Meta-governance: covers the range of functions that governments take on in relation to the support of governance arrangements, which include overseeing, steering and coordinating gov-ernance arrangements; selecting and supporting the key participants in govgov-ernance arrange-ments; mobilizing resources; ensuring that wider systems of governance are operating fairly and efficiently; and taking prime carriage of democracy and accountability issues (bell & Hindmoor, 2009).
Nudge policy: any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people’s behaviour in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives (Thaler &
sunstein, 2008).
Public health: the science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life and promoting health through organized efforts of society (Acheson, 1988).
Shared value: policies and operating practices that enhance the competitiveness of a company while simultaneously advancing economic and social conditions in the communities in which it operates. Shared value is created by identifying and extending the connections between social and economic progress (Porter & Kramer, 2011).
Social determinants of health: the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age, including the health system. These circumstances are shaped by the distribution of money, pow-er and resources at global, national and local levels, which are themselves influenced by policy choices. The social determinants of health are responsible for most health inequity, the unfair but avoidable differences in health status seen within and between countries (commission on social Determinants of Health, 2008).
Smart governance: one way to describe the major institutional adaptations observed in pub-lic and international organizations in the face of increasing interdependence. In a knowledge society, policy decisions based on purely normative considerations lose ground to decisions in-formed by evidence. At the same time, decision-making requires new methods for coping with and accounting for the associated uncertainties that abound when knowledge – always question-able, always revisable – supersedes majority values as the basis for authority. Smart governance, coined by Willke (2007), is “an abbreviation for the ensemble of principles, factors and capacities that constitute a form of governance able to cope with the conditions and exigencies of the knowledge society”.
Well-being: people’s experience of positive and negative emotions, satisfaction, vitality, resil-ience, self-esteem and sense of purpose and meaning. Social well-being has two main compo-nents: supportive relationships and a feeling of trust and belonging; together they form a picture of what everyone really wants: a fulfilling and happy life (new Economics foundation, 2011).
Glossary
Whole-of-government approach: the diffusion of governance vertically across levels of govern-ment and arenas of governance and horizontally throughout sectors. Whole-of-governgovern-ment ac-tivities are multilevel, from local to global government acac-tivities and actors, and increasingly also involving groups outside government. A whole-of-government approach often seeks to address a perceived lack of command and control at the centre with respect to an issue or overall goals by using a new organizational design and reorganization. This approach requires building trust, common ethics, a cohesive culture and new skills. It stresses a need for better coordination and integration centred on the overall societal goals for which the government stands. Health in all policies is one whole-of-government approach to making governance for health and well-being a priority for more than the health sector and working in both directions: how other sectors affect health and how health affects other sectors.
Whole-of-society approach: an approach with the aim of extending the whole-of-government approach by additional emphasis on the roles of the private sector and civil society, as well as political decision-makers such as parliamentarians. Increasingly, the policy networks that have emerged within government extend beyond government to include other societal actors, par-ticularly in considering wicked problems such as obesity (Dubé et al., 2009b) and pandemic pre-paredness (WHO, 2009). by engaging the private sector, civil society, communities and individu-als, the whole-of-society approach can strengthen the resilience of communities to withstand threats to their health, security and well-being. A whole-of-society approach goes beyond institu-tions: it influences and mobilizes local and global culture and media, rural and urban communities and all relevant policy sectors, such as the education system, the transport sector, the environ-ment and even urban design, as demonstrated in the case of obesity and the global food system.
Whole-of-society approaches are a form of collaborative governance that emphasizes coordina-tion through normative values and trust-building among a wide variety of actors.
Wicked problems: the term wicked in this context is used not in the sense of evil but rather as an issue that is highly resistant to resolution. Successfully solving or at least managing wicked policy problems requires reassessing some of the traditional ways of working and solving problems.
These problems challenge governance structures, skills bases and organizational capacity. A first step is to recognize wicked problems as such. Addressing wicked problems successfully requires broad recognition and understanding, including from governments and ministers, that there are no quick fixes or simple solutions.
References
References
Acheson D (1988). Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the future development of the public health functions. london, H.m. stationery Office:289.
African Development bank Group (2009). Checklist for gender mainstreaming in governance pro-grammes. Abidjan, African Development bank Group (http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/
afdb/Documents/Policy-Documents/checklist%20for%20Gender%20mainstreaming%20in%20 Governance%20Programmes%20En.pdf, accessed 30 may 2012).
Aizcorbe A, Retus b, smith s (2008). Toward a health care satellite account. Survey of Current Business, 88:24–30.
American beverage Association (2010). Alliance school beverage guidelines: final progress report.
Washington, Dc, American beverage Association.
