Partnerships in obesity prevention: maximising co-benefits
Michelle Jones A B E and Fiona Verity C DA Department for Health and Ageing, PO Box 287, Rundle Mall, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia.
B School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia.
C College of Human and Health Sciences, Swansea University, SA2 8PP, Wales, UK.
D School of Social and Policy Studies, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia.
E Corresponding author. Email: michelle.jones2@sa.gov.au
Health Promotion Journal of Australia 28(1) 44-51 https://doi.org/10.1071/HE16047
Submitted: 6 May 2016 Accepted: 4 November 2016 Published: 20 January 2017
Abstract
Issue addressed: Partnerships were used to increase healthy eating and active living in children for the Obesity Prevention and Lifestyle (OPAL) program, a systems-wide, community-based childhood obesity prevention program in South Australia. This part of the multi-component evaluation examines stakeholders’ perceptions of how OPAL staff worked in partnership and factors contributing to strong partnerships.
Methods: Pre- and post-interviews and focus groups with multi-sector stakeholders (n = 131) across six OPAL communities were analysed using NVivo8 qualitative data analysis software.
Results: Stakeholders reflected positively on projects developed in partnership with OPAL, reporting that staff worked to establish co-benefits. They identified several factors that contributed to the strengthening of partnerships: staff skills, visibility, resources and sustainability.
Conclusions: Rather than implementing projects with stakeholders with shared organisational goals, local shared projects were implemented that included a breadth of co-benefits, allowing multi-sector stakeholders to meet their own organisational goals. Practitioners who have the capacity to be flexible, persistent, knowledgeable and skilled communicators are required to negotiate projects, achieving benefit for both health and stakeholders’ organisational goals.
So what?: Engaging in partnership practice to broker co-benefits at the micro or program level has been an effective model for community engagement and change in OPAL. It foregrounds the need for the inclusion of value to partners, which differs from situations in which organisations come together around common goals.
Key words: childhood obesity prevention, community development, qualitative, evaluation.
References
[1] Butland B, Jebb S, Kopelman P, McPherson K, Thomas S, Mardell J, et al (2007) https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/287937/ 07-1184x-tackling-obesities-future-choices-report.pdf[2] OPAL Collective (2015) Practitioner insights on obesity prevention: the voice of South Australian OPAL workers. Health Promot Int
| Practitioner insights on obesity prevention: the voice of South Australian OPAL workers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[3] Haby MM, Doherty R, Welch N, Mason V (2012) Community-based interventions for obesity prevention: lessons learned by Australian policy-makers. BMC Res Notes 5, 20
| Community-based interventions for obesity prevention: lessons learned by Australian policy-makers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[4] World Health Organization. Population based approaches to childhood obesity prevention. Geneva: 2012. Available from: http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/childhood/WHO_new_childhoodobesity_PREVENTION_27nov_HR_PRINT_OK.pdf [Verified 16 November 2016].
[5] Hersey J, Kelly B, Roussel A, Curtis L, Horne J, Williams-Piehota P, et al (2012) The value of partnerships in state obesity prevention and control programs. Health Promot Pract 13, 222–9.
| The value of partnerships in state obesity prevention and control programs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[6] Middleton G, Henderson H, Evans D (2014) Implementing a community-based obesity prevention programme: experiences of stakeholders in the north east of England. Health Promot Int 29, 201–11.
| Implementing a community-based obesity prevention programme: experiences of stakeholders in the north east of England.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3s3nsFGgsA%3D%3D&md5=5bcb3bea9a666b0e5af13015c212bf78CAS |
[7] Israel B, Schulz A, Parker E, Becker A (1998) Review of community based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annu Rev Public Health 19, 173–202.
| Review of community based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK1c3nsVGmsw%3D%3D&md5=c630c532978c41db126c554997fb4bc3CAS |
[8] Kraak V, Story M (2010) A public health perspective on healthy lifestyles and public private partnerships for global childhood obesity prevention. J Am Diet Assoc 110, 192–200.
| A public health perspective on healthy lifestyles and public private partnerships for global childhood obesity prevention.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[9] Gillies P (1998) Effectiveness of alliances and partnerships for health promotion. Health Promot Int 13, 99–120.
| Effectiveness of alliances and partnerships for health promotion.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[10] Winston Marrow M. Taxing sugar drinks: a tool for obesity prevention, cost savings and health improvement. Public Health Law Center, 2011. Available from: http://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/Taxing%20Sugar_Drinks_Public%20Health%20Law%20Center%20%20May%202011.pdf [Verified 16 November 2016].
[11] Ruddick G. Drinks makers consider legal action against sugar tax. The Guardian 21 March 2016. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/mar/20/drinks-makers-consider-legal-action-against-sugar-tax-budget [Verified 16 November 2016].
