23.11.2014 Views

Social Determinants of Health: Ideological, Economic ... - Tamarack

Social Determinants of Health: Ideological, Economic ... - Tamarack

Social Determinants of Health: Ideological, Economic ... - Tamarack

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Social</strong> <strong>Determinants</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Health</strong>:<br />

<strong>Ideological</strong>, <strong>Economic</strong>, and Political<br />

Barriers to <strong>Health</strong><br />

Dennis Raphael, PhD<br />

School <strong>of</strong> <strong>Health</strong> Policy and Management<br />

York University<br />

Presentation to the University <strong>of</strong> Waterloo <strong>Health</strong> Studies<br />

and Gerontology Department Seminar, October 30, 2007


Overview <strong>of</strong> Presentation I<br />

• What do we know about the<br />

determinants <strong>of</strong> health?<br />

• How do we know it?<br />

• What should we be doing?<br />

• Why isn't this happening?<br />

• What can be done about it?


Overview <strong>of</strong> Presentation II<br />

• How does the epistemology (nature <strong>of</strong><br />

knowledge) shape our understandings and<br />

actions on the determinants <strong>of</strong> heath?<br />

• How do the ideologies <strong>of</strong> epidemiology and<br />

individualism shape our understandings and<br />

actions on the determinants <strong>of</strong> heath?<br />

• How does the political economy <strong>of</strong> a society<br />

shape our understandings and actions on<br />

the determinants <strong>of</strong> heath?


What do we know about the<br />

determinants <strong>of</strong> health?


We know what makes us ill.<br />

When we are ill we are told<br />

That it’s you who will heal us.<br />

When we come to you<br />

Our rags are torn <strong>of</strong>f us<br />

And you listen all over our<br />

naked body.<br />

As to the cause <strong>of</strong> our illness<br />

One glance at our rags would<br />

Tell you more.<br />

It is the same cause that<br />

wears out our bodies and our<br />

clothes.<br />

Bertolt Brecht, 1898-1956. Worker’s Speech to a Doctor


What are SDOH?<br />

• <strong>Social</strong> determinants <strong>of</strong> health are the<br />

economic and social conditions that<br />

influence the health <strong>of</strong> individuals,<br />

communities, and jurisdictions as a<br />

whole.<br />

• <strong>Social</strong> determinants <strong>of</strong> health are about<br />

the quantity and quality <strong>of</strong> a variety <strong>of</strong><br />

resources that a society makes available<br />

to its members.


Ottawa Charter’s Prerequisites <strong>of</strong> <strong>Health</strong><br />

• peace<br />

• shelter<br />

• education<br />

• food<br />

• income<br />

• a stable eco-system<br />

• sustainable resources<br />

• social justice<br />

• equity<br />

Source: World <strong>Health</strong> Organization, 1986


The Focus <strong>of</strong> the Canadian SDOH<br />

Conference<br />

• early life<br />

• education<br />

• employment and<br />

working conditions<br />

• food security<br />

• health services<br />

• housing<br />

• income and<br />

income distribution<br />

• social exclusion<br />

• social safety net<br />

• unemployment<br />

Source: Raphael, D. (2004). <strong>Social</strong> <strong>Determinants</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Health</strong>:<br />

Canadian Perspectives. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press.


All policies which have<br />

a direct bearing on<br />

health need to be<br />

coordinated. The list is<br />

long and includes,<br />

among others,<br />

income security,<br />

employment, education,<br />

housing, business,<br />

agriculture,<br />

transportation, justice<br />

and technology.<br />

-- Jake Epp, Achieving <strong>Health</strong> For All: A Framework for <strong>Health</strong><br />

Promotion, Ottawa: <strong>Health</strong> and Welfare Canada, 1986.


Alberta Government<br />

• The health <strong>of</strong> all Albertans should be promoted and<br />

improved by taking a global view <strong>of</strong> all <strong>of</strong> the<br />

factors that determine and affect people’s health.<br />

This includes basic public health measures,<br />

economic well-being, early childhood development,<br />

education, housing, nutrition, employment status,<br />

quality <strong>of</strong> the environment, lifestyle choices and<br />

healthy behaviours.<br />

• A Framework for Reform: Report <strong>of</strong> the Premier’s<br />

Advisory Council on <strong>Health</strong>, Dec. 2001, p. 41.


Mechanisms and<br />

Pathways


Materialist Approach<br />

• <strong>Health</strong> inequalities result from the<br />

differential accumulation <strong>of</strong> exposures<br />

and experiences that have their<br />

sources in the material world.<br />

• Lynch JW, et al. Income inequality and mortality:<br />

importance to health <strong>of</strong> individual income,<br />

psychosocial environment, or material conditions.<br />

BMJ 2000;320:1220-1224.


Neo-Materialist Approach<br />

• The effect <strong>of</strong> income inequality on health<br />

reflects a combination <strong>of</strong> negative exposures<br />

and lack <strong>of</strong> resources held by individuals,<br />

along with systematic underinvestment<br />

across a wide range <strong>of</strong> human, physical,<br />

health, and social infrastructure.<br />

• Lynch JW, et al Income inequality and mortality: importance to<br />

health <strong>of</strong> individual income, psychosocial environment, or material<br />

conditions. BMJ 2000;320:1220-1224.


Source: Lynch, J. (2000). Income inequality and health: Expanding the<br />

debate. <strong>Social</strong> Science and Medicine, 51, 1001-1005, Figure 1, p. 1003.


Poverty as the<br />

Clustering <strong>of</strong><br />

Disadvantage


All conceivable evils are heaped<br />

upon the poor…They are given damp<br />

dwellings, cellar dens that are not<br />

waterpro<strong>of</strong> from below or garrets that<br />

leak from above… They are supplied<br />

bad, tattered, or rotten clothing,<br />

adulterated and indigestible food.<br />

They are exposed to the most<br />

exciting changes <strong>of</strong> mental condition,<br />

the most violent vibrations between<br />

hope and fear... They are deprived <strong>of</strong><br />

all enjoyments except sexual<br />

indulgence and drunkenness and are<br />

worked every day to the point <strong>of</strong><br />

complete exhaustion <strong>of</strong> their mental<br />

and physical energies…<br />

Frederich Engels, 1820-1895. The Condition <strong>of</strong> the Working Class in England


Disadvantage and <strong>Health</strong>:<br />

Academic Perspectives<br />

It is one <strong>of</strong> the greatest <strong>of</strong> contemporary<br />

social injustices that people who live in the<br />

most disadvantaged circumstances have<br />

more illnesses, more disability and shorter<br />

lives than those who are more affluent.<br />

-- Benzeval, Judge, & Whitehead, 1995, p.xxi, Tackling<br />

Inequalities in <strong>Health</strong>: An Agenda for Action.


Percentage <strong>of</strong> Canadians, Children, and Individuals in Female<br />

Lone-Parent Families Living in Poverty by Province, 2004<br />

70<br />

BC Now Poverty<br />

Leader<br />

Percentage Living in Poverty<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

18.4<br />

23.1<br />

62.7<br />

57.7<br />

16.5<br />

13.9<br />

14.4<br />

50.2<br />

18.1<br />

32.9<br />

11.7 10.8<br />

39.9<br />

15.8 15.6<br />

54.6<br />

17.4<br />

14.7<br />

15.8<br />

19.2<br />

47.6<br />

16<br />

57.3<br />

20.1<br />

54.2<br />

13.2<br />

14.5<br />

19.2<br />

23.5<br />

62.8<br />

0<br />

NFL NB NS PEI PQ ON MB SK AL BC<br />

All Children Female Lone-Parent Families<br />

Source: Statistics Canada (2006). Persons in Low Income Before Tax, CANSIM Tables.


Low Income Gap for All Families and Unattached Individuals<br />

by Province, 2004<br />

10000<br />

Poor in Alberta and<br />

BC are Really Poor!<br />

Poverty Gap in Dollars<br />

9000<br />

8000<br />

7000<br />

6000<br />

5000<br />

4000<br />

3000<br />

6900<br />

6600 6500<br />

6100<br />

76007600<br />

5700 5500<br />

7400 7200<br />

8400<br />

7600<br />

8000<br />

7300 7200<br />

6600<br />

9200<br />

8700<br />

8900<br />

8000<br />

2000<br />

1000<br />

0<br />

NFL NB NS PEI PQ ON MB SK AB BC<br />

All Families<br />

Unattached Individuals<br />

Source: Statistics Canada (2006). Low Income Gap Before Tax in Dollars, CANSIM Tables.


SDOH (Living Conditions) and <strong>Health</strong><br />

<strong>Social</strong> determinants can affect health in a<br />

number <strong>of</strong> ways:<br />

• SDOH provides the prerequisites for health, such<br />

as shelter, food, warmth, and the ability to<br />

participate in society;<br />

• SDOH can cause stress and anxiety which can<br />

damage people’s health;<br />

• SDOH limit peoples’ choices and militates<br />

against desirable changes in behaviour.<br />

- Benzeval, Judge, & Whitehead, 1995, p.xxi, Tackling<br />

Inequalities in <strong>Health</strong>: An Agenda for Action.


Brunner, E. and Marmot, M. G. (2006), <strong>Social</strong> organization, stress, and health in<br />

Marmot, M. G. and Wilkinson, R. G. (Eds.), <strong>Social</strong> <strong>Determinants</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Health</strong>, Oxford<br />

University Press, Oxford..


How do we know it?


