Introduction. Aligning Evaluation Research and Health Promotion Values: Practices from the Americas

  • Louise Potvin
  • David V. Mcqueen
  • Mary Hall

A little more than 20 years after its birth, marked by the launching of its foundational document at an international WHO conference in Ottawa (World Health Organization, 1986), health promotion appears to be well and alive. Many western countries have now incorporated health promotion into mainstream public health practice. In Australia, for example, health promotion is defined as one of the core public health functions (National Public Health Partnership, 2000). The “Health on equal terms”, Swedish national public health program (Swedish National Committee for Public Health, 2000), is clearly a deliberate attempt to operationalize and implement values such as equity and action principles such as intersectoral action, spelled out in the Ottawa Charter (World Health Organization, 1986). In addition to this institutionalization in western states where it was an essential element of the strategy to meet the Alma Ata declaration goal of “Health for All in the year 2000” (Kickbusch, 2003),...


Health Promotion Health Promotion Practice Ottawa Charter Community Preventive Service Intersectoral Action 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Breslow, L. (1999). From disease prevention to health promotion. JAMA, 281, 1030–1033.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Campbell, D. T. (1984). Can we be scientific in applied social sciences? In R. F. Connor, D. G. Altman, & C. Jackson (Eds.), Evaluation studies review annual, Vol 9 (pp. 26–48). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, D. T. (1986). Relabeling internal and external validity for applied social scientists. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 31, 67–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Connell, J. P., Kubisch, A. C., Schorr, L. B., & Weiss, C. H. (Eds.) (1995). New approaches to evaluating community initiatives. Concepts, methods, and context. New York: Aspen Institute.Google Scholar
  5. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  6. Fulbright-Anderson, K., Kubisch, A. C., & Connell, J. P. (Eds.) (1998). New approaches to evaluating community initiatives. Volume 2: Theory, measurement, and analysis. New York: Aspen Institute.Google Scholar
  7. Green, L. W., & Lewis, F. M. (1986). Measurement and evaluation in health education and health promotion. Palo Alto CA: Mayfield.Google Scholar
  8. Guide to Community Preventive Services. (2008). The community guide. Retrieved in January 2008 from:
  9. International Union for Health Promotion and Education. (1999). The evidence in health promotion effectiveness. Shaping public health in a new Europe. Part two. Evidence book. Paris: Jouve Composition & Impression.Google Scholar
  10. Kickbusch, I. (2003). The contribution of the World Health Organization to a new public health and health promotion. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 383–388.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Kickbusch, I. (2007). Health promotion: Not a tree but a rhizome. In M. O’Neill, A. Pederson, S. Dupéré, & I. Rootman (Eds.), Health promotion in Canada. Critical perspective (pp. 363–366). Toronto: Canadian Scholar’s Press.Google Scholar
  12. Latour, B. (2001). L’espoir de Pandore. Pour une version réaliste d el’activité scientifique. Paris: La découverte.Google Scholar
  13. McQueen, D.V. (2001). Strengthening the evidence base for health promotion. Health Promotion International, 11, 261–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. McQueen, D. V. & Jones, C (Eds.) (2007a) Global perspectives on health promotion effectiveness. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. McQueen, D. V., & Jones, C. (2007b). Global perspective on health promotion effectiveness. An introduction. In D. V. McQueen, & C. Jones (Eds.), Global perspectives on health promotion effectiveness (pp. 3–11). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. National Public Health Partnership. (2000). Public health practice in Australia today: A statement of core functions. Downloaded in January 2008 from: ions/phpractice/phprac.pdf
  17. Neiman, A., & Hall, M. (2007). Urbanization and health promotion: Challenges and opportunities. In D. V. McQueen & C. Jones (Eds.), Global perspectives on health promotion effectiveness (pp. 201–224). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Potvin, L., Gendron, S., Bilodeau, A., & Chabot, P. (2005). Integrating social theory into public health practice. American Journal of Public Health, 95, 591–595.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Reddy, S. (2002). Cardiovascular diseases in the developing countries: Dimension, determinants, dynamics and directions for public health action. Public Health Nutrition, 5, 231–237.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Rootman, I., Goodstadt, M., Hyndman, B., McQueen, D. V., Potvin, L., Springett, J., & Ziglio, E. (Eds.) (2001). Evaluation in health promotion. Principles and perspectives. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Publications, European Series, No. 92.Google Scholar
  21. Rychetnik, L., Frommer, M., Hawe, P., & Shiell, A. (2002). Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 56, 119–127.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Schwandt, T. A. (2005). The centrality of practice to evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 26, 95–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shadish, W. R., Jr., Cook, T. D., & Leviton, L. C. L. (1991). Foundations of program evaluation. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Springett, J. (1998). Practical guidance on evaluating health promotion. Copenhagen, WHO Regional Office for Europe, 1998 (unit document, Integrated Health Development).Google Scholar
  25. Susser, M. (1995). The tribulation of trials – intervention in community. American Journal of Public Health, 85, 156–158.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Swedish National Committee for Public Health. (2000). Health on equal terms. National goals for public health. Stockholm: Fritzes Offentliga Publikationer.Google Scholar
  27. Toulmin, S. (2001). Return to reason. Cambridge Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Waters, E., Doyle, J., Jackson, N., Howes, F., Brunton, G., & Oakley, A. (2006) Evaluating the effectiveness of public health interventions: the role and activities of the Cochrane Collaboration. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60, 285–289.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Windsor, R. Baranowski, T., Clark, N., & Cutter, G. (1984). Evaluation of health promotion, health education programs. Mountain View: Mayfield.Google Scholar
  30. Winkleby, M. (1994). The future of community-based cardiovascular disease intervention studies. American Journal of Public Health, 84, 1369–1372.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. WHO European Working Group on Health Promotion Evaluation. (1998). Health promotion evaluation: Recommendations to policy-makers. Retrieved in January 2008 from:
  32. World Health Organization. (1986). The Ottawa Charter for health promotion. Downloaded in January 2008 from:
  33. World Health Organization. (2005). The Bangkok Charter for health promotion in a globalized world. Retrieved in January 2008 from: 6gchp/bangkok_charter/en/
  34. Zaza, S., Briss, P. A., Harris, K. W. (Eds.) (2005). The guide to community preventive services. What works to promote health? New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Ziglio, E. (1997). How to move towards evidence-based health promotion interventions. Promotion & Education, IV, 29–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Louise Potvin
    • 1
  • David V. Mcqueen
  • Mary Hall
  1. 1.Department of Social and Preventive MedicineUniversit’é de MontrealMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations