sapienzauniversitàdiromadipartimentodicomunicazione.ppt

first iteration 1. What is the evidence on risk? Toxicity – small particulate levels per cigarette? Ventilation – what difference does it make? Relativities – comparisons with other risky environments? Exposure – in-car time as compared to home, … , etc? Benchmarks – comparison with air quality standards? second iteration 2. What is the evidence on public support? Magnitude of support? Demographics of support? Support from smokers? Stability of support (words versus deeds)? Reasons for support? … And so on for theory 3 and 4 third iteration 3. What is the evidence on tobacco company opposition? What is the broader strategy behind tobacco company opposition to smoking control? Has the tobacco lobby opposed this particular ban? Will they do so in future? How does the tobacco-control lobby interpret and respond to industry tactics? fourth iteration 4. What is the evidence on enforcement Is the law being enforced? Will the police enforce the law (being a public health concern)? Will the smoking public disregard the law? What is the optimal enforcement strategy? Questions within questions CORE THEMES SUB-THEMES SUB-SUB THEMES “evidence can pursue but never quite capture unfolding policy problems.” Evidence glimpses … THE EVIDENCE. How firm is the evidence across these different theories and disciplines? THE UNCERTAINTIES. Does synthesis end in ‘hard facts’ or ‘dodgy dossiers’? Some examples from programme theories 1 and 2 Theory 1a: Is it possible to show that children’s exposure to smoking in cars causes ill health? ‘Youth exposed to smoking in cars also reported missing substantially more days of school compared to youth not exposed to smoking in cars. For example, amongst youth exposed to smoking in cars, 5% missed more than a week of school and 10% missed three to five days of school due to ill health. In comparison, amongst youth not exposed to smoking in cars, only 2% missed more than a week and of school and only 5% missed three to five days of school