Cargando…

Understanding the dynamics of notification and implementation of Article 5.3 across India’s states and union territories

INTRODUCTION: In federal systems, state and local governments may offer opportunities for innovation in implementing the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). This paper explores the implementation of WHO FCTC Article 5.3 within India’s federal system, examining how its guidelines have...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bassi, Shalini, Ralston, Rob, Arora, Monika, Chugh, Aastha, Nazar, Gaurang P, Collin, Jeff
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9125360/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35140171
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-057119
_version_ 1784711933295853568
author Bassi, Shalini
Ralston, Rob
Arora, Monika
Chugh, Aastha
Nazar, Gaurang P
Collin, Jeff
author_facet Bassi, Shalini
Ralston, Rob
Arora, Monika
Chugh, Aastha
Nazar, Gaurang P
Collin, Jeff
author_sort Bassi, Shalini
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: In federal systems, state and local governments may offer opportunities for innovation in implementing the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). This paper explores the implementation of WHO FCTC Article 5.3 within India’s federal system, examining how its guidelines have been operationalised across states and union territories. METHODS: Interviews with officials from government and civil society organisations across key states, and a document review of state government and district administration notifications adopting Article 5.3 guidelines between 2015 and 2019. RESULTS: The data reveal subnational leadership in formulating intersectoral committees, which are designed to limit interactions with the tobacco industry, and corresponding measures to reject partnership and conflicts of interest for government officials. There are notable omissions across states and union territories in adoption of key Article 5.3 guidelines; only four districts and state governments refer to regulating aspects of ‘socially responsible’ industry activities, and no notifications include measures to prevent the tobacco industry receiving preferential treatment or requiring that information provided by industry actors be transparent and accountable. Interview data indicate that dynamics of notification across states have been shaped by lesson drawing and the catalytic role of civil society. The adoption of protocols is impacting on the practices of health officials, but there are concerns about engagement by other departments and the regulatory capacity of empowered committees. CONCLUSION: The spread of state- and district-level policies illustrates opportunities federal structures can provide for accelerating tobacco control. Given significant omissions and policy tensions, there remains a need for national action to build on these innovations, including in revisions to India’s tobacco control legislation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9125360
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91253602022-06-04 Understanding the dynamics of notification and implementation of Article 5.3 across India’s states and union territories Bassi, Shalini Ralston, Rob Arora, Monika Chugh, Aastha Nazar, Gaurang P Collin, Jeff Tob Control Original Research INTRODUCTION: In federal systems, state and local governments may offer opportunities for innovation in implementing the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). This paper explores the implementation of WHO FCTC Article 5.3 within India’s federal system, examining how its guidelines have been operationalised across states and union territories. METHODS: Interviews with officials from government and civil society organisations across key states, and a document review of state government and district administration notifications adopting Article 5.3 guidelines between 2015 and 2019. RESULTS: The data reveal subnational leadership in formulating intersectoral committees, which are designed to limit interactions with the tobacco industry, and corresponding measures to reject partnership and conflicts of interest for government officials. There are notable omissions across states and union territories in adoption of key Article 5.3 guidelines; only four districts and state governments refer to regulating aspects of ‘socially responsible’ industry activities, and no notifications include measures to prevent the tobacco industry receiving preferential treatment or requiring that information provided by industry actors be transparent and accountable. Interview data indicate that dynamics of notification across states have been shaped by lesson drawing and the catalytic role of civil society. The adoption of protocols is impacting on the practices of health officials, but there are concerns about engagement by other departments and the regulatory capacity of empowered committees. CONCLUSION: The spread of state- and district-level policies illustrates opportunities federal structures can provide for accelerating tobacco control. Given significant omissions and policy tensions, there remains a need for national action to build on these innovations, including in revisions to India’s tobacco control legislation. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-06 2022-02-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9125360/ /pubmed/35140171 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-057119 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Bassi, Shalini
Ralston, Rob
Arora, Monika
Chugh, Aastha
Nazar, Gaurang P
Collin, Jeff
Understanding the dynamics of notification and implementation of Article 5.3 across India’s states and union territories
title Understanding the dynamics of notification and implementation of Article 5.3 across India’s states and union territories
title_full Understanding the dynamics of notification and implementation of Article 5.3 across India’s states and union territories
title_fullStr Understanding the dynamics of notification and implementation of Article 5.3 across India’s states and union territories
title_full_unstemmed Understanding the dynamics of notification and implementation of Article 5.3 across India’s states and union territories
title_short Understanding the dynamics of notification and implementation of Article 5.3 across India’s states and union territories
title_sort understanding the dynamics of notification and implementation of article 5.3 across india’s states and union territories
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9125360/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35140171
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-057119
work_keys_str_mv AT bassishalini understandingthedynamicsofnotificationandimplementationofarticle53acrossindiasstatesandunionterritories
AT ralstonrob understandingthedynamicsofnotificationandimplementationofarticle53acrossindiasstatesandunionterritories
AT aroramonika understandingthedynamicsofnotificationandimplementationofarticle53acrossindiasstatesandunionterritories
AT chughaastha understandingthedynamicsofnotificationandimplementationofarticle53acrossindiasstatesandunionterritories
AT nazargaurangp understandingthedynamicsofnotificationandimplementationofarticle53acrossindiasstatesandunionterritories
AT collinjeff understandingthedynamicsofnotificationandimplementationofarticle53acrossindiasstatesandunionterritories