{"title":"Health promotion policy in Sweden: means and methods in intersectoral action.","authors":"B Eklundh, B Pettersson","doi":"10.1093/heapro/2.2.177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In Sweden different commissions have been working on legislation, prevention programmes and financing, and have aimed at implementing the Health For All strategy at national level. National programmes for cardiovascular diseases, cancer, accidental injuries, etc were established by parliamentary resolution in 1985. The role of health education has been extended: from the earlier concern with matters of individual lifestyle the focus has shifted towards motivating the community as a whole to take an active interest in its health. There is good public support in the areas of legislation, knowledge and awareness, international development (WHO), and public policy. Despite the existence of legislation, strong official policy and a good organizational structure, strong efforts are still needed to turn health promotion into general practice. National, regional and local bodies as well as non-governmental and private organizations are showing an increasing interest in health promotion. Health promotion strategies are used in traditional fields such as alcohol and smoking as well as other sectors such as education, employment, culture, social welfare, town and house planning, transport and environmental protection. There has never been such a positive basis for the further development of health promotion policy in Sweden though there are a number of potential conflicts and problems related to knowledge, organization, attitudes, financing, distribution of power, etc. These are outlined broadly as \"The organizational trap\", \"Modification or revolution?\" and \"Individual or public responsibility for health?\".</p>","PeriodicalId":79940,"journal":{"name":"Health promotion (Oxford, England)","volume":"2 2","pages":"177-94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1987-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/heapro/2.2.177","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health promotion (Oxford, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/2.2.177","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12
Abstract
In Sweden different commissions have been working on legislation, prevention programmes and financing, and have aimed at implementing the Health For All strategy at national level. National programmes for cardiovascular diseases, cancer, accidental injuries, etc were established by parliamentary resolution in 1985. The role of health education has been extended: from the earlier concern with matters of individual lifestyle the focus has shifted towards motivating the community as a whole to take an active interest in its health. There is good public support in the areas of legislation, knowledge and awareness, international development (WHO), and public policy. Despite the existence of legislation, strong official policy and a good organizational structure, strong efforts are still needed to turn health promotion into general practice. National, regional and local bodies as well as non-governmental and private organizations are showing an increasing interest in health promotion. Health promotion strategies are used in traditional fields such as alcohol and smoking as well as other sectors such as education, employment, culture, social welfare, town and house planning, transport and environmental protection. There has never been such a positive basis for the further development of health promotion policy in Sweden though there are a number of potential conflicts and problems related to knowledge, organization, attitudes, financing, distribution of power, etc. These are outlined broadly as "The organizational trap", "Modification or revolution?" and "Individual or public responsibility for health?".