• 보건교육건강증진학회지
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.201-217
• /
• 2007

This study reviews the amount and expenditures in national health promotion fund from 1997 to 2006, to analyse the problems and provide the future direction of health promotion fund programs. This study suggested the guide for future plans and the scope and contents of health promotion fund programs, priority and fund budgetary allocation, and operation organization. It is needed to revise health promotion law and enforcement decree of the health promotion act. The fund should be used in limited 9 areas related to healthy life activities: (1)Anti-smoking actions, (2)To support activities leading to a healthy life, (3)Public health education and development of materials, (4)Investigation and research regarding community health matters, (5)Public nutrition management activities, (6)Oral health management activities, (7)Physical exercises for health promotion, (8)Foundation related to supporting healthy life style practice society, (9)Expenses necessary for the management and operation of the fund. And also, in order to improve the performance of health promotion, it is considered to reform the operation system including organization.

• 보건교육건강증진학회지
• /
• 제31권3호
• /
• pp.83-95
• /
• 2014

Objectives: This study was to examine the experts perception on the operation of the national health promotion fund and related policies, and to obtain the perspective on the improving governance of the fund. Methods: Experts opinion survey was recruited 120 experts who were public health officials, and members of board in academic societies related to health promotion and health policy, and 60 experts participated in the survey. Results: Most health care experts agreed that the current allocation of health promotion fund was not optimal with its lack of allocation on promoting healthy lifestyle and R&D for health promotion, while the majority of the fund was being spent on supporting national health insurance. Thus, establishing governance system and control tower for the fund was viewed as critical. Also the status of deliberation committee should be raised to higher position where it can hold practical authority to plan and evaluate fund spending. Conclusions: The priority of health promotion fund spending should be more on improving health such as modifying life-style and spreading healthy habits, rather than on disease management or subsidizing health insurance. It is recommended that change from to environment in health promotion policy regime is required to establish effective governance system for the fund operation.

• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제27권4호
• /
• pp.366-371
• /
• 2017

The National Health Promotion Fund has grown as the increase of tax on tobacco consumption, but more than half of the fund was spent on health insurance supporting. It is important to use the fund appropriately to keep legitimacy and sustainability of health promotion. Therefore, services regarding health promotion should be a priority in spending health promotion fund, and operation system should be established to manage and administer the fund properly.

• 보건교육건강증진학회지
• /
• 제29권4호
• /
• pp.29-38
• /
• 2012

Objectives: This paper aims to suggest some ways we could improve the efficiency and equity in health promotion programs in the public sector. Methods: Reports published by the Minister of Health and Welfare and web-site information were reviewed. And, the empirical results and theoretical considerations provided in this study could be used in making future direction for health promotion programs in the public sector. Results and conclusion: The public sector should play a leading role in health promotion programs. The role of public sector in health promotion program is to establish the health promotion plan based on the health survey, to develop the scientific programs, to provide the free health services, and to maintain a cooperative relationship with the private sector. In order to activate the health promotion programs in the public sector, establishing the role of the public sector, changing the operation of health promotion fund, block grants for health promotion, local health promotion fund, and integration of health statistics were suggested.

• 보건교육건강증진학회지
• /
• 제23권1호
• /
• pp.143-171
• /
• 2006

There has been 10 years since the Health Promotion Act was legislated. The government began to establish a health promotion fund on the basis of Health Promotion Act in 1995, and to manage and operate the fund from 1998. It is evaluated that health promotion program have had various outcomes in many aspects. First, there has been growing awareness of the impotance of health promotion through the establishment of Health Plan 2010 and the effort to actualize the Plan. Second, the importance of securing health equity and identifying health determinants have been recognized during the planning process of Health Plan 2010. Third, the health promotion program have mainly focused on improving healthy life style of the population. As a result, desirable health behavior change of the population could be expected from the result of 2005 National Health and Nutrition Survey. Fourth, public health centers began to play a crucial role in implementing health promotion programs, and began to build infrastructure for health promotion programs. Fifth, management efficiency of private health related organizations have been improved. Finally, training for health promotion personnel and their participation in the program could be the foundation for the higher level of outcome achievement from the health promotion programs. Important challenges for future health promotion would be identification of the determinants and risk factors of health, formulating plan of regional health promotion programs, building infrastructure for health promotion, creation of specific action model by public health center, development of health promotion program for the elderly, conducting research for evidence concerning major factors reducing the need for health care through prevention disease activities, and establishment of evaluation and feed back system for health promotion programs.

