Study details Population and Plan details and Outcomes Results Notes setting method of appraisal assessed* Authors Country: Plan: Outcomes measured: Many of the Limitations identified Glasgow Centre for Scotland Glasgow City Council’s a) Process outcomes: suggestions made by by author(s): Population Health draft East End Local (i) Health outcomes stakeholders during the None considered: Y Setting (eg urban/rural) Development Strategy assessment have been Year: (ii) Health urban incorporated into the Limitations identified recommendations 2007 Local Development by review team: incorporated in plan: Strategy. The fact that Author prepared the Population: Method of appraisal: Y Citation: (size , characteristics…) planners participated in HIA (iii) Evidence of GCPH Concepts Series 3, East End, Glasgow: HIA the process allowed for implemented: NR Briefing Paper, June 2007 population has some of a fuller understanding of Evidence gaps &/or (iv) Post-adoption poorest health in UK. the thinking behind recommendations for evaluation: NR Aim of study: suggestions than future research: Review of a case study of b) Specific issues: reading a technical Further work is participatory HIA (i) Physical activity: NR report would have undertaken to provide (ii) Mental wellbeing: Y allowed. In this case, information on health (iii) Air / noise quality etc: those responsible for and its determinants for design: Y the Local Development local populations. (iv) Unintentional injury: Strategy benefited from NR both the process and Source of funding: Quality score: (v) Other health: Y the report. Unknown Specify: + pilot Health “This - accessibility & External validity Impact Assessment of sustainable transport score: the draft East End - connectivity - Local Development - housing choice Strategy has been a - space successful exercise on several levels. The c) Knowledge outcome: participatory process Planners health using rapid appraisal knowledge or skills: Y techniques and d) Other outcome: bringing together NR Specify: people from a variety of backgrounds
Study details Population and setting Plan details and method of appraisal Outcomes assessed* Results Notes Authors Glasgow Centre for Population Health Year: 2007 Citation: GCPH Concepts Series 3, Briefing Paper, June 2007 Aim of study: Review of a case study of participatory HIA design: Quality score: + External validity score: - Country: Scotland Setting (eg urban/rural) urban Population: (size , characteristics…) East End, Glasgow: population has some of poorest health in UK. Plan: Glasgow City Council’s draft East End Local Development Strategy Method of appraisal: HIA Outcomes measured: a) Process outcomes: (i) Health outcomes considered: Y (ii) Health recommendations incorporated in plan: Y (iii) Evidence of implemented: NR (iv) Post-adoption evaluation: NR b) Specific issues: (i) Physical activity: NR (ii) Mental wellbeing: Y (iii) Air / noise quality etc: Y (iv) Unintentional injury: NR (v) Other health: Y Specify: - accessibility & sustainable transport - connectivity - housing choice - space c) Knowledge outcome: Planners health knowledge or skills: Y d) Other outcome: NR Specify: Many of the suggestions made by stakeholders during the assessment have been incorporated into the Local Development Strategy. The fact that planners participated in the process allowed for a fuller understanding of the thinking behind suggestions than reading a technical report would have allowed. In this case, those responsible for the Local Development Strategy benefited from both the process and the report. “This pilot Health Impact Assessment of the draft East End Local Development Strategy has been a successful exercise on several levels. The participatory process using rapid appraisal techniques and bringing together people from a variety of backgrounds Limitations identified by author(s): None Limitations identified by review team: Author prepared the HIA Evidence gaps &/or recommendations for future research: Further work is undertaken to provide information on health and its determinants for local populations. Source of funding: Unknown
Spatial_planning_for_Health_Review2_Final_1_April_2010_rev_21_April.docx