IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v10y2021i9p338-d631784.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rural Proofing Policies for Health: Barriers to Policy Transfer for Australia

Author

Listed:
  • I Nyoman Sutarsa

    (Rural Clinical School, Medical School, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia
    Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University, Bali 80361, Indonesia)

  • Lachlan Campbell

    (Rural Clinical School, Medical School, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia)

  • Malcolm Moore

    (Rural Clinical School, Medical School, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia)

Abstract

A ‘rural proofing’ framework, which offers assessment of the potential impacts of policies on rural and remote communities, has been advocated for by state governments and interest groups throughout Australia. It is argued that rural proofing can be used to redress health inequities between urban and rural and remote communities. While implementation of rural proofing in some countries shows promising results, there are many social and spatial contexts that should be considered prior to its adoption in Australia. Rural proofing is not the best option for rural health policy in Australia. It has been imported from communities where the urban/rural divide is minimal. It is based on a rigid urban/rural binary model that targets disparity rather than accommodating the diversity of rural communities. Rural proofing concentrates on tick-the-box activities, where rural communities are not sufficiently consulted. There is no unified federal ministry in Australia with responsibility for rural and remote affairs. Considering potential shortcomings of rural proofing for health policies, it is imperative for Australia to have a specific rural health policy at both federal and state levels.

Suggested Citation

  • I Nyoman Sutarsa & Lachlan Campbell & Malcolm Moore, 2021. "Rural Proofing Policies for Health: Barriers to Policy Transfer for Australia," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-5, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:10:y:2021:i:9:p:338-:d:631784
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/10/9/338/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/10/9/338/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:10:y:2021:i:9:p:338-:d:631784. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.