국민건강증진종합계획 2010의 기획모형과 실제

The National Health Promotion Plan 2010: The Planning Model and Approaches

  • 발행 : 2006.09.30

초록

Objectives: This study examined the national health promotion plan 2010 in order to identify the agenda and issues to be considered for the improvement of the evaluation of the plan and future planning. In specific, the examination focused on both the planning model and practical aspects of the planning work. With regard to the planning model, attention was directed to the theoretical background, logical framework and assumptions involved in the design. Also, an observation was made in comparison with Japanese $\ulcorner$Health Japan 21$\lrcorner$ and American $\ulcorner$Healthy People 2010$\lrcorner$ which provided main reference to our original health plan 2010 and revised health plan 2010 respectively. From this observation it was found that all the plans of three countries, except our original health plan 2010, basically employed a model of educational and ecological approaches to health promotion planning. As predicted, the practical constraints on the health promotion policy and programs in Korea led to many difficulties in attaining the rationality and validity of the plan. The short period of time afforded for the planning work, the limited availability of relevant data and research findings, and the lack of experiences and competent personnel in health promotion planning were main factors impeding the planning work performance. The observation and analysis of the National Health Promotion Plan 2010 suggest two main implications for the future planning of health promotion. First, it will be both theoretically and practically appropriate to maintain the current planning model basically as it is. Second, there are many practical problems that may impede effective planning for health promotion, thus continuous efforts should be made to remove or alleviate such problems.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 보건복지부, 한국보건사회연구원. 새국민건강증진 종합계획수립 2005
  2. 보건복지부. 국민건강종합계획 Health Plan 2010. 2002
  3. 서미경. 국민건강 . 영양조사의 정책적 활용방안 토론자료. 2005년 국민건강 . 영양조사 건강면접 및 보건의식행태조사 결과분석 및 정책적 활용방안에 관한 정책토론회 토론집. 한국보건사회연구원. 2006
  4. 이규식. 국민건강증진 10년의 성과. 보건교육 . 건강증진학회지 2006;23(1):143-171
  5. 한국보건사회연구원. 2010년 국민건강증진 목표설정과 전략개발: Healthy Korea 2010. 2000
  6. 한국보건사회연구원. 국민건강증진기금사업의 운영 및 평가체계 개발.1999
  7. Canada, Population Health and Wellness, Ministry of Health Services, Province of British Columbia, A Framework for Core Functions in Public Health (Resource Document), March 2005
  8. Denmark, Healthy throughout Life- the Targets and Strategies for Public Health Policy of the Government of Denmark, 2002-2010, September 2002
  9. Green LW, Kreuter MW. Health Promotion Planning: An Educational and Ecological Approach(3rd Edtiion). New York: McGraw- Hill, 1999
  10. Health Japan 21. Report on Health Japan 21 Plan, Study Committee and Health Japan 21 Plan Development Committee, 2000
  11. Laolnde MA. A New Perspective on the Health of Canadians. Otatwa: Ministry of National Health and Welfare, Canada, 1974
  12. McGinnis JM et al. The case for more active policy attention to health promotion. Health Affairs 2002;21:78-93 https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.21.2.78
  13. Sweden, Ministry of Health and Social Afafirs, Action Plan Strengthens Successful Alcohol Policy, Fact Sheet no. 12 October 2000
  14. Sweden, Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, National Goals for Public Health 2004
  15. Sweden, Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, Public Health Objectives, Fact Sheet no. 2 January 2003
  16. U.S. Department of Health Service. Healthy People 2010. 2000
  17. U.S. Department of Health Services, Public Health Services. Healthy People 2000. Full Report with Commentary, 1990
  18. U.S. Department of Health Services, Public Health Services. Healthy People 2000. Mdicourse Review and 1995 Revisions, 1995
  19. Wall R. Issue and Challenges in Assessing the Effectiveness of Health Promotion, Health Policy Research Bulletin Vol.1, Issue 3, Health Canada, March 2002
  20. WHO, Europe, Social Determinants of Health, The Solid Facts(2nd ed.), 2003