Article Text

Download PDFPDF
A glossary of terms for understanding political aspects in the implementation of Health in All Policies (HiAP)
  1. Goldameir Oneka1,
  2. Faraz Vahid Shahidi1,
  3. Carles Muntaner2,
  4. Ahmed M Bayoumi3,4,5,6,
  5. Deb Finn Mahabir2,
  6. Alix Freiler3,
  7. Patricia O’Campo1,3,
  8. Ketan Shankardass3,7,8
  1. 1 Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Li Ka Shing Knowledge, Institute University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  2. 2 Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  3. 3 Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  4. 4 Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  5. 5 Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  6. 6 Division of General Internal Medicine, St Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  7. 7 Wilfred Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
  8. 8 University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  1. Correspondence to Ms. Goldameir Oneka; golda.oneka{at}


Health in All Policies (HiAP) is a strategy that seeks to integrate health considerations into the development, implementation and evaluation of policies across various non-health sectors of the government. Over the past 15 years, there has been an increase in the uptake of HiAP by local, regional and national governments. Despite the growing popularity of this approach, most existing literature on HiAP implementation remains descriptive rather than explanatory in its orientation. Moreover, prior research has focused on the more technical aspects of the implementation process. Thus, studies that aim to ‘build capacity to promote, implement and evaluate HiAP’ abound. Conversely, there is little emphasis on the political aspects of HiAP implementation. Neglecting the role of politics in shaping the use of HiAP is problematic, since health and the strategies by which it is promoted are partially political.

This glossary addresses the politics gap in the existing literature by drawing on theoretical concepts from political, policy, and public health sciences to articulate a framework for studying how political mechanisms influence HiAP implementation. To this end, the glossary forms part of an on-going multiple explanatory case study of HiAP implementation, HARMONICS (HiAP Analysis using Realist Methods on International Case Studies,, and is meant to expand on a previously published glossary addressing the topic of HiAP implementation more broadly. Collectively, these glossaries offer a conceptual toolkit for understanding how politics explains implementation outcomes of HiAP.

  • Health inequalities

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors GO, FVS, CM, AMB, DFM, AF, PO and KS contributed equally to the conceptualisation, writing and editing of this manuscript.

  • Funding This work was supported by Canadian Institute of Health Research grant numbers 111608 and 96566. AMB supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research/Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Applied Chair in Health Services and Policy Research and is currently supported by the Fondation Baxter & Alma Ricard Chair in Inner City Health at St Michael’s Hospital and the University of Toronto.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not applicable.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles