Health promotion approaches and models: WACE Year 12 Health Studies Unit 3
“Compare the biomedical and social approaches to health promotion and evaluate which approach best suits a given health issue and population”
Health can be promoted through different approaches. The biomedical approach focuses on diagnosing, treating and preventing disease in individuals through medical services and technology. The social approach (the social model of health) focuses on changing the conditions that shape health for whole populations, such as income, environment and access. Most effective health promotion combines both, but the social approach is better suited to reducing inequities because it acts on the determinants. WACE wants you to compare the approaches and justify which fits a given issue.
What this dot point is asking
WACE expects you to distinguish the approaches clearly and then make a reasoned judgement about which suits a scenario. A strong answer defines each approach, states its strengths and limits, and matches an approach to the health issue and population in the stimulus. Marks reward justified comparison, not a description of each in isolation.
The biomedical approach
The biomedical approach treats health as the absence of disease and locates the cause and cure inside the body. It relies on doctors, hospitals, diagnosis, medication, surgery, screening and medical technology. Its strengths are clear: it extends and saves lives, treats acute illness, and produces fast, measurable results for the individual treated. Vaccination programs, cancer screening and emergency care all sit here.
Its limits matter for this course. The biomedical approach acts late, once a person is already at risk or unwell, and it is expensive and individual. It does little about the social, economic and environmental conditions that made people sick in the first place, so it can keep treating the same problems without reducing how often they occur. Relying on it alone tends to leave inequities untouched.
The social approach (the social model of health)
The social approach sees health as produced by the conditions in which people live, and it acts on those conditions for whole populations. It addresses the social determinants directly: income, education, housing, environment and access to services. It emphasises prevention, equity, intersectoral action and community participation. Building safe cycling paths, taxing tobacco, regulating food advertising and improving housing are social-approach actions.
Its strength is reach and prevention: it can lower the rate of illness across a population and target the groups facing the most disadvantage, which is why it is central to reducing inequities. Its limit is that change is slower, harder to measure, and depends on political will and cooperation across sectors. It does not treat the individuals who are already sick today, so it cannot replace the biomedical approach.
The strongest health systems use both approaches together. The biomedical approach treats people who are already unwell, while the social approach reduces how many people become unwell in the first place. A response to high rates of type 2 diabetes might combine medical screening and treatment (biomedical) with food policy, education and improved access to fresh food (social). Choosing only one leaves a gap the other would fill.
Settings and population-based approaches
Health promotion is also organised by where and to whom it is delivered. A settings-based approach works through the places people live, learn and work, such as schools, workplaces and communities, embedding health into everyday environments. A population-based approach targets a whole group rather than individuals, for example a state-wide campaign or a universal policy. These approaches usually deliver social-model actions, because they act on environments and whole groups rather than treating single patients.
Choosing the right approach
The right approach depends on the issue and the group. For an immediate, treatable condition, the biomedical approach is essential. For a widespread, preventable problem driven by social conditions, the social approach will do more, especially for disadvantaged groups. The best answers usually argue for a combination, with the balance tilted toward the social approach when the goal is to reduce inequity, because only the social approach changes the determinants.
How this maps to the exam
Expect a stimulus describing a health issue or a proposed program. You may be asked to classify actions as biomedical or social, compare the approaches, or evaluate which best suits the issue. Justify your choice using the nature of the problem, the population affected and the goal of reducing inequity.
A compare-and-evaluate question rewards a structure that contrasts the two approaches point by point, then judges against the specific issue.
Set the criteria for comparison
State what you will compare on: who it targets (individual vs population), timing (treatment vs prevention), cost, measurability, and effect on inequity. Naming criteria keeps the comparison genuine rather than two separate descriptions.
Contrast the approaches against each criterion
Biomedical: targets sick individuals, acts late, fast and measurable, costly, leaves determinants untouched. Social: targets whole populations, acts early on determinants, slower and harder to measure, but reaches disadvantaged groups and lowers the rate of illness.
Apply to the stimulus issue and group
For a preventable, socially driven problem in a disadvantaged community, weigh the criteria: prevention and equity matter most, so the social approach does more. For an acute, treatable condition the biomedical approach is essential.
State a balanced, justified verdict
Conclude with a combination, with the balance tilted toward the social approach when the goal is reducing inequity, because only it changes the determinants, while biomedical care still treats those already unwell. A reasoned, conditional verdict is the top-band move.
Students sometimes argue the social approach is simply better and the biomedical approach is outdated. Both are needed: the biomedical approach saves lives the social approach cannot reach in time. The marks come from a balanced comparison that matches the approach to the issue, usually arguing for a combination with reasons.
Exam-style questions
Questions in the style of SCSA exam questions on this dot point, each with a worked answer. They are written by ExamExplained unless tagged "Past paper"; the year shows the paper a question is modelled on.
WACE 2021-style8 marksCompare the biomedical and social approaches to health promotion, and evaluate which approach is best suited to reducing the rate of type 2 diabetes in a disadvantaged community.Show worked answer →
An 8 mark compare-and-evaluate response needs both approaches contrasted, then a justified choice for the issue and group.
- Compare
- The biomedical approach treats and prevents disease in individuals through medical services, screening and medication; it is fast and measurable but acts late, is costly and individual, and leaves the underlying conditions untouched. The social approach acts on the determinants (income, food access, environment) for whole populations; it prevents illness and targets inequity but is slower, harder to measure and depends on political will.
- Evaluate for this issue
- Type 2 diabetes is largely preventable and driven by social conditions, and the community is disadvantaged, so the social approach does more: improving fresh-food access, food policy and active environments lowers the rate across the group and targets the inequity.
- Balanced verdict
- Argue for a combination tilted toward the social approach: keep biomedical screening and treatment for those already at risk, but lead with social-model action because only it changes the determinants.
Markers reward a genuine comparison, a choice justified by the nature of the problem and the group, and a balanced rather than absolute verdict.
WACE 2023-style4 marksExplain why the social approach to health promotion is considered better suited to reducing health inequities than the biomedical approach.Show worked answer →
A 4 mark response needs the mechanism and a contrast.
Mechanism. The social approach acts on the determinants (income, education, environment, access) for whole populations and can target the groups facing the most disadvantage, lowering the rate of illness before it starts.
Contrast. The biomedical approach acts late on individuals already at risk and does little about the conditions causing the illness, so it tends to leave the gap between groups untouched.
Markers reward the link from acting on determinants to reducing inequity, contrasted with the biomedical approach's late, individual focus.