Framing arts and health: a critical policy discourse analysis of international public health institutions

BACKGROUND: This study examines how the relationship between arts and health is constructed and represented in key policy documents from leading international public health institutions, moving beyond description to critically investigate the ideological assumptions and consequences of dominant framing strategies. METHODS: A qualitative frame analysis was conducted using a purposive sample of ten policy documents, reports, and white papers (2019-2024) from the World Health Organization, the United Kingdom, and Australia. Data were systematically coded using NVivo to identify and analyze recurrent framing patterns. RESULTS: Three primary frames were identified: the Instrumental-Economic Frame, the Clinical-Evidence Frame, and the Social-Justice Frame. The Instrumental-Economic Frame, which positions the arts as a cost-effective tool for public health outcomes, was overwhelmingly dominant. Contrasts between the WHO's health-promotion focus and the UK's clinical orientation reveal divergent policy pathways. Dominant frames risk reducing the arts to utilitarian functions, obscuring their intrinsic and socio-critical value. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the implications of these frames for resource allocation, practice, and the future trajectory of the arts and health field. A more nuanced and balanced discursive approach is advocated to preserve the transformative potential of the arts in health.