Fooks Gary Jonas, Smith Julia, Lee Kelley, Holden Chris
School of Languages and Social Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, UK.
Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada.
Global Health. 2017 Mar 8;13(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s12992-017-0234-8.
The World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) stands to significantly reduce tobacco-related mortality by accelerating the introduction of evidence-based tobacco control measures. However, the extent to which States Parties have implemented the Convention varies considerably. Article 5.3 of the FCTC, is intended to insulate policy-making from the tobacco industry's political influence, and aims to address barriers to strong implementation of the Convention associated with tobacco industry political activity. This paper quantitatively assesses implementation of Article 5.3's Guidelines for Implementation, evaluates the strength of Parties' efforts to implement specific recommendations, and explores how different approaches to implementation expose the policy process to continuing industry influence.
We cross-referenced a broad range of documentary data (including FCTC Party reports and World Bank data on the governance of conflicts of interest in public administration) against Article 5.3 implementation guidelines (n = 24) for 155 Parties, and performed an in-depth thematic analysis to examine the strength of implementation for specific recommendations.
Across all Parties, 16% of guideline recommendations reviewed have been implemented. Eighty-three percent of Parties that have taken some action under Article 5.3 have introduced less than a third of the guidelines. Most compliance with the guidelines is achieved through pre-existing policy instruments introduced independently of the FCTC, which rarely cover all relevant policy actors and fall short of the guideline recommendations. Measures introduced in response to the FCTC are typically restricted to health ministries and not explicit about third parties acting on behalf of the industry. Parties systematically overlook recommendations that facilitate industry monitoring.
Highly selective and incomplete implementation of specific guideline recommendations facilitates extensive ongoing opportunities for industry policy influence. Stronger commitment to implementation is required to ensure consistently strong compliance with the FCTC internationally.
世界卫生组织(WHO)《烟草控制框架公约》(FCTC)有望通过加速引入循证烟草控制措施,显著降低与烟草相关的死亡率。然而,各缔约国对该公约的实施程度差异很大。FCTC第5.3条旨在使决策免受烟草行业的政治影响,并致力于消除与烟草行业政治活动相关的、阻碍公约有力实施的障碍。本文对第5.3条《实施准则》的实施情况进行了定量评估,评价了各缔约国实施具体建议的力度,并探讨了不同的实施方式如何使政策过程持续受到行业影响。
我们将广泛的文献数据(包括FCTC缔约国报告以及世界银行关于公共行政利益冲突治理的数据)与155个缔约国的第5.3条实施准则(n = 24)进行交叉对照,并进行了深入的主题分析,以考察具体建议的实施力度。
在所有缔约国中,所审查的准则建议有16%已得到实施。在根据第5.3条采取了一些行动的缔约国中,83%实施的准则不到三分之一。大多数对准则的遵守是通过独立于FCTC引入的现有政策工具实现的,这些工具很少涵盖所有相关政策行为体,也未达到准则建议的要求。因应FCTC而采取的措施通常仅限于卫生部,且未明确涉及代表行业行事的第三方。缔约国系统性地忽视了有助于行业监测的建议。
对具体准则建议的高度选择性和不完整实施,为行业政策影响提供了广泛的持续机会。需要更强的实施承诺,以确保在国际上始终有力地遵守FCTC。