Flexibility or Fidelity? The Implementation Dilemma in Community-Based Health Promotion

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background: Childhood overweight and obesity are major public health challenges, linked to social inequality. Community-based and system-oriented interventions have been promoted as alternatives to individually focused approaches, yet their implementation remains poorly understood. This study examines the implementation of a flexible and locally anchored community-based health promotion programme targeting children aged 0–10 years in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas in Danish municipalities. Methods: The study draws on data from a process evaluation conducted from 2020 to 2024. The data includes 37 semi-structured interviews with practitioners, heads of institutions, and programme coordinators; 34 days of participant observation; annual implementation logs; and programme materials. Data were analysed using cross-thematic analysis. Results The programme’s broad, non-prescriptive framing created shared language, legitimacy and coordination, and it enabled staff to recognise and strengthen ongoing efforts. It also meant that implementation often centred on selecting and amplifying existing practices, whereas more demanding activities were downscaled or postponed, with substantial local variation shaped by capacity. These dynamics illustrate an inherent tension in implementation: Relying on established practices supports uptake, yet it risks producing incremental adjustments that may reinforce existing advantages and insufficiently address social inequality. We conceptualise these outcomes as a mix of meaningful alignment and superficial change. Conclusion Flexible, locally anchored community-based programmes can foster ownership and legitimacy, but risk remaining largely symbolic when they rely heavily on existing practices and frontline discretion. To avoid reinforcing inequalities, such designs require clearer expectations, supportive governance structures and targeted resources that explicitly address structural conditions in children’s everyday environments.

Article activity feed