DOCSLIB.ORG

A Review of Health Impact Assessments in the U.S.: Current State-Of-Science, Best Practices, and Areas for Improvement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Review of Health Impact Assessments in the U.S.: Current State-Of-Science, Best Practices, and Areas for Improvement EPA/600/R-13/354 December 2013 www.epa.gov/ord A Review of Health Impact Assessments in the U.S.: Current State-of-Science, Best Practices, and Areas for Improvement Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory EPA/600/R-13/354 December 2013 www.epa.gov/ord A Review of Health Impact Assessments in the U.S.: Current State-of-Science, Best Practices, and Areas for Improvement Justicia Rhodus1, Florence Fulk2, Bradley Autrey2, Shannon O’Shea3, Annette Roth2 1 CSS-Dynamac c/o U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Cincinnati, OH 45268 2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Exposure Research Laboratory Cincinnati, OH 45268 3 Contractor, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Exposure Research Laboratory Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 National Exposure Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Cincinnati, OH 45268 Notice The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development funded and managed the research described here under contract EP-D-11-073 to Dynamac Corporation. It has been subjected to the Agency’s external and administrative reviews and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Author Contributions and Acknowledgements J. Rhodus (HIA Review Lead) – developed and managed the HIA Review process (including review framework and database), reviewed HIAs, implemented the QA Review and corrective actions, compiled and managed the final review database, performed final quality check on review database, synthesized the results of the HIA Review, and authored this synthesis report. F. Fulk (Principal Investigator) – managed implementation of the HIA Review in the context of other related Agency research, provided input during conceptualization of the HIA Review process, reviewed HIAs, and reviewed this synthesis report. Brad Autrey (HIA Review Team) – provided input during conceptualization of the HIA Review process, reviewed HIAs, and reviewed this synthesis report. Shannon O’Shea (HIA Review Team) – reviewed HIAs and reviewed this synthesis report. Annette Roth (HIA Review Team) – reviewed HIAs and reviewed this synthesis report. The authors would also like to thank Ellen D’Amico (CSS-Dynamac) for GIS support and Bruce Mintz (EPA-NERL), Aaron Wernham (Health Impact Project), Celia Harris (Human Impact Partners), and Steve White (Oregon Public Health Institute) for providing critical review of this synthesis report. ii Executive Summary A systematic review of health impact assessments (HIAs) from the U.S. was conducted to obtain a clear picture of how HIAs are being implemented nationally and to identify potential areas for improving the HIA community of practice. The review was focused on HIAs from the four sectors that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program has identified as target areas for empowering communities to move toward more sustainable states. These four sectors are Transportation, Housing/Buildings/ Infrastructure, Land Use, and Waste Management/Site Revitalization. The review systematically documented organizations involved in conducting the HIAs; funding sources; the types of community-level decisions being made; data, tools, and models used; self- identified data needs; methods of stakeholder engagement; pathways and endpoints; characterization of impacts; decision-making outcomes and recommendations; monitoring and follow-up measures; prioritization methods employed; HIA defensibility and effectiveness; attainment of the Minimum Elements of HIA; areas for improvement; and identification of best practices. The results of the HIA reviews were synthesized to identify the state of the HIA practice in the U.S., best practices in HIAs, and areas in the overall HIA process that could benefit from enhanced guidance, strategies, and methods for conducting community-based risk assessments and HIAs. While HIAs have helped to raise awareness and bring health into decisions outside traditional health-related fields, the effectiveness of HIAs in bringing health-related changes to pending decisions in the U.S. varies greatly. The review found that there are considerable disparities in the quality and rigor of HIAs being conducted. This, combined with the lack of monitoring, health impact management, and other follow-up in the HIAs could be limiting the overall utilization and effectiveness of this tool in the U.S. However, a number of best practices were identified in the review, which (if implemented) could help advance the HIA field of practice, reduce disparities in the quality and rigor of HIA, and improve the overall effectiveness of the tool. HIA is a relatively new and rapidly emerging field in the U.S. Understanding the current state and applicability of HIAs in the U.S., as well as best practices and areas for improvement, will help to advance the HIA community of practice in the U.S., improve the quality of assessments upon which stakeholder and policy decisions are based, and promote healthy and sustainable communities. iii Foreword The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) conducts human and ecological exposure research that provides the tools necessary for EPA to carry out its mission. Critical to the success of the NERL research program is communication and utility of its research to influence and impact decisions aimed towards protecting human health and the environment. Health impact assessments (HIAs) are becoming a more commonly used