Infant Mortality, Canada 1996<br />

Q1-Richest<br />

Q2<br />

Q3<br />

Q4<br />

Q5-Poorest<br />

per 1,000<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8<br />

Source: Wilkins et al., 2002, <strong>Health</strong> Reports


Life Expectancy, Males,<br />

Canada 1996<br />

72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79<br />

Yrs<br />

Q1-Richest<br />

Q2<br />

Q3<br />

Q4<br />

Q5-Poorest<br />

Source: Wilkins et al., 2002, <strong>Health</strong> Reports


Life Expectancy, Females,<br />

Canada, 1996<br />

80 80.5 81 81.5 82 82.5 83<br />

Yrs<br />

Q1-Richest<br />

Q2<br />

Q3<br />

Q4<br />

Q5-Poorest<br />

Source: Wilkins et al., 2002, <strong>Health</strong> Reports


Increased Risk <strong>of</strong> Diabetes in Ontario Among<br />

Low Income Residents, 1997/97<br />

Males<br />

Females<br />

Diabetes Prevalence Ratio<br />

5<br />

4<br />

3<br />

2<br />

1<br />

0<br />

1.4<br />

3.8<br />

1.5<br />

2.3<br />

Low Low-Middle Upper-<br />

Middle<br />

Income Level<br />

2<br />

1.2 1<br />

1<br />

High<br />

Source: Hux J, Booth G, Laupacis A. The ICES Practice Atlas: Diabetes in Ontario.<br />

Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and the Canadian Diabetes Association; 2002.


Diabetes Mortality, Urban Canada,<br />

ASMR x 100,000<br />

Males, 1996<br />

22<br />

20<br />

18<br />

16<br />

14<br />

12<br />

10<br />

8<br />

6<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />

1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996<br />

Source: Wilkins et al., 2002, <strong>Health</strong> Reports<br />

Q1 - Richest<br />

Neighbourhoods<br />

Q2<br />

Q3<br />

Q4<br />

Q5 - Poorest<br />

Neighbourhoods


Diabetes, males<br />

ASMR x 100,000<br />

26<br />

24<br />

22<br />

20<br />

18<br />

16<br />

14<br />

12<br />

10<br />

8<br />

6<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />

1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001<br />

Q1 - Richest<br />

Q2<br />

Q3<br />

Q4<br />

Q5 - Poorest


Diabetes Mortality, Urban Canada,<br />

ASMR x 100,000<br />

Females, 1996<br />

22<br />

20<br />

18<br />

16<br />

14<br />

12<br />

10<br />

8<br />

6<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />

1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996<br />

Q1 - Richest<br />

Neighbourhoods<br />

Q2<br />

Q3<br />

Q4<br />

Q5 - Poorest<br />

Source: Wilkins et al., 2002, <strong>Health</strong> Reports<br />

Q5 - Poorest<br />

Neighbourhoods


Diabetes, females<br />

ASMR x 100,000<br />

26<br />

24<br />

22<br />

20<br />

18<br />

16<br />

14<br />

12<br />

10<br />

8<br />

6<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />

1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001<br />

Q1 - Richest<br />

Q2<br />

Q3<br />

Q4<br />

Q5 - Poorest


Functional <strong>Health</strong>:<br />

The results <strong>of</strong> testing on children<br />

for eight basic attributes: vision,<br />

hearing, speech, mobility,<br />

dexterity, cognition, emotion, and<br />

pain and discomfort.


14<br />

Annual Family Income and Percentage <strong>of</strong><br />

Children with “Lower Functional <strong>Health</strong>”<br />

13.4<br />

12<br />

10<br />

8<br />

8.6<br />

8.1 8.3<br />

6<br />

5.1<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />

80,000<br />

Source: Prepared by the Canadian Council on <strong>Social</strong> Development using the National Longitudinal<br />

Survey <strong>of</strong> Children and Youth, 1994-1995


Heart Attack Admission Rates by Area<br />

Income, Ontario, 1994 - 1997<br />

14000<br />

12000<br />

11837<br />

13935<br />

13115<br />

10000<br />

8000<br />

8090<br />

6000<br />

4000<br />

4614<br />

2000<br />

0<br />

Highest Income<br />

Quintile<br />

2nd Quintle Middle Quintile 4th Quintile Lowest Income<br />

Quintile<br />

Source: Alter, D. A. et al. (1999). Effects <strong>of</strong> socioeconomic status o access to invasive cardiac<br />

procedures and on mortality after acute myocardial infarction. NEJM, 341, 1360-1367.


Report <strong>of</strong> Fair or Poor Self-Rated <strong>Health</strong>:<br />

Odds Ratios for Individual and Area Factors, Ontario, 1996<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5<br />

Age 40-64<br />

Age 65+<br />

Female<br />

Individual low income<br />

Individual medium income<br />

No regular exercise<br />

1.07<br />

1.62<br />

2.19<br />

2.33<br />

3.44<br />

3.89<br />

Smoker<br />

Less than secondary education<br />

Medium area inequality<br />

High area inequality<br />

Low area median income<br />

Medium area median income<br />

1.38<br />

1.43<br />

1.11<br />

1.18<br />

1.07<br />

1.18<br />

Source: Xi et al. (2005). “Income inequality and health in Ontario”, CJPH, 96, 206-211


Poor Scores (


The Story Behind the Story I<br />

How does the epistemology (the nature<br />

<strong>of</strong> knowledge) shape our understandings<br />

and actions on the determinants <strong>of</strong><br />

heath?


Three Forms <strong>of</strong> Knowledge (Park, 1993)<br />

• Instrumental (or positivist) knowledge is developed<br />

through traditional scientific approaches. It is<br />

concerned with controlling physical and social<br />

environments.<br />

• Interactive (or lived) knowledge is derived from<br />

sharing lived experiences. It is concerned with<br />

understanding and the connections among human<br />

beings.<br />

• Critical knowledge is derived from reflection and action<br />

on what is right and just. It is concerned with raising<br />

consciousness about the causes <strong>of</strong> problems and<br />

means <strong>of</strong> alleviating them.


