Cargando…

Advocacy Coalitions involved in California’s Menu Labeling Policy Debate: Exploring Coalition Structure, Policy Beliefs, Resources, and Strategies

Advocacy coalitions often play an important role in the state health policymaking process, yet little is known about their structure, composition, and behavior. In 2008, California became the first state to enact a menu labeling law. Using the advocacy coalition framework, we examine different facet...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Payán, Denise D., Lewis, LaVonna B., Cousineau, Michael R., Nichol, Michael B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5598761/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28161674
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.01.036
_version_ 1783263972387979264
author Payán, Denise D.
Lewis, LaVonna B.
Cousineau, Michael R.
Nichol, Michael B.
author_facet Payán, Denise D.
Lewis, LaVonna B.
Cousineau, Michael R.
Nichol, Michael B.
author_sort Payán, Denise D.
collection PubMed
description Advocacy coalitions often play an important role in the state health policymaking process, yet little is known about their structure, composition, and behavior. In 2008, California became the first state to enact a menu labeling law. Using the advocacy coalition framework, we examine different facets of the coalitions involved in California’s menu labeling policy debate. We use a qualitative research approach to identify coalition members and explore their expressed beliefs and policy arguments, resources, and strategies by analyzing legislative documents (n=87) and newspaper articles (n=78) produced between 1999 and 2009. Between 2003 and 2008, six menu labeling bills were introduced in the state’s legislature. We found the issue received increasing media attention during this period. We identified two advocacy coalitions involved in the debate—a public health (PH) coalition and an industry coalition. State organizations acted as coalition leaders and participated for a longer duration than elected officials. The structure and composition of each coalition varied. PH coalition leadership and membership notably increased compared to the industry coalition. The PH coalition, led by nonprofit PH and health organizations, promoted a clear and consistent message around informed decision making. The industry coalition, led by a state restaurant association, responded with cost and implementation arguments. Each coalition used various resources and strategies to advance desired outcomes. PH coalition leaders were particularly effective at using resources and employing advocacy strategies, which included engaging state legislators as coalition members, using public opinion polls and information, and leveraging media resources to garner support. Policy precedence and a local policy push emerged as important policymaking strategies. Areas for future research on the state health policymaking process are discussed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5598761
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55987612018-03-01 Advocacy Coalitions involved in California’s Menu Labeling Policy Debate: Exploring Coalition Structure, Policy Beliefs, Resources, and Strategies Payán, Denise D. Lewis, LaVonna B. Cousineau, Michael R. Nichol, Michael B. Soc Sci Med Article Advocacy coalitions often play an important role in the state health policymaking process, yet little is known about their structure, composition, and behavior. In 2008, California became the first state to enact a menu labeling law. Using the advocacy coalition framework, we examine different facets of the coalitions involved in California’s menu labeling policy debate. We use a qualitative research approach to identify coalition members and explore their expressed beliefs and policy arguments, resources, and strategies by analyzing legislative documents (n=87) and newspaper articles (n=78) produced between 1999 and 2009. Between 2003 and 2008, six menu labeling bills were introduced in the state’s legislature. We found the issue received increasing media attention during this period. We identified two advocacy coalitions involved in the debate—a public health (PH) coalition and an industry coalition. State organizations acted as coalition leaders and participated for a longer duration than elected officials. The structure and composition of each coalition varied. PH coalition leadership and membership notably increased compared to the industry coalition. The PH coalition, led by nonprofit PH and health organizations, promoted a clear and consistent message around informed decision making. The industry coalition, led by a state restaurant association, responded with cost and implementation arguments. Each coalition used various resources and strategies to advance desired outcomes. PH coalition leaders were particularly effective at using resources and employing advocacy strategies, which included engaging state legislators as coalition members, using public opinion polls and information, and leveraging media resources to garner support. Policy precedence and a local policy push emerged as important policymaking strategies. Areas for future research on the state health policymaking process are discussed. 2017-01-25 2017-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5598761/ /pubmed/28161674 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.01.036 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
spellingShingle Article
Payán, Denise D.
Lewis, LaVonna B.
Cousineau, Michael R.
Nichol, Michael B.
Advocacy Coalitions involved in California’s Menu Labeling Policy Debate: Exploring Coalition Structure, Policy Beliefs, Resources, and Strategies
title Advocacy Coalitions involved in California’s Menu Labeling Policy Debate: Exploring Coalition Structure, Policy Beliefs, Resources, and Strategies
title_full Advocacy Coalitions involved in California’s Menu Labeling Policy Debate: Exploring Coalition Structure, Policy Beliefs, Resources, and Strategies
title_fullStr Advocacy Coalitions involved in California’s Menu Labeling Policy Debate: Exploring Coalition Structure, Policy Beliefs, Resources, and Strategies
title_full_unstemmed Advocacy Coalitions involved in California’s Menu Labeling Policy Debate: Exploring Coalition Structure, Policy Beliefs, Resources, and Strategies
title_short Advocacy Coalitions involved in California’s Menu Labeling Policy Debate: Exploring Coalition Structure, Policy Beliefs, Resources, and Strategies
title_sort advocacy coalitions involved in california’s menu labeling policy debate: exploring coalition structure, policy beliefs, resources, and strategies
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5598761/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28161674
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.01.036
work_keys_str_mv AT payandenised advocacycoalitionsinvolvedincaliforniasmenulabelingpolicydebateexploringcoalitionstructurepolicybeliefsresourcesandstrategies
AT lewislavonnab advocacycoalitionsinvolvedincaliforniasmenulabelingpolicydebateexploringcoalitionstructurepolicybeliefsresourcesandstrategies
AT cousineaumichaelr advocacycoalitionsinvolvedincaliforniasmenulabelingpolicydebateexploringcoalitionstructurepolicybeliefsresourcesandstrategies
AT nicholmichaelb advocacycoalitionsinvolvedincaliforniasmenulabelingpolicydebateexploringcoalitionstructurepolicybeliefsresourcesandstrategies