tool in the U.S. for incorporating health considerations into the decision-making process of plans, projects, programs, and policies. The review of HIAs in the Transportation, Housing/Buildings/ Infrastructure, Land Use, and Waste Management/Site Revitalization sectors was conducted to inventory the types of community-level decisions being made and to assess the data, tools, and models currently used in HIAs in these four sectors. This information will aid in promoting existing EPA tools, methods, and models that can support HIAs, identifying potential research focus areas to support and improve the HIA community of practice, and discovering what the ecological assessment community of practice could draw from HIAs and vice versa in order to promote healthy and sustainable communities. iv Table of Contents Notice ....................................................................................................................................................ii Author Contributions and Acknowledgements...................................................................................ii Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ iii Foreword .............................................................................................................................................. iv Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Health Impact Assessment: The Tool.................................................................................................. 2 HIA Defined .................................................................................................................................. 2 HIA Steps....................................................................................................................................... 2 History of HIA............................................................................................................................... 2 HIA Standards and Guidelines for the Americas ........................................................................ 3 Health Impact Assessment Review ..................................................................................................... 4 Preliminary Literature Search....................................................................................................... 4 Pilot Review .................................................................................................................................. 6 Review Framework and Database ................................................................................................ 6 Final Literature Search .................................................................................................................. 9 Full-scale Review .......................................................................................................................... 9 Quality Assurance ....................................................................................................................... 11 Review Documentation............................................................................................................... 12 Health Impact Assessment Review Synthesis .................................................................................. 13 General HIA Characteristics ....................................................................................................... 13 Implementation and Outcomes of the HIA Process .................................................................. 14 Screening .............................................................................................................................. 15 Need for HIA to Inform Decision-making ................................................................. 15 Decisions
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Safety Data Sheets (Sdss) Information and Glossary
    Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) Information and Glossary 2408 Wanda Daley Drive Ames, Iowa 50011 (515) 294-5359 | www.ehs.iastate.edu Copyright© Reviewed 2018 Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) Information Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) are informational sheets required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for hazardous substances (chemicals). The OSHA Hazard Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200) and the Iowa Hazardous Chemical Risks Right to Know Standard (Iowa Administrative Code Section 875, Chapters 110-140) requires SDSs be “readily accessible” for any hazardous chemical in the workplace. Employees must be made aware of the SDS content and chemical storage location. SDSs can be obtained from manufacturers and distributors at the time of initial shipment. Each university workplace must maintain an SDS for each hazardous chemical in its inventory. SDSs that are available electronically meet the “readily accessible” criteria, as long as computer access is available to all employees whenever work is being conducted. EH&S suggests that each workspace also maintain paper copies of commonly used hazardous chemicals for ease of access. OSHA requires specific information be included on an SDS, in a 16-section format as described in the UN Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). The SDS must be in English and must include at least the following information: Section 1: Identification includes product identifier; manufacturer or distributor name, address, phone number; emergency phone number; recommended use; restrictions on use. Section 2: Hazard(s) Identification includes all hazards regarding the chemical; required label elements. Section 3: Composition/Information on Ingredients includes information on chemical ingredients; trade secret claims.