Scientific (positivistic) Knowledge is<br />

Privileged above others<br />

• Quantitative (a problem)<br />

• Individualized (a larger problem)<br />

• Non-normative (an even larger problem)<br />

• De-politicized (a pr<strong>of</strong>ound problem)<br />

• See Raphael, D., & Bryant, T. (2002). The<br />

limitations <strong>of</strong> population health as a model for a<br />

new public health. <strong>Health</strong> Promotion<br />

International, 17, 189-199.


What does de-politicized mean when talking<br />

about health promotion or population health?<br />

• Assuming that individuals’ behaviours,<br />

health, and well-being exist independently<br />

<strong>of</strong> the society in which they live<br />

• Neglect <strong>of</strong> political and economic forces<br />

shaping the distribution <strong>of</strong> resources<br />

• Emphasis on knowledge dissemination,<br />

translation, or exchange rather than<br />

building social and political movements in<br />

the service <strong>of</strong> health


The philosophers<br />

have only<br />

interpreted the<br />

world in various<br />

ways; the point,<br />

however, is to<br />

change it.<br />

Karl Marx, 1818–1883


What should we be doing?


Carrying out the action areas <strong>of</strong> the Ottawa<br />

Charter would be a good beginning ☺…<br />

• build healthy public policy<br />

• create supportive environments for<br />

health<br />

• Strengthen community action for health<br />

• develop personal skills<br />

• and re-orient health services


Federal


All policies which have<br />

a direct bearing on<br />

health need to be<br />

coordinated. The list is<br />

long and includes,<br />

among others,<br />

income security,<br />

employment, education,<br />

housing, business,<br />

agriculture,<br />

transportation, justice<br />

and technology.<br />

-- Jake Epp, Achieving <strong>Health</strong> For All: A Framework for <strong>Health</strong><br />

Promotion, Ottawa: <strong>Health</strong> and Welfare Canada, 1986.


1998


2003


2004


2004


2005


2007


Provincial


Local<br />

(NGOs)


Why isn't this happening?<br />

(to the extent that most<br />

provinces have not identified<br />

improving living conditions as<br />

a significant public health<br />

priority)


Alberta’s Plan:<br />

Take Action on <strong>Health</strong> Now<br />

A wellness program will set targets for better<br />

health. Albertans will be encouraged to follow<br />

healthier lifestyles, such as increasing their level <strong>of</strong><br />

physical activity and reducing their use <strong>of</strong> tobacco.<br />

The program will aim for better health in the<br />

general population, including lower rates <strong>of</strong><br />

diabetes, heart disease and injury. A public<br />

information and health promotion campaign will be<br />

launched in the fall <strong>of</strong> 2002.<br />

Source: Building a better public health care system, the Alberta<br />

government’s response to the Premier’s Advisory Council on <strong>Health</strong><br />

Report, January 2002


Ontario Forms a Ministry <strong>of</strong> <strong>Health</strong> Promotion<br />

The Ministry will help Ontarians lead healthier<br />

lives by delivering programs that promote<br />

healthy choices and healthy lifestyles. To do this<br />

the Ministry will work closely with partners,<br />

stakeholders and all levels <strong>of</strong> government.


The Story Behind the Story II<br />

How do the ideologies <strong>of</strong> epidemiology<br />

and individualism shape our<br />

understandings and actions on the<br />

determinants <strong>of</strong> heath?


Individualism in <strong>Health</strong><br />

• With exceptions, few decision makers examine the<br />

relationship <strong>of</strong> inequalities in health status to racism or<br />

social, political, and economic inequality. None suggest<br />

the need for major political and economic<br />

transformations to eliminate health inequities.<br />

• Many analysts and policymakers instead focus on<br />

symptoms and treatments, microanalysis <strong>of</strong> individual<br />

risk factors, and changing people’s behavior and<br />

lifestyles, not conditions or places.<br />

• They present options primarily through a biomedical<br />

model and remedial solutions, mostly associated with<br />

health care, rarely stressing social transformation<br />

(H<strong>of</strong>richter, 2003, p. 25).


Individualism…<br />

• Individualism, a powerful philosophy and practice in North<br />

American, limits the public space for social movement<br />

activism.<br />

• By transforming public issues into private matters <strong>of</strong> lifestyle,<br />

self-empowerment, and assertiveness, individualism<br />

precludes organized efforts to spur social change. It fits<br />

perfectly with a declining welfare state and also influences<br />

responses to health inequities.<br />

• From this perspective, each person is self interested and<br />

possessed <strong>of</strong> a fixed, competitive human nature. Everyone<br />

has choice and the potential for upward mobility through<br />

hard work—ignoring how we develop through the process <strong>of</strong><br />

living in society (Tesh, 1988).<br />

• Individualism presumes that individuals exist in parallel with<br />

society instead <strong>of</strong> being formed by society (H<strong>of</strong>richter, 2003,<br />

p. 28).


