Cargando…
Who calls the shots in tobacco control policy? Policy monopolies of pro and anti-tobacco interest groups across six European countries
BACKGROUND: One of the factors influencing variation in tobacco control policies across European countries is the relative policy dominance of pro and anti-tobacco control interest groups. Scholars investigating this power balance have predominantly conducted single country case studies. This study...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6589028/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31226963 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7158-6 |
_version_ | 1783429332966834176 |
---|---|
author | Kuijpers, Thomas G. Kunst, Anton E. Willemsen, Marc C. |
author_facet | Kuijpers, Thomas G. Kunst, Anton E. Willemsen, Marc C. |
author_sort | Kuijpers, Thomas G. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: One of the factors influencing variation in tobacco control policies across European countries is the relative policy dominance of pro and anti-tobacco control interest groups. Scholars investigating this power balance have predominantly conducted single country case studies. This study aims to explore and describe the relative dominance of pro and anti-tobacco control interest groups across six European countries by using a tobacco display ban as a case study. We examined whether there are patterns and similarities with regards to two components of policy monopolies: framing of tobacco and institutional arrangements. METHODS: Thirty-two semi-structured interviews with 36 key stakeholders were conducted in Belgium, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and the Netherlands. These interviews were coded using the Framework Method. RESULTS: In countries where health Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) have a relative policy dominance, tobacco consumption was predominantly framed as a health issue, NGO communities were well developed, the industry was largely absent in terms of production and manufacture, the health ministries played central roles in the policymaking process, and FCTC article 5.3 was strictly interpreted. In countries where the tobacco industry has a relative policy dominance, tobacco was framed as a private problem, NGO communities were absent or weak, the industry was well represented, the health ministries played subordinate roles in the policymaking process, and FCTC article 5.3. was only interpreted in terms of transparency. CONCLUSION: The ways in which tobacco consumption is framed in a country and the ways in which institutions are arranged correspond to the policy monopoly in place, with strong similarities across countries with the same policy monopoly. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-7158-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6589028 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65890282019-07-08 Who calls the shots in tobacco control policy? Policy monopolies of pro and anti-tobacco interest groups across six European countries Kuijpers, Thomas G. Kunst, Anton E. Willemsen, Marc C. BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: One of the factors influencing variation in tobacco control policies across European countries is the relative policy dominance of pro and anti-tobacco control interest groups. Scholars investigating this power balance have predominantly conducted single country case studies. This study aims to explore and describe the relative dominance of pro and anti-tobacco control interest groups across six European countries by using a tobacco display ban as a case study. We examined whether there are patterns and similarities with regards to two components of policy monopolies: framing of tobacco and institutional arrangements. METHODS: Thirty-two semi-structured interviews with 36 key stakeholders were conducted in Belgium, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and the Netherlands. These interviews were coded using the Framework Method. RESULTS: In countries where health Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) have a relative policy dominance, tobacco consumption was predominantly framed as a health issue, NGO communities were well developed, the industry was largely absent in terms of production and manufacture, the health ministries played central roles in the policymaking process, and FCTC article 5.3 was strictly interpreted. In countries where the tobacco industry has a relative policy dominance, tobacco was framed as a private problem, NGO communities were absent or weak, the industry was well represented, the health ministries played subordinate roles in the policymaking process, and FCTC article 5.3. was only interpreted in terms of transparency. CONCLUSION: The ways in which tobacco consumption is framed in a country and the ways in which institutions are arranged correspond to the policy monopoly in place, with strong similarities across countries with the same policy monopoly. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-7158-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-06-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6589028/ /pubmed/31226963 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7158-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Kuijpers, Thomas G. Kunst, Anton E. Willemsen, Marc C. Who calls the shots in tobacco control policy? Policy monopolies of pro and anti-tobacco interest groups across six European countries |
title | Who calls the shots in tobacco control policy? Policy monopolies of pro and anti-tobacco interest groups across six European countries |
title_full | Who calls the shots in tobacco control policy? Policy monopolies of pro and anti-tobacco interest groups across six European countries |
title_fullStr | Who calls the shots in tobacco control policy? Policy monopolies of pro and anti-tobacco interest groups across six European countries |
title_full_unstemmed | Who calls the shots in tobacco control policy? Policy monopolies of pro and anti-tobacco interest groups across six European countries |
title_short | Who calls the shots in tobacco control policy? Policy monopolies of pro and anti-tobacco interest groups across six European countries |
title_sort | who calls the shots in tobacco control policy? policy monopolies of pro and anti-tobacco interest groups across six european countries |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6589028/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31226963 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7158-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kuijpersthomasg whocallstheshotsintobaccocontrolpolicypolicymonopoliesofproandantitobaccointerestgroupsacrosssixeuropeancountries AT kunstantone whocallstheshotsintobaccocontrolpolicypolicymonopoliesofproandantitobaccointerestgroupsacrosssixeuropeancountries AT willemsenmarcc whocallstheshotsintobaccocontrolpolicypolicymonopoliesofproandantitobaccointerestgroupsacrosssixeuropeancountries |