    [Show full text]
  • Collective Action Dynamics in Urban Neighborhoods: a Study of Urban Community Gardens Nishesh Chalise Washington University in St
    Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations Arts & Sciences Winter 12-15-2015 Collective Action Dynamics in Urban Neighborhoods: A Study of Urban Community Gardens Nishesh Chalise Washington University in St. Louis Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/art_sci_etds Recommended Citation Chalise, Nishesh, "Collective Action Dynamics in Urban Neighborhoods: A Study of Urban Community Gardens" (2015). Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 641. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/art_sci_etds/641 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Arts & Sciences at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST. LOUIS Brown School of Social Work Dissertation Examination Committee: Gautam Yadama, Chair Aaron Hipp Peter Hovmand Shanta Pandey Jason Purnell Collective Action Dynamics in Urban Neighborhoods: A Study of Urban Community Gardens by Nishesh Chalise A dissertation presented to the Graduate School of Arts & Sciences of Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2015 St. Louis, Missouri © 2015, Nishesh Chalise Table of Contents List of Figures ...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality, Health, and Place
    November 2015 Water Quality, Health, and Place A RESEARCH BRIEF VERSION 1.1 Photo by Ann Forsyth Photo by The HEALTH AND PLACE INITIATIVE (HAPI) investigates how to create healthier cities in the future, with a specific emphasis on China. Bringing together experts from the Harvard Graduate School of Design (HGSD) and the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH), it creates a forum for understanding the multiple issues that face cities in light of rapid urbanization and an aging population worldwide. Health and Places Initiative http://research.gsd.harvard.edu/hapi/ Harvard Graduate School of Design The Research Briefs series summarizes recent research on links between human health and places at the neighborhood or district scale and provides background for a number of other forthcoming products—a set of health assessment tools, planning and urban design guidelines, urban design prototypes, and neighborhood cases. While the Research Briefs draw out implications for practice, it is these other tools that really provide specific, real-world guidance for how to create healthy places. © 2015 President and Fellows of Harvard College As is typical practice feel free to use and cite small parts of this work, with attribution. If you want to use substantial parts, or even this entire document, the following applies. Permission is granted for use for nonprofit education purposes for all of the work except third party materials incorporated in the work, which may require permission from the authors of such material. For permission to use this work in other circumstances, contact the Harvard Graduate School of Design: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 the Public Health Benefits of Sanitation Interventions
    The Public Health Benefits of Sanitation Interventions EPAR Brief No. 104 Jacob Lipson, Professor Leigh Anderson & Professor Susan Bolton Prepared for the Water & Sanitation Team of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Evans School Policy Analysis and Research (EPAR) Professor Leigh Anderson, PI and Lead Faculty Associate Professor Mary Kay Gugerty, Lead Faculty December 10, 2010 Introduction Limited sanitation infrastructure, poor hygienic practices, and unsafe drinking water negatively affect the health of millions of people in the developing world. Using sanitation interventions to interrupt disease pathways can significantly improve public health.1 Sanitation interventions primarily benefit public health by reducing the prevalence of enteric pathogenic illnesses, which cause diarrhea. Health benefits are realized and accrue to the direct recipients of sanitation interventions and also to their neighbors and others in their communities. In a report to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Hutton et al. (2006) estimate that the cost- benefit ratio of sanitation interventions in all developing countries worldwide is 11.2.2 This literature review summarizes the risks of inadequate sanitation to public health and presents the empirical evidence on the public health benefits of complete, intermediate and multiple factor sanitation interventions. The sanitation literature frequently uses inconsistent terminology to describe sanitation infrastructure, technologies and intervention types. Where feasible, we report study results using the original terminology of the authors, while also using consistent terminology to facilitate comparisons across studies. In this review and in much of the literature, sanitation interventions are defined as improvements which provide public or household fecal disposal facilities, and/or improve community fecal disposal and treatment methods.3,4 Sanitation interventions are distinct from water interventions, which focus on increasing access to clean water or improving water quality at drinking water sources or points of use.