Mass Media<br />

• The mass media almost always cover health as a<br />

personal issue, with emphasis on individual<br />

behavior, choice, and habits.<br />

• Risks become personal risks, and health issues<br />

become medical issues. News coverage rarely<br />

presents stories about community health.<br />

Options, mainly posed in relation to fragmented<br />

policy, shun institutional critique (Lindbladh and<br />

others, 1998).<br />

• Stories on health, as Lawrence Wallack suggests<br />

in Chapter 27 “communicate personal<br />

responsibility rather than social accountability” (p.<br />

29).


Public Understandings


Barriers to Action:<br />

Public Officials


The Political Economy <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>Determinants</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Health</strong><br />

Concepts and Action


Public <strong>Health</strong> and Public Policy:<br />

Making it Happen I<br />

Eleven public health objectives are as follows:<br />

1. Participation and influence in society<br />

2. <strong>Economic</strong> and social security<br />

3. Secure and favourable conditions during childhood<br />

and adolescence<br />

4. <strong>Health</strong>ier working life<br />

5. <strong>Health</strong>y and safe environments and products<br />

6. <strong>Health</strong> and medical care that more actively<br />

promotes good health


Public <strong>Health</strong> and Public Policy:<br />

Making it Happen II<br />

7. Effective protection against communicable<br />

diseases<br />

8. Safe sexuality and good reproductive health<br />

9. Increased physical activity<br />

10. Good eating habits and safe food<br />

11. Reduced use <strong>of</strong> tobacco and alcohol, a<br />

society free from illicit drugs and doping and<br />

a reduction in the harmful effects <strong>of</strong><br />

excessive gambling


Ross, N. et al. (2005). Metropolitan income inequality and working-age mortality: A cross-sectional<br />

analysis using comparable data from five countries Journal <strong>of</strong> Urban <strong>Health</strong>, 82, 101-110.


Figure 13.4: Union Density, Collective Agreement Coverage<br />

and Child Poverty, Early 00's (coverage rates) and Late 90's<br />

(poverty rates)<br />

Union and Bargaining<br />

Coverage<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Denmark<br />

Finland<br />

Norway<br />

Sweden<br />

92.5<br />

81<br />

4.2<br />

Switzerland<br />

Belgium<br />

Luxembourg<br />

Netherlands<br />

Germany<br />

Austria<br />

Spain<br />

Portugal<br />

Italy<br />

14.9<br />

28<br />

32<br />

Australia<br />

Canada<br />

United Kingdom<br />

New Zealand<br />

USA<br />

13 14<br />

Union Density Collective Bargaining Coverage Child Poverty Rate<br />

21.9<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

Child Poverty Rate<br />

Source: Organization for <strong>Economic</strong> Cooperation and Development (2006). Trade Union Members and Union<br />

Density. Available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/24/31781139.xls and Innocenti Research Centre. A League<br />

Table <strong>of</strong> Child Poverty in Rich Nations (Florence: Innocenti Research Centre, 1999), Figure 1, p.4.


And back in Canada…


Source: Innocenti<br />

Research Centre.<br />

(2005). Child poverty<br />

in rich countries, 2005,<br />

Innocenti report card<br />

No.6. Florence:<br />

Innocenti Research<br />

Centre.<br />

Most data are from the<br />

years 1998-2000.


Figure 3.5: Average Income by Income Quintile, All Family<br />

Units, Canada, 1995-2004<br />

160,000<br />

140,000<br />

120,000<br />

100,000<br />

80,000<br />

60,000<br />

40,000<br />

20,000<br />

0<br />

142,700<br />

119,700<br />

43,600 47,500<br />

12,400 12,900<br />

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004<br />

Lowest Quintile Second Quintile Middle Quintile<br />

Fourth Quintile<br />

Highest Quintile


United Nations Report, 1998<br />

UN lashes out at Canada<br />

for failure to end poverty<br />

Helen Branswell<br />

Times–Colonist Newspaper,<br />

Victoria, B.C., December 5,<br />

1998. pg. E.10


United Nations Report, 2006<br />

Canada failing to care for<br />

poor, disadvantaged: UN<br />

report<br />

CBC News, May 22, 2006<br />

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/05/22/unreportcanada.html


What can be done?


Figure 13.3: Policy Priorities <strong>of</strong> Canadian Food Banks<br />

Increase <strong>Social</strong> Assistance Benefits<br />

Raise the Minimum Wage<br />

Facilitate Affordable Rental Housing<br />

Improve Rates and Access to EI<br />

Increase Disability Supports<br />

Improve Income Supports for Seniors<br />

Expand Job Training Opportunities<br />

Provide Affordable Childcare<br />

Increase National Child Benefit<br />

Lower Tuition, Increase Student Grants<br />

Other Policies<br />

Expand Settlement Services<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80<br />

Percentage <strong>of</strong> Food Banks Recommending Action


Table 1. Federal Party Positions on Issues Identified by Campaign 2000 as Essential to Eliminating<br />

Child Poverty<br />

“Yes” indicates party position meets Campaign 2000 policy recommendation<br />

“Partial” indicates party position partially meets Campaign 2000 policy recommendation<br />

