Global and National Action on SDH Michael Marmot UCL

Preview:

DESCRIPTION

Global and National Action on SDH Michael Marmot UCL. Secretary’s Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2010 Web-based Meeting 11 th Dec 2009. Lessons from International Efforts. Social justice - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Global and National Action

on SDH

Michael MarmotUCL

Secretary’s Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2010

Web-based Meeting11th Dec 2009

• Lessons from International Efforts

• Social justice• Empowerment as a

means – material, psychosocial, political

• Creating the conditions for people to take control of their lives

www.who.int/social_determinants

Conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age

Structural drivers of those conditions at global, national and local level

CSDH – three principles of action

Monitoring, Training, Research

Conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age

Structural drivers of those conditions at global, national and local level

CSDH – three Linked Areas for Action

Monitoring, Training, Research

Early child development and education

Healthy Places Fair Employment Social Protection

Universal Health Care

• Tools: Health impact assessment?

Early child development and education

Healthy Places Fair Employment Social Protection

Universal Health Care

Health Equity in all Policies

Fair Financing Good Global Governance

Market Responsibility

Gender Equity

Political empowerment – inclusion and voice

CSDH – Areas for Action

• Wider determinants

EXPENDITURE ON MEDICAL CARE PER CAPITA IN US AND UK

• UNITED STATES:

– US$ 6,096

• UNITED KINGDOM:

– US$ 2,560 (adjusted for purchasing power)

(Human Development Report 2007/2008)

HEALTH DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ENGLAND AND THE US55-64 year olds

0

5

10

15

20

25

England US England US England US

Low income Middle income High Income

Heart disease Diabetes CancerSource: Banks, Marmot, Oldfield and Smith; JAMA 2006

% Prevalence

• Not just the poor. A gradient

Life expectancy at age 25 by education,United States, 1988 - 1998

47.9

53.4

50.6

56.4

52.2

57.4

54.7

58.5

40

45

50

55

60

Men Women

Less than 121213-15More than 15L

E a

t ag

e 2

5 Years of school completed:

Source: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Commission to build a Healthier America, 2008

• The slope of the gradient is not fixed

Life expectancy at birth by socioeconomic deprivation US (male and female combined)

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1980-82

1989-91

1998-2000

(Singh & Siahpush, 2006)

Real earnings growth (%) for men and women working full time by decile, 1980 - 2005

OECD 2008

Real earnings growth (%) for men and women working full time by decile, 1980 - 2003

OECD 2008

Proportion relatively poor pre and post welfare state redistribution

05

1015202530354045

poverty rates post tax & transfers poverty reduction by income redistribution

71% 71% 72%

Source: Fritzell & Ritakallio 2004 using Luxembourg Income Study data, CSDH Nordic Network

62% 63% 59%

54%49%

44%50%

24%

Pov

erty

%

• Recognition by elected officials?

“…and we will learn from other countries along the way…”

Gordon Brown, Prime Minister, UK at Closing the Gap Conference, 6th Nov 2008

“I am pleased to announce that Sir Michael Marmot has agreed to undertake a new review of health inequalities in England…”

• “I have asked Professor Sir Michael Marmot, drawing on the excellent evidence of the WHO’s social determinants of health commission, to lead a review, based on the best global evidence on how we can do more to tackle health inequality in this country.”

Alan Johnson, Secretary of State, DH,6th Nov 2008Closing the Gap Conference, London

Building on health inequalities agenda in the UK

• 1998 - Acheson Inquiry into Inequalities in Health;• 1999 – national strategy for health in England –

Saving Lives: our healthier nation – commitment to tackling health inequalities

• 2002 – Treasury led cross cutting review on health inequalities

• 2003 – Tackling health inequalities - Programme for action

• Identify evidence to underpin future policy and action; • Show how evidence can be translated into practice;• Advise on possible objectives and measures, build on

experience of the current PSA target on infant mortality and life expectancy;

• Publish a report to contribute to development post-2010 health inequalities strategy. (Feb 2010)

• Indicators and the economic case

Life expectancy and disability free life expectancy at birth, persons by neighbourhood income level, England, 1999-2003

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

Neighbourhood Income Deprivation - Population PercentileSource: ONS …………………………………………………………………………..

Age

Life expectancy

DFLE

Pension age in 2024

Poly. (DFLE)

Poly. (Lifeexpectancy)

• Whole of government

2) Enable all children, young people & adults

to maximise their capabilities & control their

lives.

Policy objectives

Effective evidence-based delivery systems.

Reduce health inequalities and improve health and well-being for all.

Policy Goals

Create an enabling society that maximises individual and

community potential.

Ensure social justice, healthand sustainability are at heart

of policies.

5) Create and develop

healthy and environmentally

sustainable places &

communities.

4) Ensure healthy

standard of living for all.

3) Create fair

employment & decent

work for all.

1) Give every

child the best start

in life.

Equality & health equity in all policies.

6) Strengthen the role and impact of ill-

health prevention.

Policy mechanisms

• Department for Transport

• Department for Children, Schools and Families

• Department of Work and Pensions

• Department of Energy and Climate Change

• Department of Communities and Local Government

• Ministry of Justice

• Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

• Department for Culture, Media and Sport

• Opposition parties

Working across government

• Understanding of the problem?

LIFE EXPECTANCY IN LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN: MEN

• Cycle from Hampstead in the north of Camden to UCL in the south. Travel from area where life expectancy for men is 81 years; within 30 min by bike life expectancy drops by eleven years to 70 years.

Areas in blue are known as “Spearhead Authorities”

Kensington & ChelseaQueens Gate ward:LE for men: 88 years.

Life expectancy at birth for selected London electoral wards, 2002-06

HaringeyTottenham Green LE for men: 71 years

(data from London Health Observatory)

• Local level?

Policy Mechanisms

• Equality & health equity in all policies– Health Impact Assessments– Equality legislation– Cross and all government approach

• Evidence based delivery systems– National and local levels

• Establish potential targets and indicators of outcome, output and process– Underpin the areas of action on social determinants in short, medium

and long term

• Provide a rigorous basis to facilitate performance improvement of national & local government and its agencies and hold them to account

• Provide the basis for: – setting national targets and indicators– assisting local agencies in their development of local targets on a

nationally comparable basis

Framework for indicators and targets

A fairer society

For further information

www.ucl.ac.uk/gheg/marmotreview

Final Report Launched and available online

11 February 2010

Recommended