Localising the Global Standards for Health-Promoting Schools: A Comparison of China and Germany

Objective: This study examines the localisation in China and Germany of the Global Standards for Health-Promoting Schools (HPS) developed jointly by WHO and UNESCO, focusing on how global frameworks are taken up and localised within different cultural and policy contexts. Methods: A qualitative comparative design combined policy review with systematic content analysis. Two national school-facing documents were analysed using the WHO/UNESCO’ HPS domains as a coding framework. We compared domain emphases and mapped a condensed set of indicators to specific national statements, using localisation labels (adopt, intensify, externalise, disperse, omit). Social–ecological systems theory provided a multilevel lens for interpreting how institutional structures and cultural expectations shaped localisation. Results: Divergence from the HPS standards was strongest in school health services and in the school social–emotional environment (SEE). In China, health services were embedded in schools through the use of dedicated staff, facilities and routine provision, reflecting a “big school–big health” model that sought to integrate educational and health responsibilities. In Germany, services were largely community- or needs-based and externally coordinated, reflecting a “small school–small health” model with clearer system differentiation. With respect to the school SEE, Germany addressed the requirements via school culture and student-centred competencies, while China addressed SEE mainly through auditable requirements spread across domains. Conclusion: Different systemic and cultural contexts generate distinct localisation pathways and trade-offs. The findings of this study highlight a “missing middle” between global standards and practical application, and suggest that progressive implementation is more workable when countries also put in place concrete supports—either in-school professional support and safeguards, or clear referral routes and cross-sector coordination.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health Education Journal
Published
2026-04-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00178969261434440
Primary Topic
School Health and Nursing Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Localising the Global Standards for Health-Promoting Schools: A Comparison of China and Germany

Ziyin Xiong, Jing Dai, Ruizhi Zhu
Health Education Journal
School Health and Nursing Education
article

Localising the Global Standards for Health-Promoting Schools: A Comparison of China and Germany

Ziyin Xiong, Jing Dai, Ruizhi Zhu
article en

Abstract

Objective: This study examines the localisation in China and Germany of the Global Standards for Health-Promoting Schools (HPS) developed jointly by WHO and UNESCO, focusing on how global frameworks are taken up and localised within different cultural and policy contexts. Methods: A qualitative comparative design combined policy review with systematic content analysis. Two national school-facing documents were analysed using the WHO/UNESCO’ HPS domains as a coding framework. We compared domain emphases and mapped a condensed set of indicators to specific national statements, using localisation labels (adopt, intensify, externalise, disperse, omit). Social–ecological systems theory provided a multilevel lens for interpreting how institutional structures and cultural expectations shaped localisation. Results: Divergence from the HPS standards was strongest in school health services and in the school social–emotional environment (SEE). In China, health services were embedded in schools through the use of dedicated staff, facilities and routine provision, reflecting a “big school–big health” model that sought to integrate educational and health responsibilities. In Germany, services were largely community- or needs-based and externally coordinated, reflecting a “small school–small health” model with clearer system differentiation. With respect to the school SEE, Germany addressed the requirements via school culture and student-centred competencies, while China addressed SEE mainly through auditable requirements spread across domains. Conclusion: Different systemic and cultural contexts generate distinct localisation pathways and trade-offs. The findings of this study highlight a “missing middle” between global standards and practical application, and suggest that progressive implementation is more workable when countries also put in place concrete supports—either in-school professional support and safeguards, or clear referral routes and cross-sector coordination.

Health Education Journal
Beijing Foreign Studies University (CN), Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN), Shaoxing University (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, National Social Science Fund of China
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
School Health and Nursing Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.