“No” indicates party makes no commitment that meets Campaign 2000 policy recommendation<br />

ISSUE CPC LIB NDP BLOC<br />

Increase Canada Child Tax Benefit to $4,900/child<br />

by 2007 & end clawback from families on social assistance No No Yes No*<br />

Commit to key principles (quality, universal, accessible<br />

& developmental programming) for child care system No Yes Yes No*<br />

Introduce legislation to secure early learning & child care<br />

as permanent social program No No Yes No*<br />

Increase federal funding for a national public system <strong>of</strong><br />

Early Learning & Child Care No Yes Yes Yes<br />

Commit to increase social housing & increase funding<br />

by $2 B/year No Partial Yes Yes<br />

Raise the federal minimum wage to $10/hour No No Yes No*<br />

Restore eligibility for Employment Insurance No No Yes Yes<br />

Increase funding for post-secondary education No Partial Partial Yes


Figure 13.4: Union Density, Collective Agreement Coverage<br />

and Child Poverty, Early 00's (coverage rates) and Late 90's<br />

(poverty rates)<br />

Union and Bargaining<br />

Coverage<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Denmark<br />

Finland<br />

Norway<br />

Sweden<br />

92.5<br />

81<br />

4.2<br />

Switzerland<br />

Belgium<br />

Luxembourg<br />

Netherlands<br />

Germany<br />

Austria<br />

Spain<br />

Portugal<br />

Italy<br />

14.9<br />

28<br />

32<br />

Australia<br />

Canada<br />

United Kingdom<br />

New Zealand<br />

USA<br />

13 14<br />

Union Density Collective Bargaining Coverage Child Poverty Rate<br />

21.9<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

Child Poverty Rate<br />

Source: Organization for <strong>Economic</strong> Cooperation and Development (2006). Trade Union Members and Union<br />

Density. Available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/24/31781139.xls and Innocenti Research Centre. A League<br />

Table <strong>of</strong> Child Poverty in Rich Nations (Florence: Innocenti Research Centre, 1999), Figure 1, p.4.


Reducing <strong>Health</strong> Inequalities<br />

We consider that without a shift <strong>of</strong><br />

resources to the less well <strong>of</strong>f, both in<br />

and out <strong>of</strong> work, little will be<br />

accomplished in terms <strong>of</strong> a reduction <strong>of</strong><br />

health inequalities by interventions<br />

addressing particular downstream’<br />

influences.<br />

-- Report <strong>of</strong> the Acheson Independent Inquiry<br />

into Inequalities in <strong>Health</strong> 1998 p 33


The Story Behind the Story III<br />

How does the political economy <strong>of</strong> a<br />

society shape our understandings and<br />

actions on the determinants <strong>of</strong> heath?


What is the Central Institution in<br />

Canadian Society?<br />

• The state?<br />

•The market?<br />

• The family?


Source: Saint-Arnaud, S., & Bernard, P. (2003). Convergence or resilience? A<br />

hierarchial cluster analysis <strong>of</strong> the welfare regimes in advanced countries. Current<br />

Sociology, 51(5), 499-527.


Esping-Andersen Typology <strong>of</strong><br />

Welfare States I<br />

• <strong>Social</strong> Democratic (e.g., Sweden, Norway, Denmark,<br />

Finland), Liberal (UK, USA, Canada, Australia), and<br />

Conservative (Germany, France, Italy, Portugal)<br />

welfare states form a continuum <strong>of</strong> government<br />

support to citizens.<br />

• These supports range from high government<br />

intervention welfare systems in the <strong>Social</strong> Democratic<br />

countries to residual welfare systems as seen in<br />

Liberal political economies.<br />

• Conservative nations (e.g., Germany, France, Italy fall<br />

midway in their provisions.<br />

• Source: Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). <strong>Social</strong> Foundations <strong>of</strong><br />

Post-Industrial Economies. New York: Oxford University Press.


Esping-Andersen Typology <strong>of</strong><br />

Welfare States II<br />

• The Liberal welfare state sees means-tested<br />

assistance, modest universal transfers, and modest<br />

social-insurance plans.<br />

• Means-testing refers to benefits in the Liberal welfare<br />

state being primarily geared to low-income groups.<br />

• <strong>Social</strong> assistance is limited by traditional, liberal workethic<br />

attitudes that stigmatize the needy and attribute<br />

failure to individual, rather than, societal failures.<br />

• Liberal nations limit welfare benefits since it is<br />

believed generous benefits lead to a preference for<br />

welfare dependency rather than gainful employment.<br />

• Source: Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). <strong>Social</strong> Foundations <strong>of</strong> Post-<br />

Industrial Economies. New York: Oxford University Press.


