scholarly journals Preemption in Tobacco Control: A Framework for Other Areas of Public Health

2020 ◽  
Vol 110 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Crosbie ◽  
Laura A. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Local Authority ◽  
Local Policy ◽  
Media Advocacy ◽  
Government Documents ◽  
Health Community ◽  
Control Community ◽  
New Policies ◽  
Front Groups

Preemption—when a higher level of government limits the authority of a lower level to enact new policies—has been devastating to tobacco control. We developed a preemption framework based on this experience for anticipating and responding to the possibility of preemption in other public health areas. We analyzed peer-reviewed literature, reports, and government documents pertaining to tobacco control preemption. We triangulated data and thematically analyzed them. Since the 1980s, tobacco companies have attempted to secure state preemption through front groups, lobbying key policymakers, inserting preemption into other legislation, and issuing legal threats and challenges. The tobacco control community responded by creating awareness of preemption through media advocacy, educating policymakers, mobilizing national collaborations, and expanding networks with the legal community. Ten of the 25 state smoke-free preemption laws have been fully repealed. Repeal, however, took an average of 11 years. State preemption has been detrimental to tobacco control by dividing the health community, weakening local authority, chilling public education and debate, and slowing local policy diffusion. Health scholars, advocates, and policymakers should use the framework to anticipate and prevent industry use of preemption in other public health areas.

Insider Activists and Secondhand Smoke Countermeasures in Japan

Asian Survey ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Celeste L. Arrington
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Promotion ◽  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Secondhand Smoke ◽  
Public Spaces ◽  
Health Protection ◽  
Policy Entrepreneurship ◽  
Government Documents ◽  
Public Health Protection

Long considered a smoker’s paradise, Japan passed its strictest regulations yet on indoor smoking in 2018 with revisions to the Health Promotion Law and a new ordinance in Tokyo. Timed for the Tokyo Olympics, both reforms made smoking regulations stronger and more legalistic despite reflecting distinctive policy paradigms in their particulars. The national regulations curtailed smoking in many public spaces but accommodated smoking in small restaurants and bars. Tokyo’s stronger restrictions emphasized public health protection by exempting only eateries with no employees. I argue that fully understanding these contemporaneous reforms requires analyzing insider activists: state actors who participated in the tobacco control movement or had sustained interaction with it during earlier reform waves. Case studies drawing on interviews and movement and government documents illustrate the mechanisms insider activists can access because they straddle multiple fields. This article contributes to scholarship about ideas, policy entrepreneurship, and the blurry line between insiders and outsiders in policymaking.

scholarly journals The Impact of State Preemption of Local Smoking Restrictions on Public Health Protections and Changes in Social Norms

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul D. Mowery ◽  
Steve Babb ◽  
Robin Hobart ◽  
Cindy Tworek ◽  
Allison MacNeil
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Secondhand Smoke ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Local Policy ◽  
Public Places ◽  
Smoking Restrictions ◽  
Smoke Free Policy ◽  
Multiple Data ◽  
The Impact

Introduction. Preemption is a legislative or judicial arrangement in which a higher level of government precludes lower levels of government from exercising authority over a topic. In the area of smoke-free policy, preemption typically takes the form of a state law that prevents communities from adopting local smoking restrictions.Background. A broad consensus exists among tobacco control practitioners that preemption adversely impacts tobacco control efforts. This paper examines the effect of state provisions preempting local smoking restrictions in enclosed public places and workplaces.Methods. Multiple data sources were used to assess the impact of state preemptive laws on the proportion of indoor workers covered by smoke-free workplace policies and public support for smoke-free policies. We controlled for potential confounding variables.Results. State preemptive laws were associated with fewer local ordinances restricting smoking, a reduced level of worker protection from secondhand smoke, and reduced support for smoke-free policies among current smokers.Discussion. State preemptive laws have several effects that could impede progress in secondhand smoke protections and broader tobacco control efforts.Conclusion. Practitioners and advocates working on other public health issues should familiarize themselves with the benefits of local policy making and the potential impact of preemption.

Should Your State Have a Public Health Law Center?

