Analysis of intersectoral interdisciplinary approach to mental health of civil servants in Аsia and the Middle East countries
Abstract
This article presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of intersectoral and interdisciplinary approaches to ensuring the mental health of civil servants in seven countries of Asia and the Middle East: Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Israel and China. The study is based on a systematic analysis of national strategies and policies in the field of mental health, relevant legislation, as well as support programs for civil servants, including programs for the prevention of professional burnout, psycho-emotional stress, as well as crisis and military situations. Special attention is paid to mechanisms of interagency interaction that ensure coordination of actions of different sectors of state administration, medical institutions, psychological services and public organizations involved in the formation and implementation of mental health policy.
As a result, three basic models of intersectoral cooperation in the mental health policy of civil servants were identified: a model of centralized mandate (China, Singapore), which is characterized by directive management, clear protocols and rapid mobilization of resources; a model of integrated legal regulation (Japan, Hong Kong), which is based on legal norms, quality standards and a multi-level system of services; a fragmented and evolving model (South Korea, Israel), where programs are often departmental or pilot in nature and require coordination at the state policy level. The case of Taiwan is separately evaluated as an example of institutional strengthening of services with a focus on the availability of support and tools for preventing professional burnout. The study also identifies key drivers of policy formation in the field of mental health of civil servants, including professional stress, high levels of suicidal behavior, the consequences of military conflicts, socio-economic and crisis factors. Based on the analysis of international experience, practical recommendations have been formulated for the implementation of an intersectoral approach in the public administration system, in particular, for the development of integrated strategies, increasing the competence of civil servants in the field of psycho-emotional self-support, creating interdepartmental information exchange platforms, and implementing mental health monitoring standards at the state level.
Downloads
References
Bytiak, Yu.P. (2018). Civil service in Ukraine: Organizational and legal foundations: Monograph. Kharkiv: Pravo. [in Ukrainian].
World Health Organization. (2022). World mental health report: Transforming mental health for all. Geneva: WHO. Retrieved November 26, 2025. URL: https://www.who.int/ publica-tions/i/item/9789240049338 [in Ukrainian].
Hazarian, S.V. (2021). Psycho-emotional resilience of civil servants under conditions of public administration transformation. Public Administration and Local Self-Government, (3), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.32840/1813-3401.2021.3.6 [in Ukrainian].
Hbur, Z.V. (2020). Personnel policy in the system of public administration: Current challenges. Investments: Practice and Experience, (22), 85–90. https://doi.org/10.32702/2306-6814.2020.22.85 [in Ukrainian].
Kovbasiuk, Yu.V., & Voronko, L.O. (2019). Human resource management in the public sector: Textbook. Kyiv: NAPA. [in Ukrainian].
Kravchenko, S.O. (2022). Professional burnout as a problem of civil service. Public Administration: Theory and Practice, (1), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.34132/patp.2022.01.11 [in Ukrainian].
Latynin, M.A. (2020). Institutional capacity of public service under crisis challenges. Bulletin of the National Academy for Public Administration, (4), 23–31. [in Ukrainian].
Lypovska, S.O. (2023). Personnel policy and mental health of staff. Public Administra-tion, 132–140. [in Ukrainian].
Melnyk, A.H. (2020). Institutional capacity of the civil service (pp. 24–29). Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Melnyk, A.F., & Obolenskyi, O.Yu. (2020). Public administration: Textbook. Kyiv: Znannia. [in Ukrainian].
Ministry of Health of Ukraine. (2021). Concept for the development of the mental health care system in Ukraine until 2030. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Savchenko, V.A. (2019). Socio-psychological aspects of personnel management in public authorities. State and Regions. Series: Public Administration, (2), 67–74. [in Ukrainian].
Savchenko, V.M. (2022). Psycho-emotional workload in public authorities, 68–71.
Khodakivskyi, Ye.I., & Buriak, R.I. (2018). Axiological foundations of public admin-istration. Economy and State, (12), 4–9. https://doi.org/10.32702/2306-6806.2018.12.4 [in Ukrainian].
Government of Japan. (2014). Act on Promotion of Preventive Measures against Ka-roshi and Other Overwork-Related Health Disorders: Act No. 100 of 2014. Tokyo. Retrieved No-vember 26, 2025. URL: https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp
Advisory Committee on Mental Health. (2024). Advisory Committee on Mental Health (ACMH) Report. Hong Kong: SAR Government. Retrieved November 26, 2025. URL: https://www.cmha.gov.hk
Aviram, U. (2002). Mental health services in Israel at a crossroads. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 48(2), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/002076402128783182
Government of Japan. (2006). Basic Act on Suicide Prevention. Tokyo. Retrieved No-vember 26, 2025. URL: https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp
Chen, C.M., & Lin, Y.Y. (2023). Community-based mental health policy in Taiwan. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 17, Article 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-023-00589-4
Choi, K.S. (2020). Occupational stress and burnout among public officials in South Korea. Asian Social Work and Policy Review, 14(3), 188–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/aswp.12201
Employee Assistance Programs (EAP): Global implementation models. (2024). Hu-man Resource Management Review.
Fukuda, Y. (2019). Mental health policy and suicide prevention in Japan. Japan Medi-cal Association Journal, 62(2), 63–68.
Fragmented care systems: Lessons from South Korea and Israel. (2024). Global Health Policy.
Glandon, D., & Meghani, A. (2019). Intersectoral collaboration for mental health. Health Policy and Planning, 34(5), 343–352. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czz045
Government of Singapore, Ministry of Health. (2023). National Mental Health and Well-being Strategy. Singapore. Retrieved November 26, 2025. URL: https://www.moh.gov.sg
Kim, J.Y., & Lee, S.H. (2022). Mental health reform in South Korea: Challenges and opportunities. Psychiatry Investigation, 19(7), 523–531. https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2022.0105
Health Bureau of Hong Kong. (2024). Mental Health Workplace Charter in Hong Kong: Report of the Hong Kong Health Bureau. Hong Kong. Retrieved November 26, 2025. URL: https://www.healthbureau.gov.hk
Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan. (2006). Guidelines for the Promo-tion of Mental Health Care for Workers. Tokyo. Retrieved November 26, 2025. URL: https://www.mhlw.go.jp
National Health Commission of China. (2012). Mental Health Law of the People’s Re-public of China. Beijing: Government of China. Retrieved November 26, 2025. URL: http://www.nhc.gov.cn
OECD. (2020). Mental health and work: Asia-Pacific. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264176759-en
Ministry of Health of Singapore. (2023). Project Dawn: Singapore’s mental health ini-tiative for migrant workers. Singapore. Retrieved November 26, 2025. URL: https://www.moh.gov.sg
The Japanese Stress Check Program: A new national policy for monitoring and screen-ing psychosocial stress in the workplace. (2014). Retrieved November 26, 2025. URL: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5373916/
World Health Organization. (2022). Mental health in the workplace. Geneva: WHO. Retrieved November 26, 2025. URL: https://www.who.int/publications