Anglo-Saxon Liberal Regimes<br />

• Anglo-Saxon liberal political economies had the<br />

lowest health care expenditures and the lowest<br />

coverage by public medical care.<br />

• Had greater incidence <strong>of</strong> low wage earnings,<br />

higher income inequalities, and the highest poverty<br />

rates.<br />

• These economies derived the greatest proportion<br />

<strong>of</strong> income from capital investment rather than<br />

wages.<br />

• These economies had the lowest improvement<br />

rates in infant mortality rates from 1960 to1996.<br />

• Source: Navarro, V., & Shi, L. (2002). The Political Context <strong>of</strong> <strong>Social</strong> Inequalities and<br />

<strong>Health</strong>. In V. Navarro (Ed.), The Political Economy <strong>of</strong> <strong>Social</strong> Inequalities: Consequences<br />

for <strong>Health</strong> and Quality <strong>of</strong> Life. Amityville, NY: Baywood


Figure 12.4: Public Expenditure on Old Age as % <strong>of</strong> GDP, 2001<br />

0 5 10 15<br />

Greece<br />

Switzerland<br />

Germany<br />

Italy<br />

Austria<br />

France<br />

Sweden<br />

Belgium<br />

Poland<br />

Denmark<br />

Spain<br />

UK<br />

Hungary<br />

Finland<br />

Portugal<br />

Luxembourg<br />

Mexico<br />

Japan<br />

Norway<br />

Slovak<br />

Czech Republic<br />

Netherlands<br />

Iceland<br />

USA<br />

Turkey<br />

Canada<br />

New Zealand<br />

Australia<br />

Ireland<br />

Korea<br />

1.2<br />

2.7<br />

5.5<br />

5.3<br />

5.1<br />

4.8<br />

4.7<br />

4.7<br />

9.2<br />

8.7<br />

8.5<br />

8.3<br />

8.3<br />

8.1<br />

8.0<br />

7.9<br />

7.9<br />

7.5<br />

7.4<br />

7.3<br />

6.8<br />

6.7<br />

6.7<br />

6.4<br />

12.7<br />

11.8<br />

11.7<br />

11.3<br />

10.7<br />

10.6


Figure 12.5: Public Expenditure on Incapacity-Related Benefits<br />

as % <strong>of</strong> GDP, 2001<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6<br />

Poland<br />

Sweden<br />

Norway<br />

Netherlands<br />

Denmark<br />

Finland<br />

Switzerland<br />

Luxembourg<br />

Belgium<br />

Czech<br />

New Zealand<br />

Iceland<br />

Hungary<br />

Austria<br />

UK<br />

Portugal<br />

Spain<br />

Slovak<br />

Germany<br />

Australia<br />

France<br />

Italy<br />

Greece<br />

Ireland<br />

USA<br />

Canada<br />

Japan<br />

Korea<br />

Turkey<br />

0.8<br />

0.7<br />

0.5<br />

0.4<br />

1.4<br />

1.1<br />

1.8<br />

3.3<br />

3.0<br />

2.8<br />

2.8<br />

2.7<br />

2.5<br />

2.5<br />

2.5<br />

2.4<br />

2.3<br />

2.3<br />

2.3<br />

2.1<br />

2.1<br />

4.1<br />

3.9<br />

3.9<br />

3.8<br />

3.6<br />

4.8<br />

5.2<br />

5.5


Figure 12.6: Public Expenditure on Family as % <strong>of</strong> GDP, 2001<br />

0 1 2 3 4<br />

Denmark<br />

Luxembourg<br />

Norway<br />

Finland<br />

Austria<br />

Sweden<br />

Australia<br />

France<br />

Iceland<br />

Hungary<br />

Belgium<br />

UK<br />

New Zealand<br />

Germany<br />

Greece<br />

Ireland<br />

Czech Republic<br />

Slovak<br />

Switzerland<br />

Portugal<br />

Netherlands<br />

Turkey<br />

Italy<br />

Poland<br />

Canada<br />

Japan<br />

Spain<br />

USA<br />

Mexico<br />

0.6<br />

0.5<br />

0.4<br />

0.3<br />

1.2<br />

1.2<br />

1.1<br />

1.1<br />

1.0<br />

0.9<br />

0.9<br />

1.9<br />

1.8<br />

1.6<br />

1.6<br />

1.5<br />

2.6<br />

2.5<br />

2.3<br />

2.2<br />

2.2<br />

3.2<br />

3.0<br />

2.9<br />

2.9<br />

2.8<br />

2.8<br />

3.4<br />

3.8


Educate


Disease is not something<br />

personal and special, but<br />

only a manifestation <strong>of</strong> life<br />

under modified<br />

(pathological) conditions.<br />

If medicine is to fulfil her<br />

great task, then she must<br />

enter the political and<br />

social life. Do we not<br />

always find the diseases<br />

<strong>of</strong> the populace traceable<br />

to defects in society?<br />

Rudolph Virchow, 1821-1902


Motivate


Activate


Figure 13.3: Policy Priorities <strong>of</strong> Canadian Food Banks<br />

Increase <strong>Social</strong> Assistance Benefits<br />

Raise the Minimum Wage<br />

Facilitate Affordable Rental Housing<br />

Improve Rates and Access to EI<br />

Increase Disability Supports<br />

Improve Income Supports for Seniors<br />

Expand Job Training Opportunities<br />

Provide Affordable Childcare<br />

Increase National Child Benefit<br />

Lower Tuition, Increase Student Grants<br />

Other Policies<br />

Expand Settlement Services<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80<br />

