Background  This paper considers energy as a social and commercial determinant of Health. Stable access to clean and sustainable energy is integral for human wellbeing yet public Health rarely considers its importance. Methods  Using NVivo qualitative analysis software we analysed all Australian federal, state and territory strategic energy policies covering varying periods between 2016-2030. We defined strategic Policy as including the goals, objectives and strategies of the department regarding a specific area of Policy responsibility. This criterion excluded documents such as operational guidelines. 36 energy-related policies were analyzed. Results  While the nature of energy supply is crucial to determining the impact of human and environmental Health, our analysis showed that Health and wellbeing are only rarely considered in Policy. We developed a conceptual framework to guide our work linking energy Policy with Health. Australia’s continued reliance on fossil fuels evident in the policies poses Health risks, especially as climate change threatens physical and mental Health. Yet Health considerations were mainly absent from the policies. However, some jurisdictions (South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory [ACT]) had policies encouraging a fast move to renewables. Energy pricing was a key focus in each jurisdiction and had become highly politicalized in the past decade. Little attention was paid to equity considerations in the policies. Conclusion  Energy Policy would be more Health promoting if public Health perspectives were considered during its development. On the basis of our Policy analysis and literature review we conclude with recommendations for Healthy energy Policy.

Background: In Australia, childhood obesity follows a socioeconomic gradient whereby children with lower socioeconomic position are disproportionately burdened. To reduce these inequalities in childhood obesity requires a multi-component Policy-driven response. Action to address Health issues is underpinned by the ways in which they are represented as ‘, problems’,in public Policy. This study critically examines representations of inequalities in childhood obesity within Australian Health Policy documents published between 2000-2019. Methods: Australia’, s federal, state and territory government Health department websites were searched for Health Policy documents including Healthy weight, obesity, Healthy eating, food and nutrition strategies,child and youth Health strategies,and broader Health and wellbeing, prevention and Health promotion policies that proposed objectives or strategies for childhood obesity prevention. Thematic analysis of eligible documents was guided by a theoretical framework informed by problematization theory, ecological systems theory, and theoretical principles for equity in Health Policy. Results: Eighteen Policy documents were eligible for inclusion. The dominant representation of inequalities in childhood obesity was one of individual responsibility. The social determinants of inequalities in childhood obesity were acknowledged, yet Policy actions predominantly focused on individual determinants. Equity was positioned as a principle of Policy documents but was seldom mentioned in Policy actions. Conclusion: Current representations of inequalities in childhood obesity in Australian Health Policy documents do not adequately address the underlying causes of Health inequities. In order to reduce inequalities in childhood obesity future policies will need greater focus on Health equity and the social determinants of Health (SDoH).

Energy policies have a major impact on the Health and well-being of the population. However, Australia’s energy policies rarely consider Health and well-being in their policies. In Australia and in many other countries, energy policies, while developed by governments, are heavily influenced by commercial entities within the fossil fuel industry. This means that Australia’s energy Policy does not reflect what climate science tells us is necessary for a safe climate. Australia’s environmental laws are insufficient to protect both nature and the environment. Environment and climate advocates have been urging the Australian government to strengthen these laws while industry, particularly the mining industry have been pushing to weaken them. This clearly demonstrates the strong intersection between commercial and political determinants of Health.

Background: Health apps are a booming, yet under-regulated market, with potential consumer harms in privacy and Health safety. Regulation of the Health app market tends to be siloed, with no single sector holding comprehensive oversight. We sought to explore this phenomenon by critically analysing how the problem of Health app regulation is being presented and addressed in the Policy arena. Methods: We conducted a critical, qualitative case study of regulation of the Australian mental Health app market. We purposively sampled influential policies from government, industry and non-profit organisations that provided oversight of app development, distribution or selection for use. We used Bacchi’ s critical, theoretical approach to Policy analysis, analysing Policy solutions in relation to the ways the underlying problem was presented and discussed. We analysed the ways that policies characterised key stakeholder groups and the rationale Policy authors provided for various mechanisms of Health app oversight. Results: We identified and analysed 29 policies from Australia and beyond, spanning 5 sectors: medical device, privacy, advertising, finance, and digital content. Policy authors predominantly framed the problem as potential loss of commercial reputations and profits, rather than consumer protection. Policy solutions assigned main responsibility for app oversight to the public, with a heavy onus on consumers to select safe and high-quality apps. Commercial actors, including powerful app distributors and commercial third parties were rarely subjects of Policy initiatives, despite having considerable power to affect app user outcomes. Conclusion: A stronger regulatory focus on app distributors and commercial partners may improve consumer privacy and safety. Policy-makers in different sectors should work together to develop an overarching regulatory framework for Health apps, with a focus on consumer protection.

Baum et al analyse the Australian energy sector’s influence on Health. This commentary suggests that their valuable work may be further enhanced by shifting the gaze in five ways: first, by leaving the Health field’s dictate of linear analysis into circularity; second, by removing humans from the centre of analysis; third, by regarding the planet as an indivisible whole system and recognising, for instance, that Australia is not Africa; fourth, by recognising that energy is a source of – sometimes perverse, as demonstrated in the Russia-Ukraine conflict – political power; and fifth, by really starting from the energy point of view rather than the human Health perspective. To reorient the debate, the commentary ends with a proposal of the energy cycle as a heuristic to explain global and local Health equity.