What does this research mean for the field?

One year after the removal of financial incentives, the continuation of sustainability initiatives among general practices using the Green Impact for Health toolkit is mixed. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

To evaluate whether City and Hackney practices continued sustainability efforts after the removal of financial incentives.

May 31, 2026Open Access

Green Impact for Health 1 year on: did City and Hackney practices keep going?

Key Points

To evaluate whether City and Hackney practices continued sustainability efforts after the removal of financial incentives.
Analysis of participation in the Green Impact for Health toolkit by City and Hackney practices in 2024.
Evaluation of sustainability practices post-removal of Local Enhanced Service requirements in 2025.
Awards given to practices for sustainability efforts assessed.
30 practices initially signed up for the Green Impact for Health toolkit and received awards for their sustainability efforts.
Year later, the sustainability commitment varied across practices after the financial incentive was removed.

Abstract

Green Impact for Health 1 year on: did City and Hackney practices keep going?In 2024, City and Hackney general practices made a big push to bring sustainability into everyday primary care by linking the Green Impact for Health (GIfH) toolkit 1-3 to the Local Enhanced Service (LES).It worked: 30 practices signed up and many earned awards for their efforts. 4t in 2025 the LES requirement was removed.Would practices keep going without this financial incentive, or would sustainability slip down the priority list?A year later, the picture is mixed.

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Mareeni Raymond (Thu,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1bcfb05783ba022b6fbb72 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp26x745833

Bookmark

View Full Paper