) but are marginal to bio-medical primary medical care. The aim of this paper is to examine the factors that account for the absence of strong community health systems in high income countries, using Australia as an example. METHODS: Data are drawn from two Australian PHC studies led by the authors. One examined seven case studies of community health services over a five-year period which saw considerable health system change. The second examined regional PHC organisations. We conducted new analysis using the 'three I's' framework (interests, institutions, ideas) to examine why community health systems have not flourished in high-income countries. RESULTS: The elements of the community health services that provide insights on how they could become the basis of an effective community health system are: a focus on equity and accessibility, effective community participation/control; multidisciplinary teamwork; and strategies from care to health promotion. Key barriers identified were: when general practitioners (GPs) were seen to lead rather than be part of a team; funding models that encourage curative services rather than disease prevention and health promotion; and professional and medical dominance so that community voices are drowned out. CONCLUSION: Our study of the community health system in Australia indicates that instituting such a system in high income countries will require systematic ideological, political and institutional change to shift the overarching government policy environment, and health sector policies and practices towards a social model of health which allows community control, and multidisciplinary service provision.

Barriers to digital health services among people living in areas of socioeconomic disadvantage: Research from hospital diabetes and antenatal clinics.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: We sought to examine barriers to access to, use of, and benefits from digital health services in an area of socioeconomic disadvantage of Adelaide, Australia. METHODS: We conducted waiting room surveys in two hospital diabetes clinics and one hospital antenatal clinic in South Australia, and follow-up telephone interviews with 20 patients. We examined the extent of access to, use of and benefits from digital health services, and what barriers people encountered. We undertook mixed methods, with quantitative descriptive analysis and qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-seven diabetes clinic patients (54% response rate) and 99 antenatal clinic patients (33% response rate) participated. Sixty-two percent of the patients with diabetes and 27% of antenatal clinic patients had never used digital health services. Seventeen percent of patients with diabetes and 30% of antenatal clinic patients were hesitant users, and 22% of patients with diabetes and 44% of antenatal clinic patients were confident users. Barriers included struggling to afford the technology or to stay connected and a lack of trust in online health information. Potential benefits included feeling more empowered and complementing face-to-face care. CONCLUSIONS: There are socioeconomic barriers to access, use of, and ability to benefit from digital health strategies that mean not everyone will be able to benefit from digital health services. SO WHAT?: As COVID-19 accelerates the shift towards digital health services, people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage may be excluded. If barriers to access and use are not addressed, they will exacerbate already increasing health inequities.

Universal Health Coverage for Non-communicable Diseases and Health Equity: Lessons From Australian Primary Healthcare.

BACKGROUND: Universal health coverage (UHC) is central to current international debate on health policy. The primary healthcare (PHC) system is crucial to achieving UHC, in order to address the rising incidence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) more effectively and equitably. In this paper, we examine the Australian case as a mature system of UHC and identify lessons for UHC policy to support equity of access to PHC and reduce NCDs. METHODS: Our qualitative research used policy mapping and monitoring and 30 key informant interviews, and applied policy theory, to investigate the implementation of Australian PHC policy between 2008 and 2018. RESULTS: Although the Australian PHC system does support equity of access to primary medical care, other ideational, actor-centred and structural features of policy detract from the capacities of the system to prevent and manage NCDs effectively, deliver equity of access according to need, and support equity in health outcomes. These features include a dominant focus on episodic primary medical care, which is a poor model of care for NCDs, and an inequitable distribution of these services. Also, a mixed system of public and private insurance coverage in PHC contributes to inequities in access and health outcomes, driving additional NCD demand into the health system. CONCLUSION: Countries aiming to achieve UHC to support health equity and reduce NCDs can learn from strengths and weaknesses in the Australian system. We recommend a range of ideational, actor-centred and structural features of UHC systems in PHC that will support effective action on NCDs, equity of access to care according to need, and equity in health outcomes across geographically and ethnically diverse populations.