From public health to public good: Toward universal wellbeing.

We aim to consolidate recent trends in public health into a reconceptualization of the field as public good. We build on several strands of theory, research and action to formulate a more impactful future for the field. Our argument comprises three main parts. In the first part, we describe the central components of the proposed public good: conditions of justice, experiences of mattering, and outcomes of subjective and objective wellbeing. In the second section, we identify continua of practices that paint a trajectory from traditional public health to ecological and participatory public health, to universal wellbeing framed as a public good. The continua are defined in terms of assumptions, practices and roles. Among others, these continua pertain to capabilities, scope of the field, ecological focus, timing of intervention, role of citizen, role of professional, role of settings and role of government. Finally, the third section introduces a series of strategies and recommendations to make the narrative of universal wellbeing as public good a reality.

Advancing complexity-informed health promotion: a scoping review to link health promotion and co-creation.

A complexity-informed approach has recently been proposed as a hopeful revolution for health promotion (HP), requesting appropriate ways of tackling the complexities of health, equity and well-being. In addition, co-creation has gained traction as an approach to tackle complexity. HP and co-creation are established concepts that have long been enacted in practice. Although each concept is premised on similar approaches to value-creation such as participation and collaboration, little has been done to link the two approaches. To advance complexity-informed HP, this scoping review presents findings from peer-reviewed articles, published in English, between 2009 and March 2020. Articles were identified through searches of academic databases. Twenty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria, explicitly linking HP and co-creation. Included articles were charted by descriptive information and main focus, and advanced by a thematic analysis. Four themes suggest a potential avenue for advancing complexity-informed HP: (i) dealing with complexity, (ii) value creation, (iii) the value of the values and (iv) benefits and challenges. While current links between HP and co-creation are scarce they are increasing and promising. Based on the findings from the review, propositions to advance complexity-informed HP is outlined and discussed. Overall it is argued that co-creation and HP are mutually beneficial concepts, providing a framework for participative, collaborative, context-sensitive and knowledge-based practice that reflects the complex nature of health. More research is needed to highlight potential and challenges of integrating co-creation in HP, especially related to health equity and sustainable development.