2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (S4) ◽  
pp. 58-59
Author(s):  
Jill Moore ◽  
Marice Ashe ◽  
Patricia Gray ◽  
Doug Blanke
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Policy Change ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Legal Representation ◽  
National Network ◽  
College Of Law ◽  
Control Community ◽  
Strategic Advice ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium is a national “network” designed to tap expertise about tobacco control legislation and to leverage existing resources. Based at the William Mitchell College of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota, the Consortium supports local counsel with research, strategic advice, sample materials and pleadings, and amicus briefs. The Consortium’s priorities are to support capacity nationally, to offer education, and to perform outreach activities to a variety of audiences.The Consortium seeks to advance policy change by making legal expertise more readily available to the tobacco control community. Legal issues are inevitably involved in policy change. The Consortium does not provide legal representation, but conducts analysis and research. They publish on important and emerging legal issues as well as on specific cases, assist in the development of legislation, and train public health practitioners and policy makers on recurring legal issues.

Health

2019 ◽  
pp. 354-362
Author(s):  
Gian Luca Burci
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Health It ◽  
Health Governance ◽  
Illicit Trade ◽  
Normative Development ◽  
Control Community ◽  
Public Health Officials ◽  
Regulatory Measures

This chapter provides an overview of the conception, negotiation, and normative development of the WHO Framework Convention for Tobacco Control (FCTC) based on the professional experience of the author, a former Legal Counsel of WHO. The FCTC must be appreciated against the background of the normative role of WHO and its reluctance to use international lawmaking as a tool for global health governance. The FCTC is a groundbreaking instrument for the protection and promotion of public health; it was conceived as a framework convention in order to accommodate diverse regulatory measures at national and international levels and to create a normative space to facilitate progressive agreement on evidence-based interventions. The negotiation of the convention as well as of its Protocol on Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products was influenced by the relative lack of treaty-making experience on the part of public health officials in national delegations and by the uncompromising hostility of the tobacco control community against the tobacco industry. The resulting tension with strong commercial interests linked to tobacco trade led to a number of difficult and sometimes awkward compromises. At the same time, it led to the establishment of a strong institutional framework that has been instrumental in developing the FCTC through the adoption of far-reaching guidelines and the monitoring of compliance. Notwithstanding its success, there has been no serious discussion in WHO on the negotiation of new conventions, and the FCTC may remain an isolated achievement enabled by a unique set of circumstances.

Tobacco Control Advocacy in Australia: Reflections on 30 Years of Progress

2001 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Chapman ◽  
Melanie Wakefield
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Political Support ◽  
World Health ◽  
Media Advocacy ◽  
Program Support ◽  
Organization Policy ◽  
Health Organization

Australia has one of the world’s most successful records on tobacco control. The role of public health advocacy in securing public and political support for tobacco control legislation and policy and program support is widely acknowledged and enshrined in World Health Organization policy documents yet is seldom the subject of analysis in the public health policy research literature. Australian public health advocates tend to not work in settings where evaluation and systematic planning are valued. However, their day-to-day strategies reveal considerable method and grounding in framing theory. The nature of media advocacy is explored, with differences between the conceptualization of routine “programmatic” public health interventions and the modus operandi of media advocacy highlighted. Two case studies on securing smoke-free indoor air and banning all tobacco advertising are used to illustrate advocacy strategies that have been used in Australia. Finally, the argument that advocacy should emanate from communities and be driven by them is considered.

scholarly journals The electronic cigarette: a knight in shining armour or a Trojan horse?

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 201-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil W. Schluger
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Harm Reduction ◽  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Smoking Behaviour ◽  
Public Health Community ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Community

SummaryElectronic cigarettes have caused a sharp debate in the public health community, with some promoting them as a means of harm reduction for tobacco users and some taking a strong stand against them because of fear of renormalising smoking behaviour and interrupting tobacco control progress. People with mental health problems smoke at high rates and e-cigarettes seem a potentially attractive method of cessation in this population, and their use should be studied carefully.

scholarly journals Tobacco industry access to policy elites and the implementation of Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control

2019 ◽  
pp. tobaccocontrol-2019-055251
Author(s):  
Marc C Willemsen ◽  
Gary Fooks
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Tobacco Industry ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Degree Of Protection ◽  
Code Of Practice ◽  
Codes Of Practice ◽  
Government Documents ◽  
The Government ◽  
Naming And Shaming

