Developing an Advocacy Campaign
Developingan Advocacy Campaign
As the use of tobacco continue to affect many people in thecommunity, the rise of services and policies that help counter thisaddiction is very evident. Campaigns are still ongoing in this fieldto empower the community in general through teaching people thedangers of smoking and providing care and rehabilitation services forthose who are already addicted. The policy in the discussion is aboutcampaigns on tobacco use and the creation of a service line in alllanguages so as to serve people of different origins within the freesmoking cessation services which in the past were only offered in theSpanish language. Telephone programs provide essential tools tocounter tobacco use and many countries still adopt them. Theseservice lines help citizens with free services such as counselingprograms, self-helping quit programs, and other related information.This program helps provide services via telephone and thus manyfacilities like media, healthcare providers, smoking control programsand the public school system is available in the promotion of duty.The availability of this helpline helps very many people in a givenregion, and the inclusion of different languages will enhance its useby the minority ethnic communities in the area.
It is clear that the availability of a helpline service is crucial inevery tobacco control program. Nevertheless, to pass this policy tillit reaches the adoption part by the people and different creates abig hurdle for decision makers (Hill & Varone 2016). It is dueto the existence of regulations and rules already set in place thusleading to unending legislative processes which may either have apositive or negative impact of the service in provision. The policystated above can either be enacted through modification of existingregulations or creation on new legislations. The first processinvolves checking how the system fits into existing rules and lawsset in place to regulate such services. It is evident though thatcreation of new regulations is the best method as it allows fullimplementation of the policy as it influences the decisions andactions the concerned stakeholders are supposed to undertake toimplement the particular plan. The new policies do the modificationafter getting feedback on how adoption is taking place, and a needarises and requires the change in a specified part of the regulations(Anderson 2014). Rulemaking is a method of upgrading and changingcertain features in a policy so as to influence the implementation ina given direction. Thus in the process, it is Clear that rulemakingcreates new systems in-between and the changed rules become modifiedpolicies. The modification of policies is influenced by both theinternal and external parties thus a policy should have standards anddirectives put in place to help control the results of the system andto avoid derailment by parties that are not for the plan.
Many laws exist in the field of tobacco control. Their creation,which is related to some past policies set to regulate smoking arestill present currently. Many tobacco companies have lobbied for lawsthat help them to preserve the industry independence in advertisingand selling tobacco. These rules present difficulties inimplementation of new policies that oppose their presence. So as Tocounter this, a tobacco lobby was formed, and its success is evidentin curbing and preventing the passing of many tobacco controlpolicies, and this is evident in different stated (Oliver Innvar &Thomas 2014). However, due to this lobby having a bad public image,healthcare providers and other involved parties have used thisdisadvantage to expose the rot in this policies to the citizen andshow how different supporters work together to stop the creation ofpolicies regarding tobacco control. The power of the tobacco lobbyaffects adoption of new policies as it hinders implementation ofcontrol measures provided in the policy.
In Advocacy, a policy maker requires a set of approaches andstrategies useful in influencing various legislators to passspecified regulations concerning the policy.so as to simplify this apolicy maker should first identify people who are willing to becollaborative in the implementation of the plan. Another way isthrough the identification of and interacting with legislators whoseviews vary from those stated in the policy so as to know where theirarguments lie and formulate ways of countering them (Gugliucci 2014).Some other different methods are available too.An advocate shouldcall individual meetings and briefings to present an analysis of thepolicy to the legislators so as to help them understand itsframework. Use of letters and phone is also applicable in such cases.Public hearings, discussions and also holding public forums isappropriate in trying to influence lawmakers to support the policy.
It’s clear that good advocacy rests of a three-legged stool wherethe determination of its effectiveness requires all the three legs tobe in place. These three legs include the capital leg which showseverything happening in the area the policies are made, the communityleg showing everything going on in the community and at last themedia leg which encompasses everything the policy maker does tospread the word and the outlets used. Thus by having a follow-up onthis three pillars, an advocate comes up with the best ways ofinfluencing legislators. Different barriers arise in the advocacy ofthis policy. The major obstacle is the organizational barrier whichdoes not adopt the policy thus making them ineffective in the longrun (Mark Sanders & Richmond 2014). Such a hindrance requires toomuch time and resources to overcome but can be removed by thecreation of regulations that smoothen the adoption of the policy byall organizations. So as to make the policy more effective andincrease its rate of adoption, many parameters are available, andadvocates should explore all of them before deciding on the best oneto use.
Anderson, J. E.(2014). Public policymaking. Cengage Learning.
Gugliucci, M. R.(2014). Nursing Home Living: The Complexities and Potential.
Hill, M., &Varone, F. (2016). The public policy process. Routledge.
Mark, A. J.,Sanders, S. C., Mitchell, J. A., Seale, H., & Richmond, R. L.(2014). Smoke‐free outdoorareas: supporting the government to introduce tobaccocontrol policies. Australian and New Zealand periodical ofpublic health, 38(6), 518-523.
Oliver, K.,Innvar, S., Woodman, J., & Thomas, J. (2014). A systematic reviewof obstacles to and implementers of the use of evidence bypolicymakers. BMC health services research, 14(1),2.
No related posts.