Capacity building and social marketing promotes healthy lifestyle behaviour in an Australian Aboriginal community. (16th July 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Berends, Lynda; Halliday, Rebecca
• Is Part Of: Australian journal of rural health. Volume 26:Number 4(2018)
• Page Start: 279
• Page End: 283
• Publication Date: 2018-07-16
• Subjects: Aboriginal health -- community‐based prevention marketing -- health promotion -- program evaluation; Rural health -- Periodicals; Rural health -- Australia -- Periodicals; 613
• DOI: 10.1111/ajr.12421
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1038-5282

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: We explored the effectiveness of a project targeting an Australian Aboriginal community. Design: A collaborative approach included stakeholder interviews, an intercept survey, observations and Facebook insights. Setting: Gippsland encompasses 41 557 km 2 of Victoria and has an Aboriginal population of around 4000. Participants: Five stakeholders from local Aboriginal health/sports organisations were interviewed at 6 and 18 months. A total of 49 Aboriginal persons aged 16 years or more, who lived in Gippsland, were surveyed at a community event. Facebook engagement involved 933 people over a 4‐week period. Main outcome measures: Reach was assessed at 6 and 18 months using Facebook likes and video views. Survey measures addressed campaign awareness, recall and attitudinal and behavioural change. Results: The project provides organisations with skills development, social media production and online resources promoting sports and community events. Stakeholders and survey respondents valued local content, positive stories and awareness‐raising elements. Two campaigns developed by state and regional organisations were adapted using locally developed social media with campaign messages. After 18 months, there were 2592 video views and 1738 likes. Forty‐seven (69%) of the eligible attendees at the community event completed the survey. Thirty‐three (70%) had seen the campaign; 20 (61%) subsequently thought about changing their behaviour and 13 (39%) changed their behaviour. Conclusion: The model was mutually beneficial. Partner organisations enabled project access to local events and project staff supported organisational development and event promotion. Social marketing engaged the community and prompted positive behaviour change. Formative work that is undertaken centrally might be useful for organisations to adapt for local campaigns.