1

Public Health Associations experience of influencing national public health policy and practiceStephen Knight, Waasila Jassat & Laetitia Rispel

13th World Congress on Public HealthAddis Ababa, Ethiopia

23 April 2012

2

Background to Survey• Public Health Association of South Africa (PHASA)– In operation for 12 years– Successes include • Holding annual conference• Relatively financially viable• Regular newsletter and webpage (http://www.phasa.org.za)• Active executive & paid secretariat

• Extensive debate in last four years on influencing public health policy nationally – Lacked resources or capacity to do so effectively– Key strategic goals

• WFPHA Conference

3

Methods• Studied finding of 2011 WFPHA survey• Questionnaire prepared– Input from CPHA– Closed ended questions– Only in English and French

• Internet based• Executed by WFPHA secretariat who requested

members to complete questionnaire• Reminders sent

4

Results• 20 responses– 18 English; 2 French– 17 associations ; 3 non-members

AFR; 10

SEAR; 5

EUR; 3

AMR; 1

WPR; 1

AFRSEAREURAMRWPR

5

Response• In existence for

0 – 10 yrs 811 - 40 yrs 9> 40 yrs 3

• Membership numbers< 100 7100 – 999 71000 – 4999 45000+ 2

• employed staff & office space 70%

6

Organisational development

• Organised a conference 14• Skills building workshops 11• Seminars / symposia 14 • Involved in public health days 4• Newsletter 13• Electronic newsletter 10• Webpage 12

7

Organisational development

conference workshop seminar PH days newsletter e-newsletter webpage0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

14

11

14

4

13

10

12

8

Main sources of revenue

Corporate donations / sponsorship

Membership fees

Overhead from project revenues

Fund raising

Conference fees

Government

Publications

Grants

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

7

7

7

3

2

1

1

1

9

• Use of partnerships / networks / coalitions– Special interest groups 7– Non-governmental organisation 17– Other professional organisations 16– Other (youth groups, civil society orgs)

Partnerships

• Policy on engaging govt7

• Training/ manuals on policy influence 3• Dedicated policy staff 6• Who decides on policy?– Executive members – volunteer time

Policy engagement

10

Other (letter writing campaigns, journal, implementation research, demonstration projects, parliamentary committees, through coalitions)

Policy engagement

11

Through conference

Meetings with govt officials

Disseminate position papers

Meetings with politicians

Media releases

Social media

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

15

14

12

12

10

10

16

Policy Issues engaged in

Other (tobacco control, alcohol, nutrition, injury prevention, HIV, NCD prevention and control, gun control, safe injection, development assistance framework, health information through census)

Human Resources for health

Social Determinants

Millennium Development Goals

Health inequalities

Environment & health

Public Health funding

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

12

10

10

9

8

7

18

Recommendations for policy influence

• Organisational development– Working groups focused on specific public health issues– Develop advocacy skills– Maintain an independent, politically non-partisan

stance/position • Research and Knowledge sharing– Ensure evidence-informed positions on issues – Connect academics to policy making– Facilitate and support public health research– Understand who your audience is and how to

communicate with them

19

Limitations• Time constraints– Short period for response– No time for piloting– Lack of Portuguese translation– Could not delve into qualitative aspects of the “art

of influence”• Poor response to questionnaire

20

Conclusions• Few PHAs actively involved in policy

engagement with governments• Need to develop skills, policy and practice in this

field• Need to share experiences• Addressing resource availability for policy

influence

21

Acknowledgements• Ulrich Laaser• Jim Chauvin• Laetitia Bourquin• Marta Lomazzi