Andersson E (in press). Engagement in health: what role for the public and patients? In: Kickbusch I, Gleicher D, eds. Governance for health. Berlin, Springer.
Ansell c, Gash A (2007). collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Admin-istration Research and Theory, 18:543–571.
(Australian) management Advisory committee (mAc) (2004). Connecting government: whole of government responses to Australia’s priority challenges. Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia (http://www.apsc.gov.au/mac/connectinggovernment.pdf, accessed 30 may 2012).
barabas J (2004). How deliberation affects policy opinions. American Political Science Review, 98:687–701.
beck u (1992). Risk society: towards a new modernity. London, Sage.
bell s, Hindmoor A (2009). Rethinking governance: the centrality of the state in modern society.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
birkavs v, mccartney c (2011). Policies for shared societies: their contribution to well-being and economic performance. In: Challenge Europe: growth, well-being and social policy in Europe:
trade-off or synergy? brussels, European Policy centre:20–26.
bonell c et al. (2011). One nudge forward, two steps back. British Medical Journal, 342:d401.
brandt Am (2007). The cigarette century: the rise, fall, and deadly persistence of the product that defined America. new york, basic books.
braveman P, Gruskin s (2003). Defining equity in health. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 57:254–258.
bryson Jm, crosby bc, stone mm (2006). The design and implementation of cross-sector collabo-rations: propositions from the literature. Public Administration Review, 66:44–55.
bull b, mcneill D, eds. (2007). Development issues in global governance. London, Routledge.
burger D, mayer c (2003). Making sustainable development a reality: the role of social and ecologi-cal standards. Eschborn, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische zusammenarbeit (GTz).
butler-Jones D (2008). The Chief Public Health Officer’s report on the state of public health in Can-ada, 2008: addressing health inequalities. Ottawa, minister of Health (http://www.phac-aspc.
gc.ca/cphorsphc-respcacsp/2008/pdf/cpho-report-eng.pdf, accessed 30 may 2012).
capewell s et al. (1999). Effects of the Heartbeat Wales programme. British Medical Journal, 318:1072.
References
cashore b (2002). legitimacy and the privatisation of environmental governance: how non-state market driven (nsmD) governance systems gain rule making authority. Governance, 15:503–529.
children’s Hospital boston (2012a). MedWatcher: track medication safely from your iPhone. Bos-ton, children’s Hospital boston (http://www.healthmap.org/medwatcher, accessed 30 may 2012).
children’s Hospital boston (2012b). Outbreaks near me. boston, children’s Hospital boston (http://
www.healthmap.org/outbreaksnearme, accessed 30 may 2012).
christensen T, laegreid P (2007). The whole of government approach to public sector reform.
Public Administration Review, 67:1059–1066.
cnn World (2006). Skinny models banned from catwalk. Atlanta, cable news network (http://
articles.cnn.com/2006-09-13/world/spain.models_1_association-of-fashion-designers-skinny-models-pasarela-cibeles?_s=Pm:WORlD, accessed 30 may 2012).
commission on Global Governance (1995). Our global neighbourhood. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
commission on social Determinants of Health (2008). Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Final report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva, World Health Organization (http://www.who.int/
social_determinants/resources/gkn_lee_al.pdf, accessed 30 may 2012).
conklin J (2006). Wicked problems and social complexity. In: Dialogue mapping: building shared understanding of wicked problems. new york, Wiley.
coulter A (2005). What do patients and the public want from primary care? British Medical Journal, 331:1199.
council of the European union (2006a). Council conclusions on health in all policies (HiAP). Pro-ceedings of the 2767th Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council meeting, Brussels, 30 November and 1 December 2006. brussels, council of the European union (http://
www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/lsa/91929.pdf, accessed 30 may 2012).
council of the European union (2006b). Council conclusions on common values and principles in European Union health systems. brussels, council of the European union.
crawford A (2006). networked governance and the post-regulatory state? Theoretical Criminol-ogy, 10:449–479.
cullbridge marketing and communications (2011). Tools of change: proven methods for promot-ing health, safety and environmental citizenship [web site]. Ottawa, cullbridge marketpromot-ing and Communications.
Dahlgren G, Whitehead m (2006). European strategies for tackling social inequities in health: level-ling up part 2. copenhagen, WHO Regional Office for Europe.
Davis Rm (1998). Healthy People 2010: national health objectives for the united states. British Medical Journal, 317:1513−1517.
de la chapelle b (2008). multi-stakeholder governance: emergence and transformational poten-tial of a new political paradigm. In: Helbing D, ed. Managing complexity: insights, concepts, ap-plications. Berlin, Springer.
Dodgson R, lee K, Drager n (2002). Global health governance: a conceptual review. Geneva, World