Department of Geography, Social Science Centre, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5C2.
Health Place. 2018 Sep;53:264-267. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2017.09.005. Epub 2017 Nov 15.
In this commentary, I respond to the special section in Health & Place (vol. 46) on "Exercise and environment: new qualitative work to link popular practice and public health" edited by Hitchings and Latham. I argue that if qualitative research is to effectively inform public health policy and practice it cannot ignore the fact that physical activity participation is inequitable. Without building in a critical equity lens, geographers risk perpetuating the "inequality paradox"-that is, the potential for population health interventions to inadvertently exacerbate health inequalities. Related to this, I challenge the editors' assumption that geographers' critiques of public health approaches to physical activity and our applied efforts to foster physical activity participation are mutually exclusive endeavours. Rather, I argue they are mutually necessary within a social justice agenda. Finally, I close this commentary by offering ways forward for qualitative research on exercise and environment to connect with public health agendas and inform interventions.
在这篇评论中，我回应了《健康与地点》（第 46 卷）中关于“运动与环境：将流行实践与公共卫生联系起来的新定性工作”的特刊，该特刊由 Hitchings 和 Latham 编辑。我认为，如果定性研究要有效地为公共卫生政策和实践提供信息，它就不能忽视这样一个事实，即体育活动参与是不平等的。如果不建立一个批判性的公平视角，地理学家就有可能使“不平等悖论”永久化——也就是说，人口健康干预有可能无意中加剧健康不平等。与此相关，我质疑编辑们的假设，即地理学家对公共卫生方法对体育活动的批评，以及我们促进体育活动参与的应用努力，是相互排斥的。相反，我认为，在社会正义议程中，它们是相互必要的。最后，我通过提供将运动与环境的定性研究与公共卫生议程联系起来并为干预措施提供信息的方法，结束了这篇评论。