    [Show full text]
  • A Health Impact Assessment in Harris County, Texas ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
    East Aldine District’s Town Center Development: A Health Impact Assessment in Harris County, Texas ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was supported by a grant from the Health Impact Project, a collaboration of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and The Pew Charitable Trusts, with funding from the Episcopal Health Foundation. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Health Impact Project, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, The Pew Charitable Trusts, or the Episcopal Health Foundation. SPECIAL THANKS The authors would like to thank the following for their support and contributions to the HIA: Christy Lambright and the Harris County Community Services Department staff; Victor Caballero, Montserrat Encontra, Katharine Kuzmyak, Aman Narayan, Anna Wheless, and Manlin Yao for assisting with data collection and analysis; and James Llamas for aiding in the interpretations of the Traffic Impact Analysis conducted for the East Aldine District Town Center. PRINCIPAL AUTHORS HIA STAFF CONTRIBUTORS Patricia L. Cummings, MPH, PhD Victoria Adaramola, MBA Program Manager and Principal Investigator Public Health Associate, Centers for Disease Control Built Environment & Health Impact Assessment Unit and Prevention Environmental Public Health Division Built Environment & Health Impact Assessment Unit Harris County Public Health (HCPH) Environmental Public Health Division, HCPH Ellen Schwaller, MUEP Jocelyn Hwang, MPH Community Health & Design Coordinator Research Analyst Built Environment & Health Impact Assessment Unit Built Environment & Health Impact Assessment Unit Environmental Public Health Division, HCPH Environmental Public Health Division, HCPH Sarah Wesely, MPH Robert Martinez, BS Research Analyst Team Lead GIS Coordinator Built Environment & Health Impact Assessment Unit Built Environment & Health Impact Assessment Unit Environmental Public Health Division, HCPH Environmental Public Health Division, HCPH Laura E.
    [Show full text]
  • Operating in Insecure Environments
    Operating in Insecure Environments Jane Nelson Senior Fellow and Director, Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University August 2006 ⎪ Working Paper No. 25 A Working Paper of the: Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative A Cooperative Project among: The Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government The Center for Public Leadership The Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations The Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy Citation This paper may be cited as: Nelson, Jane. 2006. “Operating in Insecure Environments.” Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative Working Paper No. 25. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. Comments may be directed to the author. This paper was prepared for the Brookings-Blum Roundtable, “Breaking the Poverty- Insecurity Nexus,” held in Aspen, Colorado, on August 2-4, 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative The Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government is a multi-disciplinary and multi-stakeholder program that seeks to study and enhance the public contributions of private enterprise. It explores the intersection of corporate responsibility, corporate governance and strategy, public policy, and the media. It bridges theory and practice, builds leadership skills, and supports constructive dialogue and collaboration among different sectors. It was founded in 2004 with the support of Walter H. Shorenstein, Chevron Corporation, The Coca-Cola Company,
    [Show full text]
  • Health in Impact Assessments: Opportunities Not to Be Missed
    The WHO Regional HEALTH IN IMPACT ASSESSMENTS Office for Europe Opportunities not to be missed The World Health Organization (WHO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations created in 1948 with the primary responsibility for international health matters and public health. The WHO Regional Office for Europe is one of six regional offices throughout the world, each with its own programme geared to the particular health conditions of the Prospective impact assessment is a consolidated approach for countries it serves. pursuing foresight in policy and decision-making, systematically Member States deployed worldwide. There is consensus that, even in well developed impact assessments, human health is not always Albania Andorra covered adequately. Partly