Skip to main content

Foundations of Evaluation for Planetary Health: Endnotes

Foundations of Evaluation for Planetary Health
Endnotes

  • Show the following:

    Annotations
    Resources

  • Adjust appearance:

    Font
    Font style
    Color Scheme
    Light
    Dark
    Annotation contrast
    Low
    High
    Margins
  • Search within:
    • My Notes + Comments
    • Notifications
    • Privacy
  • Project HomeFoundations of Evaluation for Planetary Health
  • Projects
  • Learn more about Manifold

Notes

table of contents
  1. Abstract
  2. Acknowledgements
  3. About the Authors
    1. Astrid Brousselle
    2. Kai Mountfort
  4. Invitation
  5. Prologue: The Hummingbird Fable
  6. Introduction
    1. Earth Day Evaluation Declaration 2024
    2. Endnotes
  7. 1. Context Matters: Evaluation in the 21st Century
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Environmental and Social Depletion
    4. Reducing Risks
    5. Local Cultural Contexts
    6. Evaluation Takes Place in a Political Context
    7. Post-truth Influence as the New Propaganda
    8. Conclusion
    9. Endnotes
  8. 2. Evaluation for Planetary Health
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
    4. The Planetary Health Framework
    5. A Transformative Approach
    6. Conclusion
    7. Endnotes
  9. 3. The Planetary Health Rapid Impact Assessment Tool
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. The Planetary Health Rapid Impact Assessment Tool
    4. Conclusion
    5. Endnotes
  10. 4. Evaluation: Definitions, Approaches and Questions
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Definitions
    4. Evaluation Approaches
    5. When to Evaluate and for What Purpose?
    6. Evaluative Questions
    7. Conclusion
    8. Endnotes
  11. 5. Preparing for the Evaluation
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Evaluation Use and the Importance of Mapping the Context
    4. Drafting an Evaluation Plan
    5. Summary
    6. Conclusion
    7. Endnotes
  12. 6. Representing the Intervention
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. The Causal Model
    4. The Logic Model
    5. Use of Logic Models
    6. Different Visual Representations of the Intervention
    7. Conclusion
    8. Endnotes
  13. 7. Logic Analysis
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Foundations of Logic Analysis
    4. Types of Logic Analysis
    5. Steps for Conducting a Direct Logic Analysis
    6. Steps for Conducting a Reverse Logic Analysis
    7. Conclusion
    8. Endnotes
  14. 8. Effect Analysis and Related Approaches
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Defining Effects and Causal Relationship
    4. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Research Designs
    5. Contribution Analysis
    6. Impact Evaluation
    7. Considering Planetary Health Dimensions when Evaluating Impacts
    8. Outcome Harvesting
    9. Conclusion
    10. Endnotes
  15. 9. Implementation Analysis
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. In the Literature
    4. Implementation Analysis Questions
    5. Evaluation Designs for Implementation Analysis
    6. Impacts on Planetary Health
    7. Conclusion
    8. Endnotes
  16. 10. Economic Evaluation
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Background
    4. Types of Economic Evaluations
    5. The Comparator
    6. Cost Calculation
    7. Time Horizon
    8. Uncertainty
    9. Decision Criteria
    10. Limitations of Existing Approaches
    11. A Proposal for Useful Economic Evaluations for Planetary Health
    12. Conclusion
    13. Endnotes
  17. 11. Needs Assessment
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Defining What is, What should be and For Whom
    4. Contextual Elements and Boundaries
    5. Ex-ante and Ex-post
    6. Other important Considerations
    7. Next Steps?
    8. A Political Exercise
    9. Summary
    10. Endnotes
  18. 12. Monitoring
    1. Highlights
    2. Introduction
    3. Focus
    4. Establishing a Monitoring System
    5. Reporting and Other Considerations
    6. Gaming and Other Behavioural Effects
    7. Conclusion
    8. Endnotes
  19. 13. An Example: Evaluating a Local Government Official Community Plan Using Planetary Health Lenses
    1. Introduction
    2. Characterizing the OCP Within the Context of the Planetary Health Framework
    3. Data Collection
    4. Findings
    5. Recommendations
    6. Conclusion
    7. Endnotes
  20. 14. Further Thoughts and Resources
    1. Endnotes
  21. Bibliography

Endnotes

Agence Canadienne des Médicaments et des Technologies de la Santé. (2006). Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Technologies: Canada. 3rd Edition.

Benmahrnia, T., Dionne, P., Tchouaket, E., Fansi, A., & Brousselle, A., I. (2017). Investing in a healthy lifestyle strategy: is it worth it? International Journal of Public Health, 62, 2-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-016-0884-y

Bohmholdt, A. (2014). Evaluating the Triple Bottom Line Using Sustainable Return on Investment: The Triple Bottom Line Using Sustainable ROI. Remediation Journal, 24, 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21404

Brousselle, A., Benmarhnia, T., & Benhadj, L. (2016). What are the benefits and risks of using return on investment to defend public health programs? Preventive Medicine Reports, 3, 135-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2015.11.015

Brousselle, A., Lachaine, J., & Contandriopoulos, A. P. (2011c). L’évaluation économique. In A. Brousselle, F. Champagne, A. P. Contandriopoulos, & Z. Hartz (Eds.), L’Évaluation: Concepts et Méthodes (pp. 187-223). Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal.

