Promoting Health, Social and Environmental Justice in the Context of Health Care Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The core business of health care is promoting and protecting human health. This is reflected in influential international declarations such as the Declaration of the Alma Ata for Primary Health Care and the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. Contemporary health care practice is guided by these mandates and recognises the importance of social justice and equity; inter-sectorial action on environmental, political and economic factors; community participation in decision making; and stable ecosystems as prerequisites for human health. More recently in response to greater knowledge of the health impacts of climate change and environmental degradation, health care agencies are becoming increasingly concerned with their role in the climate justice and the environmental sustainability agenda. Preliminary evidence from Victoria, Australia indicates that health care agencies are also engaging with the issue of environmental justice and how it intersects with social justice and health equity concerns. This chapter will highlight examples of emerging practice from five qualitative case studies of health care agencies in Victoria, Australia. The chapter derives its findings from individual and group interviews with health professionals and document analysis that explored the nature and scope of practice in rural, regional and urban health care settings. The study indicated that these health care agencies were broadening their practice remit to address the environmental impacts of their service provision as well as community-level environmental justice issues. This chapter features examples of practice at the nexus of environment-equity-health within public housing estates, public hospitals and women’s health programmes. Despite differences in approach, target population and context, the core finding was that health care strategies, competencies and frameworks were transferable to action on climate and environment-related issues in these settings. This assessment of health care practice is significant because it demonstrates some reassuring directions in the provision of health care and the development of an environmental justice movement in Australia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.049 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.046 | 0.123 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.030 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.038 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".