Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Western Ontario, London, ON.
Can J Public Health. 2009 Sep-Oct;100(5):370-5. doi: 10.1007/BF03405273.
The aim of this study was to determine how tobacco control interest groups influence tobacco policy decision-making through submissions and presentations to parliamentary committees.
A qualitative content analysis was used to examine the presentations and submissions on tobacco-related legislation made to parliamentary committees between 1996 and 2004. The sample was identified from the public list of tobacco-related bills tabled in both the House of Commons and the Senate; the Government of Canada website and LEGISinfo were used to determine which committee reviewed the relevant bill. Committee clerks were asked to send submissions and presentations related to specific bills identified through LEGISinfo. Submissions and presentations were scanned and entered into QSR N6 software for coding. The coding instrument was adapted from previous studies employing qualitative content analysis. Montini and Bero's recommendations were used to evaluate the submissions and presentations.
Tobacco control interest groups did present scientific evidence to support tobacco control. However, they underused credible witnesses to present information at meetings. The topics presented by tobacco control interests groups were usually relevant to the bill being discussed.
Tobacco control interest groups employed some of the strategies suggested by Montini and Bero in their attempt to influence parliamentary committees through submissions and presentations. They did include scientific evidence in their submissions; however, they could improve their strategies in the area of using credible witnesses, such as scientists and medical experts. Incorporating Montini and Bero's recommendations into lobbying efforts may increase success in influencing committees.
本研究旨在通过向议会委员会提交材料和陈述来确定烟草控制利益集团如何通过提交材料和陈述来影响烟草政策决策。
采用定性内容分析方法,审查了 1996 年至 2004 年期间向议会委员会提交的与烟草相关立法的陈述和材料。从下议院和上议院提交的与烟草相关法案的公开清单中确定了样本;从加拿大政府网站和 LEGISinfo 确定了审查相关法案的委员会。委员会办事员被要求发送通过 LEGISinfo 确定的与特定法案相关的陈述和材料。对陈述和材料进行扫描并输入 QSR N6 软件进行编码。编码工具改编自以前采用定性内容分析的研究。蒙蒂尼和贝罗的建议用于评估陈述和材料。
烟草控制利益集团确实提出了科学证据来支持烟草控制。然而,他们在会议上很少利用可信的证人来提供信息。烟草控制利益集团提出的主题通常与正在讨论的法案相关。
烟草控制利益集团在试图通过提交材料和陈述来影响议会委员会时,采用了蒙蒂尼和贝罗建议的一些策略。他们确实在提交的材料中包括了科学证据;然而,他们可以在利用可信的证人(如科学家和医学专家)方面改进他们的策略。将蒙蒂尼和贝罗的建议纳入游说工作中可能会增加影响委员会的成功机会。