• 한국보건교육건강증진학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국보건교육건강증진학회 2005년도 국민건강증진법 제정 10주년 국제학술대회
• /
• pp.153-195
• /
• 2005

There has been 10 years since The Health Promotion Act was legislated. The government began to establish a health promotion fund on the basis of Health Promotion Act in 1995, and to manage and operate the fund from 1998. It is evaluated that health promotion program have had various outcomes in many aspects. First, there has been growing awareness of the impotance of health promotion through the establishment of Health Plan 2010 and the effort to actualize the Plan. Second, the importance of securing health equity and identifying health determinants have been recognized during the planning process of Health Plan 2010. Third, the health promotion program have mainly focused on improving healthy life style of the population. As a result, desirable health behavior change of the population could be expected from the result of 2005 National Health and Nutrition Survey. Fourth, public health centers began to play a crucial role in implementing health promotion programs, and began to build infrastructure for health promotion programs. Fifth, the outcomes of health promotion programs by public health centers and private health organizations have been increasing. Finally, training for health promotion personnel and their participation in the program could be the foundation for the higher level of outcome achievement from the health promotion programs. Important challenges for future health promotion would be identification of the determinants and risk factors of health in Korea, establishment of local health promotion plan, building infrastructure for health promotion, creation of specific action model by public health center, development of diverse health promotion programs and health promotion program for the elderly, conducting research for evidence concerning major factors reducing the need for health care through prevention disease activities, and establishment of evaluation and feed back system for health promotion programs.

• 보건교육건강증진학회지
• /
• 제21권3호
• /
• pp.19-33
• /
• 2004

The focus of this paper is to critically evaluate the contemporary health promotion policy of g Korea and Japan. The primary purpose of this comparative research project is to stimulate policy debate and to strengthen the design and implementation of evidence-based policies that improve population health and reduce health related disparities. For the purpose of the research object we adopted analysis of health promotion(HP) sources. The HP Source which is still under development in Europe, is a potentially valuable tool for global use. This European Commission funded project lead by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine has brought together organisations from all of the European Union Member States, plus Norway, Iceland, Latvia, Switzerland and the Czech Republic to contribute their data. The findings of this research will be conclude by making recommendations for further comparative studies and in particular how EUHPID and the HP Source tool and database can be expanded for use at global level through the IUHPE. The result as follows: 1. The Health Promotion Act enacted 1995 in Korea and 2000 in Japan. The government has a national document on HP titled Health Plan 2010 and Healthy Korea 2010 in Korea and Healthy Japan 21 in Japan. 2. The Health Plan 2010 of Korea contains 14 goals, i.e. life expectancy, smoking, nutrition, mental health, dental health, reproductive health, hypertension, cerebrovascular diseases, arthritis, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer. It should be emphasized that the Korean HP national document adds 3 goals of health expectancy, reproductive health, and arthritis to its Japanese counterpart. Health Plan 2010 of Korea specifies 37 objectives in 14 goals, and Healthy Japan 21 proposes 48 objectives and 80 targets in 9 goals. 3. Health Plan 2010 and Healthy Japan 21 have not been evaluated yet, and no regular systematic monitoring reporting of HP policies is available in Korea and Japan yet. 4. National Health Promotion Fund is a financial source of HP programs at the national level in Korea. Its annual amount is 736 billion Won(equivalent to approximately 640 million US$), otherwise no specific Health Promotion Fund in Japan.

• 보건교육건강증진학회지
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.219-228
• /
• 2000

The fundamental hypothesis of health promotion is that the modification of behavior to better fit practices associated with health will in fact increase health and longevity. Therefore, it is in general said that the most important thing to health promotion is the practice of health education which can result in the change of human behaviors. The National Health Promotion Fund is the financial resource of health promotion programs in Korea. The budget for health education of the fund accounted for 0.58 billion won out of the health promotion budget, 29.5 billion won in 1998. It has been the smallest out of 4 categories of health promotion programs from 1998 to 2000. What is worse, only 0.26 billion won was spent on health education in fact. It was less than a half of the budget for health education. In addition to it, the budget for the development of health education material was 0.17 billion won in 1998. But it was not spent on the project at all. And the project of educational material development got no budget in 1999. The Korean health promotion needs to enlarge the portion of community health education services drastically in order to attain the proper behavioral change of the people in the future.

• 보건교육건강증진학회지
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.241-249
• /
• 2007

Health education aims at behavior change rather than just delivering health knowledge to people. In Korea health education activities in public sector began in 1960 and they were included in the primary prevention program in communities. This article reviewed current health education programs in healthy living practice programs provided by local public health centers in Korea and drew implications for the future role of health education in community setting. Health education has been a core function of the National Health Promotion programs in the nation since the enactment of the National Health Promotion Law in 1995. The National Health Promotion programs are funded by the National Health Promotion Fund which are drawn from tobacco tax. The National Health Promotion programs include healthy living practice programs (smoking prevention and cessation programs, moderate alcohol use programs, physical activity promotion programs, and nutrition programs), chronic disease prevention programs, oral health programs and public hygiene programs. Methods of the National Health Promotion programs include health education, health counseling, health class, health information management, survey and research. Smoking prevention and cessation programs include smoking cessation clinic, smoking cessation education, non-smoking environment program, and non-smoking campaign. Moderate alcohol use programs include alcohol use education, moderate alcohol use campaign, alcohol use counseling, and alcohol free environment programs. Physical activity promotion programs include obesity control, targeted exercise program, and exercise civic group programs. Nutrition programs include nutrition management, obesity management, nutrition education, breakfast eating program, and nutrition counseling and treatment programs. The health education programs in community are not efficient today because there are many overlapping contents and short term goals. Community health education programs needs to be more comprehensive. Workforce development is another big issue at the moment because the National credential program will begin in 2009. Variety of community health education programs should be developed and funded by the national health promotion fund.

• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제24권3호
• /
• pp.203-204
• /
• 2014