Percentage <strong>of</strong> Food Banks Recommending Action


Figure 13.4: Union Density, Collective Agreement Coverage<br />

and Child Poverty, Early 00's (coverage rates) and Late 90's<br />

(poverty rates)<br />

Union and Bargaining<br />

Coverage<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Denmark<br />

Finland<br />

Norway<br />

Sweden<br />

Switzerland<br />

Belgium<br />

Luxembourg<br />

Netherlands<br />

Germany<br />

Austria<br />

Spain<br />

Portugal<br />

Italy<br />

Australia<br />

Canada<br />

United Kingdom<br />

New Zealand<br />

USA<br />

Union Density Collective Bargaining Coverage Child Poverty Rate<br />

13 14<br />

21.9<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

Child Poverty Rate<br />

Source: Organization for <strong>Economic</strong> Cooperation and Development (2006). Trade Union Members and Union<br />

Density. Available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/24/31781139.xls and Innocenti Research Centre. A League<br />

Table <strong>of</strong> Child Poverty in Rich Nations (Florence: Innocenti Research Centre, 1999), Figure 1, p.4.


Resources<br />

• Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives<br />

• Centre for <strong>Social</strong> Justice<br />

• Canadian Council on <strong>Social</strong> Development<br />

• Campaign 2000<br />

• National Council <strong>of</strong> Welfare<br />

• Canadian Labour Congress<br />

• National Anti-Poverty Coalition<br />

• Caledon Institute<br />

• Canadian Policy Research Networks<br />

• Public <strong>Health</strong> Agency – <strong>Health</strong> Canada


A Canada with Scandinavian-Style<br />

Equality is Achievable<br />

• It’s not as if we need to obliterate capitalism. Properly<br />

regulated, taxed, and forced to operate in the public<br />

interest, business firms can fit constructively into a just<br />

society. The wealth that their workers produce can be<br />

more fairly distributed.<br />

• This is evident in several parts <strong>of</strong> Europe, notably in the<br />

Scandinavian nations, where capitalism still thrives.<br />

Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland may not have<br />

developed idyllic societies -- but their economies are far<br />

more equitable than Canada’s and far less blighted by<br />

poverty, hunger, and homelessness.<br />

• Business firms operate freely and pr<strong>of</strong>itably in these<br />

countries, but under constraints that make them good<br />

corporate citizens…<br />

• Source: Ed Finn, CCPA Monitor, March 1, 2006.


% <strong>of</strong> GDP in<br />

Transfers<br />

Degree <strong>of</strong> Proportional Representation<br />

Source: Alesina, A. & Glaeser, E. L. (2004). Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe: A World<br />

<strong>of</strong> Difference. Toronto: Oxford University Press


Table 1. Federal Party Positions on Issues Identified by Campaign 2000 as Essential to Eliminating<br />

Child Poverty<br />

“Yes” indicates party position meets Campaign 2000 policy recommendation<br />

“Partial” indicates party position partially meets Campaign 2000 policy recommendation<br />

“No” indicates party makes no commitment that meets Campaign 2000 policy recommendation<br />

ISSUE CPC LIB NDP BLOC<br />

Increase Canada Child Tax Benefit to $4,900/child<br />

by 2007 & end clawback from families on social assistance No No Yes No*<br />

Commit to key principles (quality, universal, accessible<br />

& developmental programming) for child care system No Yes Yes No*<br />

Introduce legislation to secure early learning & child care<br />

as permanent social program No No Yes No*<br />

Increase federal funding for a national public system <strong>of</strong><br />

Early Learning & Child Care No Yes Yes Yes<br />

Commit to increase social housing & increase funding<br />

by $2 B/year No Partial Yes Yes<br />

Raise the federal minimum wage to $10/hour No No Yes No*<br />

Restore eligibility for Employment Insurance No No Yes Yes<br />

Increase funding for post-secondary education No Partial Partial Yes


The Best Hope<br />

• The best means therefore <strong>of</strong> promoting health and<br />

improving population health involves Canadians – and<br />

others -- being informed about the political and<br />

economic forces that shape the health <strong>of</strong> a society.<br />

Once so empowered, they can consider political and<br />

other means <strong>of</strong> influencing these forces.<br />

• <strong>Health</strong> promoters and population health researchers<br />

need to “get political” and recognize the importance <strong>of</strong><br />

political and social action in support <strong>of</strong> health.<br />

• This seems a rather daunting task, but one that hold<br />

the best hope <strong>of</strong> promoting the health <strong>of</strong> citizens in<br />

Canada and elsewhere (Bryant, Raphael, & Rioux,<br />

2006).


And, finally…


And I always thought: the<br />

very simplest words<br />

Must be enough. When I<br />

say what things are like<br />

Everyone's heart must be<br />

torn to shreds.<br />

That you'll go down if you<br />

don't stand up for yourself<br />

Surely you see that.<br />

Bertolt Brecht, 1898-1956. And I Always Thought.


Dennis Raphael<br />

draphael@yorku.ca<br />

This presentation and other presentations<br />

and related papers are available at:<br />

http://www.atkinson.yorku.ca/draphael

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!