Government, governance, and place-based approaches: lessons from and for public policy.

BACKGROUND: Place-based approaches are increasingly applied to address the determinants of health, many of which are complex problems, to ultimately improve population health outcomes. Through public policy, government actions can affect the effectiveness of place-based approaches by influencing the conceptualisation, development, implementation, governance, and/or evaluation of place-based approaches. Despite the important role of public policy, there has been limited examination of public policy related to place-based approaches. We add to the limited knowledge base by analysing Australian national public policy, to explore: (1) the definitions, conceptualisations, and characteristics of place-based approaches in public policy; (2) the government's perception and communication of its role in place-based approaches; and (3) the extent to which government policy reflects the necessary conditions for successful place-based governance developed by Marsh and colleagues, namely localised context, embedded learning, and reciprocal accountability. METHODS: This research was underpinned by the Theory of Systems Change and methodologically informed by the READ approach to document analysis. Ritchie and Spencer's framework method was utilised to analyse the data. RESULTS: We identified and reviewed 67 policy documents. In terms of conceptualisation, common characteristics of place-based approaches related to collaboration, including community in decision-making, responsiveness to community needs, and suitability of place-based approaches to address complex problems and socio-economic determinants of health. Three roles of government were identified: funder, partner, and creator of a supportive policy environment. From the three criteria for successful place-based governance, localised context was the most dominant across the documents and reciprocal accountability the least. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we drew key implications for public policy and research. There was a disproportionate emphasis on the bottom-up approach across the documents, which presents the risk of diminishing government interest in place-based approaches, potentially burdening communities experiencing disadvantage beyond their capacities. Governments engaged in place-based approaches should work towards a more balanced hybrid approach to place-based approaches that maintain the central functions of government while allowing for successful place-based governance. This could be achieved by promoting consistency in conceptualisations of 'place-based', employing an active role in trust building, advancing the creation of a supportive policy environment, and embedding 'learning' across place-based approaches.

Scoping review of practice-focused resources to support the implementation of place-based approaches.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: There is increasing interest across public health research, policy, and practice in place-based approaches to improve health outcomes. Practice-focused resources, such as grey literature, courses and websites, are utilised by practitioners to support the implementation of place-based approaches. METHODS: A detailed search of two search engines: Google and DuckDuckGo to identify free practice-focused resources was conducted. RESULTS: Forty-one resources met inclusion criteria, including 26 publications, 13 web-based resources and two courses. They were mainly focused on collaboration, developed by not-for-profit organisations, focused on a broad target audience, and supported people living with disadvantage. The publications we reviewed generally: clearly stated important information, such as the author of the publication; used their own evaluations, professional experience and other grey literature as supporting evidence; included specific, practical implementation strategies; and were easy to read. CONCLUSIONS: Based on findings, we recommend that: (1) the development of resources to support evidence-informed practice and governance be prioritised; (2) resources clearly state their target audience and tailor communication to this audience; (3) resources draw on evidence from a range of sources; (4) resources continue to include practical implementation strategies supported by examples and (5) resource content be adaptable to different contexts (e.g., different settings and/or target populations). SO WHAT?: This is the first review of practice-focused resources to support the implementation of place-based approaches and the findings can be used to reduce duplication of efforts and inform future research, policy, and practice, particularly the refinement of existing resources and the development of future resources.

The C-CAP Process: A Comprehensive Approach to Community Resource Mapping.

INTRODUCTION: Place-based systems change approaches are gaining popularity to address the complex problems associated with locational disadvantage. An important stage of place-based systems change involves understanding the context that surrounds (re)produces a target problem. Community resource mapping can be used to establish the context and identify the strengths of a community that might be leveraged through systems change efforts. Approaches to community resource mapping draw on a range of philosophical assumptions and methodological frameworks. However, comprehensive, practical guidance for researchers and practitioners to conduct community resource mapping is scarce. METHOD: Drawing on the learnings from a literature review, scoping workshops, and reflective practice sessions, we developed a flexible, methodologically robust process called the Contextualize, Collect, Analyze, and Present (C-CAP) process: a four-phase approach to preparing for, conducting, and reporting on community resource mapping. The C-CAP process was co-developed by researchers and practitioners and was tested and refined in two different communities. RESULTS: The C-CAP process provides robust guidance for conducting and reporting on a community resource mapping project. The C-CAP process can be applied by public health practitioners and researchers and adapted for use across different communities, problems, and target groups. We encourage others guided by differing theoretical perspectives to apply C-CAP and share the learnings. CONCLUSION: Application of the C-CAP process has the potential to improve the comparability and comprehensiveness of findings from community resource mapping projects and avoids duplication of effort by reducing the need to design new processes for each new community resource mapping activity.