Brousselle, A., & Lessard, C. (2011). Economic evaluation to inform health care decision-making: Promise, pitfalls and a proposal for an alternative path. Social Sciences & Medicine, 72(6), 832-839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.008

Bryan, S., Coyle, D., Krahn, M., & C, M. (2017). Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Technologies: Canada. https://www.cadth.ca/guidelines-economic-evaluation-health-technologies-canada-4th-edition

Caro, J. (2009). Editorial: Pursuing efficiency: A dead end for HTA? Value in Health, 12, S49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00559.x

Coast, J. (2004). Is economic evaluation in touch with society’s health values? BMJ, 329(7476), 1233-1236. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.329.7476.1233

Domenighetti, G. (1998). Equité, priorités sanitaires et société civile. Epistula ALASS, 26, 9-13.

Donaldson, C., Currie, G., & Mitton, C. (2002). Cost effectiveness analysis in health care: Contraindications. BMJ, 325(7369), 891-894. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.325.7369.891

Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G. L., & Torrance, G. W. (1998). Méthodes d’évaluation économique des programmes de santé, 2e édition. Economica.

Eddama, O., & Coast, J. (2008). A systematic review of the use of economic evaluation in local decision-making. Health Policy, 86, 129-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2007.11.010

Fox-Rushby, J., & Cairns, J. E. (2005). Economic evaluation. Maidenhead (NY) Open University Press.

Gold, M., Siegel, J., Russell, L., & Weinstein, M. E. (1996). Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford University Press.

Hadorn, D. C. (1991). Setting health care priorities in Oregon. JAMA, 265(17), 2218-2225. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1991.03460170072036

Hadorn, D. C. (1996). The Oregon priority-setting exercise: cost-effectiveness and the rule of rescue, revisited. Medical Decision Making, 16(2), 117-119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X9601600203

Kim, Y., Kim, Y., Lee, H. J., Lee, S., S.Y., P., Oh, S. H., Jang, S., T., L., Ahn, J., & Shin, S. (2022). The Primary Process and Key Concepts of Economic Evaluation in Healthcare. Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, 55(5), 415-423. https://doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.22.195

Mauskopf, J. A., Paul, J. E., Grant, D. M., & Stergachis, A. (1998). The role of cost-consequence analysis in healthcare decision-making. PharmacoEconomics, 13(3), 277-288. https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199813030-00002

McKie, J., & Richardson, J. (2003). The rule of rescue. Social Science & Medicine, 56(12), 2407-2419. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00244-7

National Center for Environmental Economics. (2023). Supplementary Material for the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final Rulemaking, “Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review”. EPA Report on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent Scientific Advances. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-12/epa_scghg_2023_report_final.pdf

Nord, E., Pinto, J. L., Richardson, J., Menzel, P., & Ubel, P. (1999). Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes. Health Economics, 8(1), 25-39. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199902)8:1<25::AID-HEC398>3.0.CO;2-H

Pinkerton, S. D., Johnson-Masotti, A. P., Derse, A., & Layde, P. M. (2002). Ethical issues in cost-effectiveness analysis. Evaluation and Program Planning, 25(1), 71-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189(01)00050-7

Rabarison, K. M., Bish, C., Massoudi, M., & Giles, W. (2015). Economic Evaluation Enhances Public Health Decision Making. Frontiers in Public Health, 24(3). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2015.00164

Rozworski, M. (2014). Methods of economic evaluation: What are the ethical implications for healthy public policy? N. C. C. f. H. P. P. https://www.ncchpp.ca/docs/2014_EvalEcon_Methodes_En.pdf.

Simoens, S., & Laekeman, G. (2005). Applying health technology assessment to pharmaceutical care: Pitfalls and future directions. Pharmacy World & Science, 27(2), 73-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-004-4098-7

Tchouaket, E., Brousselle, A., Fansi, A., Dionne, P.-A., Bertrand, E., & Fortin, C. (2013). The economic value of Quebec's water fluoridation program. Journal of Public Health, 21(6), 523-533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-013-0578-3

Tengs, T. O., Meyer, G., Siegel, J. E., Pliskin, J. S., Graham, J. D., & Weinstein, M. C. (1996). Oregon's Medicaid ranking and cost-effectiveness: Is there any relationship? Medical Decision Making, 16, 99-197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X9601600201

Ubel, P., Loewenstein, G., Scanlon, D., & Kamlet, M. (1996). Individual utilities are inconsistent with rationing choices: A partial explanation of why Oregon's cost-effectiveness list failed. Medical Decision Making, 16(2), 108-116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X9601600202

Veatch, R. M. (1995). The role of ethics in quality and accountability initiatives. Medical Care, 33, JS69-JS76.

Weinstein, M. C. (2006). Recent developments in decision-analytic modelling for economic evaluation. PharmacoEconomics, 24, 1043-1053. https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200624110-00002

Williams, A. (1992). Cost-effectiveness analysis: Is it ethical? Journal of Medical Ethics, 18(1), 7-11. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.18.1.7

Williams, A. H., & Cookson, R. A. (2006). Equity-efficiency trade-offs in health technology assessment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 22(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026646230605077X

Williams, I., McIver, S., Moore, D., & Bryan, S. (2008). The use of economic evaluations in NHS decision-making: A review and empirical investigation. Health Technology Assessment, 12(7), iii, ix-x, 1-175. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta12070

Annotate

Next Chapter
11. Needs Assessment
PreviousNext
EPUB
This book is released under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. This means that you are free to share and build upon the material, so long as you give appropriate credit and indicate if changes are made. You may not use the material for commercial purposes. Under this license, anyone who redistributes or modifies this book, in whole or in part, can do so for free providing they properly attribute the book as follows: Brousselle, A. (2026). Foundations of Evaluation for Planetary Health. Victoria, B.C. University of Victoria Libraries. Doi: https://doi.org/10.18357/9781550587364
Powered by Manifold Scholarship. Learn more at
Opens in new tab or windowmanifoldapp.org