as a response, health impact Armenia assessment (HIA) has emerged and has been applied in several Austria Azerbaijan countries in Europe and beyond. Opinions about the merits of HIA Belarus separate from other forms of impact assessment differ. This Belgium Bosnia and Herzegovina publication aims to provide a detailed and balanced view on Bulgaria “health in impact assessments”. Five key types of impact Croatia Cyprus assessment, namely environmental impact assessment, strategic Czech Republic environmental assessment, social impact assessment, Denmark sustainability assessment, and HIA are presented, and four key Estonia Finland questions are discussed: How can the various assessments France contribute to promoting and protecting human health? How can Georgia Germany further integration of health support the various forms of impact Greece assessments? What forms of integration seem advisable? What Hungary Iceland priorities for further development? This analysis suggests that the Ireland potential of impact assessments to protect and promote health is Israel Italy underutilized, and represents a missed opportunity.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Impact Assessment of Air Pollution in the Eight Major Italian Cities
    EURO/02/5040650 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF AIR POLLUTION IN THE EIGHT MAJOR ITALIAN CITIES HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF AIR POLLUTION IN THE EIGHT MAJOR ITALIAN CITIES By MARCO MARTUZZI WHO European Centre for Environment and Health Rome Operational Division WHO Regional Office for Europe CLAUDIA GALASSI Regional Agency for Health, Bologna, Italy BART OSTRO Air Pollution Epidemiology Unit California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) FRANCESCO FORASTIERE Department of Epidemiology, Rome Health Authority, Rome, Italy ROBERTO BERTOLLINI WHO European Centre for Environment and Health Rome Operational Division WHO Regional Office for Europe ABSTRACT The report contains the health impact assessment of urban air pollution in the eight major Italian cities; it gives estimates of mortality, morbidity and numbers days of restricted activity associated with air pollution level. The report illustrates the methodology, discusses scientific uncertainty and implications for findings as well as for the need for further research. Due to the methodological discussion and to its practical application in quantifying health effects of air pollution exposure, the report is also recommended as a handbook for local health officers. The case study and methodological tools can support Member States in implementing and developing environmental health policies. The dissemination of the report, among health officers and local government officers in Europe will increase awareness of air pollution related health effects and
    [Show full text]
  • John Snow, Cholera and the Mystery of the Broad Street Pump PDF Book Well Written and Easy to Read, Despite of the Heavy Subject
    THE MEDICAL DETECTIVE: JOHN SNOW, CHOLERA AND THE MYSTERY OF THE BROAD STREET PUMP PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Sandra Hempel | 304 pages | 06 Aug 2007 | GRANTA BOOKS | 9781862079373 | English | London, United Kingdom The Medical Detective: John Snow, Cholera and the Mystery of the Broad Street Pump PDF Book Well written and easy to read, despite of the heavy subject. When people didb't believe the doctor who proposed the answer and suggested a way to stop the spread of such a deadly disease, I wanted to scream in frustration! He first published his theory in an essay, On the Mode of Communication of Cholera , [21] followed by a more detailed treatise in incorporating the results of his investigation of the role of the water supply in the Soho epidemic of Snow did not approach cholera from a scientific point of view. Sandra Hempel. John Snow. The city had widened the street and the cesspit was lost. He showed that homes supplied by the Southwark and Vauxhall Waterworks Company , which was taking water from sewage-polluted sections of the Thames , had a cholera rate fourteen times that of those supplied by Lambeth Waterworks Company , which obtained water from the upriver, cleaner Seething Wells. Sandra Hempel did a fantastic job with grabbing attention of the reader and her experience with journalism really shows itself in this book. He then repeated the procedure for the delivery of her daughter three years later. View 2 comments. Episode 6. The author did a wonderful job of keeping me interested in what could have been a fairly dry subject.
    [Show full text]
  • Sullivan-Type Principles for U.S. Multinationals in Emerging
    "SULLIVAN-TYPE" PRINCIPLES FOR U.S. MULTINATIONALS IN EMERGING ECONOMIES RICHARD T. DE GEORGE* 1. INTRODUCTION The high rate of crime in Russia and the prominence of the Russian Mafia are well known and publicized in the West. President Yeltsin has called crime, which is choking the emerging market economy, Russia's biggest problem.' An article in U.S. News & World Report describes Russia as "a vast bazaar in which the easiest way to get rich is to steal."2 The government has shown itself ineffective in combating crime and in establishing a rule of law. Consequently, many ordinary Russians, who are experiencing a decline in their standard of living,3 are more ambivalent about the march towards capitalism than they were in 1991. Many Western businesses are understandably reluctant to enter an area in which corruption is rampant and the future uncertain. However, the reasons behind the present conditions are too often inadequately understood. As a result, the remedy and the appropriate role of Western companies in the developing market of countries of the former Soviet Union are not clearly * Richard T. De George is University Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, of Russian and East European Studies, and of Business Administration, and Director of the International Center for Ethics in Business at the University of Kansas. His books include The New Marxism; Soviet Ethics and Morality; Business Ethics; and Competing with Integrity in International Business. 1 He has frequently called fighting crime his top priority. See Jack F. Matlock, Russia: The Power of the Mob, NY REVIEW OF BOOKS, July 13, 1995, at 12, 13; see also Julie Corwin et al., The Looting of Russia, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Campaigners' Guide to Financial Markets
    The Campaigners’ Guide to Financial Markets THETHE CAMPCAMPAIGNERS’AIGNERS’ GUIDEGUIDE TTOO FINFINANCIALANCIAL MARKETSMARKETS Effff ective Lobbying of Companies and Financial Institutions Nicholas Hildyard Mark Mansley 1 The Campaigners’ Guide to Financial Markets 2 The Campaigners’ Guide to Financial Markets Contents Preface – 7 Acknowledgements – 9 1. FINANCIAL MARKETS - A NEW POLITICAL SPACE – 11 A world transformed – 12 The impacts of globalisation – 14 The growing power of the private sector – 16 The shifting space for change – 17 Lobbying the markets – 18 The power of the market – Markets as “neutral ground” – NGO strengths: market weaknesses – Increasing consumer awareness – Globalisation and increased corporate vulnerability – The rise of ethical shareholding – Changing institutional cultures – New regulatory measures – A willingness to change? The limits of market activism – 33 Is a financial campaign appropriate? – 33 Boxes The increasing economic power of the private sector – 13 What are financial markets? – 14 Changing the framework: From Seattle to Prague – 18 Project finance – 20 Consumer and shareholder activism – 23 A bank besieged: Consumer power against bigotry – 25 Huntingdon Life Sciences: Naming and shaming – 27 First do no harm – 30 The impact of shareholder activism – the US experience (by Michelle Chan-Fishel) – 33 Put your own house in order – 34 Internal review – 33 2. UNDERSTANDING THE MARKETS – PSYCHOLOGY,,, ARGUMENTS AND OPENINGS – 37 Using the mentality of the market to your advantage – 38 Exposing the risks – 39 Key pressure points and how to use them – 41 Management quality – Business strategy – Financial risk: company analysis / project analysis – Non–financial risks – Political risks – Legal risks – Environmental risks – Reputational risks Matching the pressure points to the financial player – 54 Boxes Reading the balance sheet – 40 ABB – Moving out of dams – 43 Three Gorges: Bond issues challenged – 47 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Health Impact Assessment in the U.S. 27 Case Studies, 1999-2007
    Use of Health Impact Assessment in the U.S. 27 Case Studies, 1999–2007 Andrew L. Dannenberg, MD, MPH, Rajiv Bhatia, MD, MPH, Brian L. Cole, DrPH, Sarah K. Heaton, MPH, Jason D. Feldman, MPH, Candace D. Rutt, PhD Objectives: To document the growing use in the United States of health impact assessment (HIA) methods to help planners and others consider the health consequences of their decisions. Methods: Using multiple search strategies, 27 HIAs were identified that were completed in the U.S. during 1999 –2007. Key characteristics of each HIA were abstracted from published and unpublished sources. Results: Topics examined in these HIAs ranged from policies about living wages and after-school programs to projects about power plants and public transit. Most HIAs were funded by local health departments, foundations, or federal agencies. Concerns about health disparities were especially important in HIAs on housing, urban redevelopment, home energy subsidies, and wage policy. The use of quantitative and nonquantitative methods varied among HIAs. Most HIAs presented recommendations for policy or project changes to improve health. Impacts of the HIAs were infrequently documented. Conclusions: These completed HIAs are useful for helping conduct future HIAs and for training public health officials and others about HIAs. More work is needed to document the impact of HIAs and thereby increase their value in decision-making processes. (Am J Prev Med 2008;34(3):241–256) © 2008 American Journal of Preventive Medicine Introduction needed: (1) to increase awareness of their use across the country, (2) to document that HIAs are applicable he use of health impact assessment (HIA) has in U.S.
    [Show full text]