Author
Listed:
- Katherine Cullerton
- Kelly D’cunha
- Chloe Clifford Astbury
- Daniel Hunt
- Alexandra J Bhatti
- Richmond Aryeetey
Abstract
Advocacy is a core function of public health practice and is essential for advancing population health, whether by promoting preventative measures or encouraging evidence-based policy reform. However, public health advocates, globally, face considerable barriers, including limited knowledge of effective strategies, resource constraints (such as time and funding), low prioritisation within organisations, and interference from powerful commercial industries seeking to impede policy change. To better support advocacy efforts, we sought to understand global advocacy practices, identify effective strategies, and determine where additional resources or evidence are most needed. We conducted an online cross-sectional survey with 156 self-identified public health advocates across 36 countries. Most respondents (80%) reported engaging in advocacy regularly, dedicating approximately half of their work time on related activities. Working in coalitions on policy issues was one of the most frequently used and effective strategies. While 61% of respondents felt well-equipped with advocacy knowledge, many reported gaps in other areas of preparedness, including insufficient funding, lack of time, limited access to networks, and gaps in advocacy skills, particularly regarding engaging with industry. Notably, respondents from middle-income countries reported higher self-assessed advocacy skills than those from low- or high-income countries. These findings highlight the need for tailored support and resources, particularly in relation to capacity building and evidence generation. In response, we propose a research agenda to address the most pressing issues facing public health advocates, globally.
Suggested Citation
Katherine Cullerton & Kelly D’cunha & Chloe Clifford Astbury & Daniel Hunt & Alexandra J Bhatti & Richmond Aryeetey, 2026.
"Towards an international research agenda for public health advocacy: Practice, preparedness and knowledge gaps,"
PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(1), pages 1-15, January.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pgph00:0005713
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0005713
Download full text from publisher
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:plo:pgph00:0005713. 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: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.