The concept of social determinants of health in health promotion policies in Thailand, Sweden, England, USA, and Japan: A narrative review

Abstract

Objectives The Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH) of the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that national and municipal governments take adequate steps to "improve daily living conditions," "(create governance to) tackle the inequitable distribution of power, money, and resources," and "measure and understand the problem and assess the impact of" government actions. This study provides an analysis of the health promotion policies of Japan and other countries and examines their conformance to these recommendations, and offers suggestions for developing a conducive social environment for Japan's health promotion policies.Methods We reviewed grey literature on health promotion policies in Japan, the USA, England, Sweden, and Thailand, extracting the definitions of health inequalities and their characterization in each policy, and analyzing each document vis-á-vis the CSDH's three recommendations and "comprehensive national health equity surveillance framework."Results The health promotion policies of Japan, England, Sweden, and the USA had similar definitions of health inequality, emphasizing fairness and prioritizing the reduction of health inequality as the key strategy for health promotion. However, their primary approaches to improve daily living conditions varied: In Japan, the primary approach is to create opportunities for participation and ensure access to social resources. Meanwhile, the USA relies largely on objective assessments and scientific evidence-based actions. England focused on enhancing support for socially disadvantaged individuals and areas. In Sweden, a universal intervention based on life-course perspectives was stressed, while Thailand attached much value to a multi-sectoral collaboration. All these countries, however, had a health policy implementation plan in quest of the elimination of unfair distributions of power, money, and resources. The USA planned to monitor a total of 187 social factors, the largest number among the 6 subject countries. It also had a wide range of perspectives on health inequalities, including income and disability, as well as conducting assessments using information from outside the health sector, with items assessed at various levels, including individual, regional, and national policies.Conclusion With reference to these approaches in other countries, for Japan's health promotion policies, we recommend: (1) grasping of health inequalities from more diversified perspectives and adopting measures to address them, (2) setting targets based on multi-level social determinants of individual behavior and health status, including individual socioeconomic status, and (3) promoting collaborative initiatives and use of indicators with entities outside the health sector.