International Journal of Health Policy and Management

International Journal of Health Policy and Management

Building Better Public Health Policy Knowledge: The Case for Pluralism

Document Type : Viewpoint

Author
Patrick Harris 1, 2
1 International Centre for Future Health Systems, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
2 Centre for Health Equity Training, Research and Evaluation, Population Health and Epidemiology Unit, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool, NSW, Australia
10.34172/ijhpm.9659
Keywords
Positivism
Pragmatism
Critical Social Science
Critical Realism
Climate Change
Populism

Introduction

Given the multiple challenges facing public health across the globe it is timely to reflect on how different types of knowledge are of use for public health policy. Public health policy, like all public policy, operates in complex, contested environments where multiple forms of knowledge are needed—both for policy (technical evidence to inform decisions and implementation) and about policy (sociopolitical to understand systems, processes, and power).1,2 ...(Read more...)

  1. Howlett M, Ramesh M, Perl A. Studying Public Policy: Principles and Processes. Oxford University Press Global; 2020.
  2. Raven R, von Wirth T, Bai X, et al. The future of urban experimentation through ten critical lessons from decades of practice. Nature Cities. doi:10.1038/s44284-026-00398-z
  3. Crotty M. The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process. Sydney: Alex and Unwin; 1998.
  4. Campbell-Lendrum D, Neville T, Schweizer C, Neira M. Climate change and health: three grand challenges. Nat Med. 2023;29(7):1631-1638. doi:1038/s41591-023-02438-w
  5. Lindström M. Populism and health inequality in high-income countries. SSM Popul Health. 2020;11:100574. doi:1016/j.ssmph.2020.100574
  6. Speed E, Mannion R. The rise of post-truth populism in pluralist liberal democracies: challenges for health policy. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;6(5):249-251. doi:15171/ijhpm.2017.19
  7. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern Epidemiology. Vol. 3. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.
  8. Khalatbari-Soltani S, Jegasothy E, Abimbola S, van Zwieten A. Inequity is our biggest killer: looking upstream to tackle the burden of disease in Australia. Med J Aust. 2026;224(1):e70119. doi:5694/mja2.70119
  9. Robinson WR, Bailey ZD. Invited commentary: what social epidemiology brings to the table-reconciling social epidemiology and causal inference. Am J Epidemiol. 2020;189(3):171-174. doi:10.1093/aje/kwz197
  10. Glasgow RE. What does it mean to be pragmatic? Pragmatic methods, measures, and models to facilitate research translation. Health Educ Behav. 2013;40(3):257-265. doi:1177/1090198113486805
  11. Gillespie A, Glăveanu V, de Saint Laurent C. Pragmatism and Methodology: Doing Research That Matters With Mixed Methods. Cambridge University Press; 2024.
  12. Ramanadhan S, Revette AC, Lee RM, Aveling EL. Pragmatic approaches to analyzing qualitative data for implementation science: an introduction. Implement Sci Commun. 2021;2(1):70. doi:1186/s43058-021-00174-1
  13. Elder-Vass D. The Causal Power of Social Structures: Emergence, Structure and Agency. Cambridge University Press; 2010.
  14. Browne C. Critical Social Theory. SAGE; 2017.
  15. Harris P, Baum F, Friel S, Mackean T, Schram A, Townsend B. A glossary of theories for understanding power and policy for health equity. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2020;74(6):548-552. doi:1136/jech-2019-213692
  16. Archer M. Realist social theory: the morphogenetic approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995.
  17. Bhaskar R. The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philisophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences. Hassocks: Harvester Press; 1989.
  18. Sayer A. Realism and Social Science. Sage Publications; 2000.
  19. Harris P. Illuminating Policy for Health: Insights From a Decade of Researching Urban and Regional Planning. Palgrave McMillan; 2022.
  20. Välikangas A. The limited role of social sciences and humanities in interdisciplinary funding: What are its effects? Social Epistemology. 2024;38(2):152-172.
  21. Tian W, Cai R, Fang Z, Xie Q, Hu Z, Wang X. Research funding in different SCI disciplines: A comparison analysis based on Web of Science. Quant Sci Stud. 2024;5(3):757-777. doi:1162/qss_a_00315
International Journal of Health Policy and Management
Volume 15, Issue 1
2026
Pages 1-4

  • Received Date 06 December 2025
  • Revised Date 18 February 2026
  • Accepted Date 31 March 2026
  • First Published Date 31 March 2026
  • Published Date 01 December 2026