[12] Førde H (1998) Is imposing risk awareness cultural imperalism? Soc Sci Med 47, 1155–9.
| Is imposing risk awareness cultural imperalism?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[13] Mayo M. Community development, contestations, continuities and change. In Craig C, Popple K, Shaw M, editors. Community development in theory and practice (pp. 13–27). Spokesman: Nottingham; 2008.
[14] Legge D, Wilson G, Butler P, Wright M, McBride T, Attewell R (1996) Best practice in primary health care. Aust J Prim Health Interchange 2, 12–26.
| Best practice in primary health care.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[15] Kania J, Kramer M (2011) Collective Impact. Stanf Soc Innov Rev Winter, 36–41.
[16] Borys J, Le Bodo Y, Jebb SA, Seidell J, Summerbell C, Richard D, et al (2012) EPODE approach for childhood obesity prevention: methods, progress and international development. Obes Rev 13, 299–315.
| EPODE approach for childhood obesity prevention: methods, progress and international development.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[17] Bronfenbrenner U (1977) Toward an experimental ecology of human development. Am Psychol 32, 513–31.
| Toward an experimental ecology of human development.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[18] Ife J. Community development: community-based alternatives in an age of globalisation. 2nd edn. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia; 2002.
[19] Williams J, Weir L. OPAL – using a social marketing approach to reducing childhood obesity. In Rundle-Thiele S, editor. Contemporary issues in social marketing. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing; 2013.
[20] Jones M, Verity F, Warin M, Ratcliffe J, Cobiac L, Swinburn B, et al (2016) OPALesence: Epistemological pluralism in the evaluation of a systems-wide childhood obesity prevention program. Evaluation 22, 29–48.
| OPALesence: Epistemological pluralism in the evaluation of a systems-wide childhood obesity prevention program.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[21] Leslie E, Magarey A, Olds T, Ratcliffe J, Jones M, Cobiac L (2015) Community-based obesity prevention in Australia: background, methods and recruitment outcomes for the evaluation of the effectiveness of OPAL (Obesity Prevention and Lifestyle. Advances Pediatr Res 2, http://www.apr-journal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/APR03-0436.pdf
[22] Neuman WL. Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches, 3rd edn. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon; 1997.
[23] Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002.
[24] Graneheim UH, Lundman B (2004) Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 24, 105–12.
| Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2c%2FmvVKquw%3D%3D&md5=1f32579747086323ffd9a8ce6268bebbCAS |
[25] Green J, Willis K, Hughes E, Small R, Welch N, Gibbs L, et al (2007) Generating best evidence from qualitative research: the role of data analysis. Aust N Z J Publ Heal 31, 545–50.
| Generating best evidence from qualitative research: the role of data analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[26] Fereday J, Muir-Cochrane E (2006) Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int J Qual Methods 5, 80–92.
[27] Liamputtong P (2009) Qualitative data analysis: conceptual and practical considerations. Health Promot J Austr 20, 133–9.
[28] Tracy SJ (2010) Qualitative quality: eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qual Inq 16, 837–51.
| Qualitative quality: eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[29] Pettman T, McAllister M, Verity F, Magarey A, Dollman J, Tripptree M, et al. Eat Well Be Active Community Programs final report. Adelaide: SA Health; 2010.
[30] Giles-Corti B, Foster S, Shilton T, Falconer R (2010) The co-benefits for health of investing in active transportation. N S W Public Health Bull 21, 122–7.
| The co-benefits for health of investing in active transportation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[31] Trowbridge M, Huang T-K, Botchwey N, Fisher T, Pyke C, Rodgers A (2013) Public health and the green building industry: partnership opportunities for childhood obesity prevention. Am J Prev Med 44, 489–95.
| Public health and the green building industry: partnership opportunities for childhood obesity prevention.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[32] Capon A, Synnott E, Holliday S (2009) Urbanism, climate change and health: systems approaches to governance. N S W Public Health Bull 20, 24–8.
| Urbanism, climate change and health: systems approaches to governance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[33] Lowe M (2014) Obesity and climate change mitigation in Australia: overview and analysis of policies with co-benefits. Aust N Z J Public Health 38, 19–24.
| Obesity and climate change mitigation in Australia: overview and analysis of policies with co-benefits.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[34] Miyatsuka A, Zusman E. Fact sheet no. 1: what are co-benefits? 2012. Available from: https://pub.iges.or.jp/system/files/publication_documents/pub/nonpeer/2393/acp_factsheet_1_what_co-benefits.pdf [Verified 16 November 2016].
[35] Richard Z, Kostadinov I, Jones M, Cargo M (2014) Assessing implementation fidelity and adaptation in a community-based childhood obesity prevention intervention. Health Educ Res 11,
| Assessing implementation fidelity and adaptation in a community-based childhood obesity prevention intervention.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |