Investigating inconsistencies regarding health equity in select World Health Organization texts: a critical discourse analysis of health promotion, social determinants of health, and urban health texts, 2008–2016
Abstract Background Scholarly critiques have demonstrated that the World Health Organization (WHO) approaches the concept of health equity inconsistently. For example, inconsistencies center around measuring health inequity across individuals versus groups; in approaches and goals sought in striving...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2024-12-01
|
| Series: | BMC Global and Public Health |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s44263-024-00106-w |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract Background Scholarly critiques have demonstrated that the World Health Organization (WHO) approaches the concept of health equity inconsistently. For example, inconsistencies center around measuring health inequity across individuals versus groups; in approaches and goals sought in striving for health equity; and whether considerations around health equity prioritize socioeconomic status or also consider other social determinants of health. However, the significance of these contrasting approaches has yet to be assessed empirically. Methods This study employs critical discourse analysis to assess the WHO’s approaches to health equity in select health promotion, social determinants of health, and urban health texts from 2008 to 2016. Results We find that the WHO: (i) usually measures health equity by comparing groups; (ii) explicitly specifies three approaches to health equity (although we identified additional implicit approaches in our analysis of WHO discourses); and (iii) considers health equity inconsistently both in terms of socioeconomic status and other social determinants of health, but socioeconomic status was given substantially more attention than other individual social determinants of health. Conclusions There is misalignment with the WHO’s stated approaches to tackle health inequity and its discourses around health equity. This incongruence increases the likelihood of pursuing short-term solutions and not sustainably addressing the root causes of health inequity. Critical discourse analysis’ focus on power allows for understanding why ‘radical’ approaches are not explicitly expressed to ensure that governments will be agreeable to addressing health inequity. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2731-913X |