IntroductionArticle 5.3 WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) aims to prevent tobacco industry interference with public health policy. The degree of protection depends on several factors: the interpretation of Article 5.3 by governments; the presence of codes of practice; and the effectiveness of industry lobbying versus public health advocacy. We examine these factors with reference to the Dutch government’s interpretation of Article 5.3.MethodsWe searched the Dutch Tobacco Industry Special Collection, part of the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents archive, containing more than 1100 Dutch government documents.ResultsBetween 2007 and 2012, under consistent pressure from the industry, an initial strict view of Article 5.3 gave way to increased contact with the industry. The industry tried to shift the governance of tobacco policy back to the Ministry of Economic Affairs. Around 2010, Dutch public health advocates began to use Article 5.3. Efforts included naming and shaming government contact with the industry, parliamentary questions about industry–government contact, a report outlining how Article 5.3 should be observed and, most importantly, a court case. In response to this, the government produced a formal code of practice, which was used to prevent industry involvement in the development of a new National Prevention Accord.DiscussionThe Dutch government’s initial decision not to codify Article 5.3 created an administrative environment in which health ministers’ interpretation of Article 5.3 was able to shift according to their political beliefs. The findings support the recommendation that Parties to the FCTC take a strict approach and formally codify Article 5.3 to ensure effective implementation.

Navigating the Ethics of Big Data in Public Health

2019 ◽  
pp. 353-367
Author(s):  
Effy Vayena ◽  
Lawrence Madoff
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Big Data ◽  
Credit Card ◽  
Health Sector ◽  
Public Health Research ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Community ◽  
Digital Disease Detection ◽  
The Public Sphere

“Big data,” which encompasses massive amounts of information from both within the health sector (such as electronic health records) and outside the health sector (social media, search queries, cell phone metadata, credit card expenditures), is increasingly envisioned as a rich source to inform public health research and practice. This chapter examines the enormous range of sources, the highly varied nature of these data, and the differing motivations for their collection, which together challenge the public health community in ethically mining and exploiting big data. Ethical challenges revolve around the blurring of three previously clearer boundaries: between personal health data and nonhealth data; between the private and the public sphere in the online world; and, finally, between the powers and responsibilities of state and nonstate actors in relation to big data. Considerations include the implications for privacy, control and sharing of data, fair distribution of benefits and burdens, civic empowerment, accountability, and digital disease detection.

scholarly journals A Holistic Intersection Rating System (HIRS)—A Novel Methodology to Measure the Holistic Operational Performance of Signalized Urban Intersections

Smart Cities ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 1018-1038
Author(s):  
Wesam Emad Saba ◽  
Salwa M. Beheiry ◽  
Ghassan Abu-Lebdeh ◽  
Mustafa S. AL-Tekreeti
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Local Economy ◽  
Rating System ◽  
Operational Performance ◽  
Community Activities ◽  
Community Wellbeing ◽  
Importance Index ◽  
Health Community ◽  
Direct And Indirect Impacts ◽  
Indirect Impacts

Signalized urban intersections are key components of urban transportation networks. They are traditionally viewed and designed as primarily motorized traffic facilities, and thus their physical and operational designs have traditionally aimed at maximizing traffic throughput subject to constraints dictated by vehicular safety requirements and pedestrian crossing needs. Seen from a holistic viewpoint, urban intersections are hubs or effective centers of community activities of which traffic flow is only one. Those hubs have direct and indirect impacts on the overlapping traffic functionalities, the environment, public health, community wellbeing, and the local economy. This study proposes a new rating system, the Holistic Intersection Rating System (HIRS), aimed at appraising signalized intersections from a more inclusive viewpoint. This appraisal covers traffic functionality, sustainability, and public health and community wellbeing. This rating system can be used as a guide to conceive, plan, or design new intersections or revamp existing ones. HIRS rates signalized urban intersections based on the level of use of relevant enabling technologies, and the physical and operational designs that allow those intersections to operate holistically, thus leading to a more human-centric and sustainable operational performance. HIRS was validated using a panel of experts in construction, transportation, and public health. The Relative Importance Index (RII) method was used to weigh the HIRS features. The rating system was piloted on a sample of 20 intersections in different cities in the UAE. The results revealed glaring gaps in services to or the consideration of pedestrians, cyclists, and nearby households. The sample intersections scored a mean of 32% on the public health and community wellbeing section, 37% on the pedestrian subsection, and 15% on the cyclist subsection. Such relatively low scores serve as indicators of areas for improvements, and if mapped to their specific features and their relative weights, specific physical and operations designs and technology integration can be identified as actionable items for inclusion in plans and/or designs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document