Search

Social capital is often cited as shaping impacts of participatory arts, although the concept has not been systematically mapped in arts, health and wellbeing contexts. In wider health inequalities research, complex, differential, and sometimes negative impacts of social capital have been recognised. This paper maps of social capital concepts in qualitative research as part of the UK What Works for Wellbeing evidence review programme on culture, sport and wellbeing. Studies often cite positive impacts of bonding and, to a lesser extent, bridging social capital. However, reported challenges suggest the need for a critical approach. Forms of linking social capital, such as reframing and political engagement to address social divisions, are less often cited but may be important in participatory arts and wellbeing. Future research should further specify dimensions of social capital as well as their nuanced effects in arts, and wellbeing contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this special issue is to encourage critical theoretical and methodological reflection on the broad topic of leisure and wellbeing. Haworth ([27]) emphasised that while the relationship between leisure and positive or optimal experience was already an established field of enquiry, there had been little opportunity for debate about linking such research and policy agendas focused on the concept of wellbeing. Our contributors discuss issues connected to subjective wellbeing in leisure policy and practice, focusing on themes such as identity, leisure, happiness, spirituality, difference, and cultural diversity in the leisure sphere. The authors propose that adventure satisfies multiple and overlapping psychological needs for autonomy, competence, relatedness and beneficence, and the significance of this type of meaning-making has policy and practice implications beyond adventure recreation for schooling, public health and urban and rural planning. [Extracted from the article]

Background: A lack of physical activity and excessive sitting can contribute to poor physical health and wellbeing. The high percentage of the UK adult population in employment, and the prolonged sitting associated with desk-based office-work, make these workplaces an appropriate setting for interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase physical activity. This pilot study aims to determine the effect of an office-based sit-stand workstation intervention, compared with usual desk use, on daily sitting, standing and physical activity, and to examine the factors that underlie sitting, standing and physical activity, within and outside, the workplace. Methods/Design: A randomised control trial (RCT) comparing the effects of a sit-stand workstation only and a multi-component sit-stand workstation intervention, with usual desk-based working practice (no sit-stand workstation) will be conducted with office workers across two organisations, over a 12 month period (N = 30). The multicomponent intervention will comprise organisational, environmental and individual elements. Objective data will be collected at baseline, and after 2-weeks, 3-months, 6-months and 12-months of the intervention. Objective measures of sitting, standing, and physical activity will be made concurrently (ActivPAL3™ and ActiGraph (GT3X+)). Activity diaries, ethnographic participant observation, and interviews with participants and key organisational personnel will be used to elicit understanding of the influence of organisational culture on sitting, standing and physical activity behaviour in the workplace. Discussion: This study will be the first long-term sit-stand workstation intervention study utilising an RCT design, and incorporating a comprehensive process evaluation. The study will generate an understanding of the factors that encourage and restrict successful implementation of sit-stand workstation interventions, and will help inform future occupational wellbeing policy and practice. Other strengths include the objective measurement of physical activity during both work and non-work hours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Physical inactivity is a global public health priority. There are known health and well-being consequences of being inactive, and the benefits of being physically active are well established. However, there are persistent inequalities when it comes to how physically active people are, with disabled people, people living with long-term health conditions, and people residing in areas of socio-economic deprivation being particularly affected. Methods such as whole system approaches (WSAs), which are dynamic, multifaceted, and engage all relevant stakeholders, have gained momentum as an approach to address such complex public health problems. However, evidence relating to the implementation of WSAs to address physical inactivity is lacking. The aim of the Prevention and Enablement Model (PEM) was to take a whole system approach in Essex to encourage and support disabled people and/or individuals living with long-term health conditions to be more active, happier, and to live more independently. Methods: The aim of this study was to explore the enablers, challenges, and reflections associated with the process of designing and implementing the PEM. Semi-structured interviews (n = 12) were used to collect data from people involved in the PEM's design, implementation and/or delivery. Data was analysed using Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Four themes were identified: (1) Working collaboratively: Specific enablers of time and space were identified as important in the planning and implementation of a WSA (2) Leadership and planning: Distributed and flexible leadership was identified as central to successful implementation (3) Re-orientating practice: Highlighted the transformative potential of a whole system approach and how it contrasts with conventional work practices, and (4) Reflection and learning: Informing ongoing refinements and further implementation of successful system change. Conclusions: These findings highlight the challenge and complexity of implementing a WSA that involves diverse stakeholders from across adult social care, the NHS, and the third sector. Several important enablers are identified, such as leadership and planning, and the challenges and discomfort that can arise whilst changing systems. Ongoing efforts are required to ensure that different elements of the system collaborate effectively to address inequalities in physical activity participation, through the implementation of a WSA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]