Policy Influencer and General Public Support for Proposed Alcohol Healthy Public Policy Options in Alberta and Quebec, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Although alcohol consumption is considered a major modifiable risk factor for chronic disease, policies to reduce alcohol-related harm remain low on the Canadian policy agenda. The objective of this study was to understand support for population-level healthy public policies to reduce alcohol-related harm by assessing the attitudes of policy influencers and the public in two Canadian provinces, and by sociodemographic characteristics. METHOD: A stratified sample of the general public (n = 2,400) and a census sample of policy influencers (n = 302) in Alberta and Quebec participated in the 2016 Chronic Disease Prevention Survey, which included questions to assess support for alcohol-specific policies. Differences in levels of support were determined by calculating differences in the proportion of support for alcohol control policies, comparing groups by regional and sociodemographic characteristics. The modified Nuffield Council on Bioethics Intervention Ladder was used to assess support according to the level of individual intrusiveness. RESULTS: We found that policy influencers and general public respondents were supportive of both information-based policies, with the exception of warning labels, and more restrictive policies targeting youth (e.g., enforcement). Both groups were less favorable to alcohol-specific policies that guided choice through disincentives (e.g., taxation). There were more differences in policy support by sociodemographic characteristics among the public. CONCLUSIONS: For health advocates to advance policies to reduce alcohol-related harms at the population level, they will need to mobilize additional support for more intrusive, yet more effective, policy interventions. Advocacy efforts should focus on communicating the effectiveness and positive outcomes of these interventions to help garner support.

Using the intervention ladder to examine policy influencer and general public support for potential tobacco control policies in Alberta and Quebec. / Utilisation d'une échelle d'intervention pour analyser le soutien à d'éventuelles politiques de lutte contre le tabagisme de la part du grand public et d'influenceurs en matière de politiques en Alberta et au Québec.

OBJECTIVE: To assess general public and policy influencer support for population-level tobacco control policies in two Canadian provinces. METHODS: We implemented the Chronic Disease Prevention Survey in 2016 to a census sample of policy influencers (n = 302) and a random sample of members of the public (n = 2400) in Alberta and Quebec, Canada. Survey respondents ranked their support for tobacco control policy options using a Likert-style scale, with aggregate responses presented as net favourable percentages. Levels of support were further analyzed by coding each policy option using the Nuffield Council on Bioethics intervention ladder framework, to assess its level of intrusiveness on personal autonomy. RESULTS: Policy influencers and the public considered the vast majority of tobacco control policy options as "extremely" or "very" favourable, although policy influencers in Alberta and Quebec differed on over half the policies, with stronger support in Quebec. Policy influencers and the public strongly supported more intrusive tobacco control policy options, despite anticipated effects on personal autonomy (i.e. for policies targeting children/youth and emerging tobacco products like electronic cigarettes). They indicated less support for fiscally based tobacco control policies (i.e. taxation), despite these policies being highly effective. CONCLUSION: Overall, policy influencers and the general public strongly supported more restrictive tobacco control policies. This study further highlights policies where support among both population groups was unanimous (potential "quick wins" for health advocates). It also highlights areas where additional advocacy work is required to communicate the population-health benefit of tobacco control policies.

Healthy Public Policy Options to Promote Physical Activity for Chronic Disease Prevention: Understanding Canadian Policy Influencer and General Public Preferences.

BACKGROUND: Attitudes and beliefs of policy influencers and the general public toward physical activity policy may support or impede population-level action, requiring improved understanding of aggregate preferences toward policies that promote physical activity. METHODS: In 2016, the Chronic Disease Prevention Survey was administered to a census sample of policy influencers (n = 302) and a stratified random sample of the public (n = 2400) in Alberta and Québec. Using net favorable percentages and the Nuffield Council on Bioethics' intervention ladder framework to guide analysis, the authors examined support for evidence-based healthy public policies to increase physical activity levels. RESULTS: Less intrusive policy options (ie, policies that are not always the most impactful) tended to have higher levels of support than policies that eliminated choice. However, there was support for certain types of policies affecting influential determinants of physical activity such as the built environment (ie, provided they enabled rather than restricted choice) and school settings (ie, focusing on children and youth). Overall, the general public indicated stronger levels of support for more physical activity policy options than policy influencers. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' findings may be useful for health advocates in identifying support for evidence-based healthy public policies affecting more influential determinants of physical activity.

Assessing general public and policy influencer support for healthy public policies to promote healthy eating at the population level in two Canadian provinces.

OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare the favourability of healthy public policy options to promote healthy eating from the perspective of members of the general public and policy influencers in two Canadian provinces. DESIGN: The Chronic Disease Prevention Survey, administered in 2016, required participants to rank their level of support for different evidence-based policy options to promote healthy eating at the population level. Pearson's χ 2 significance testing was used to compare support between groups for each policy option and results were interpreted using the Nuffield Council on Bioethics' intervention ladder framework. SETTING: Alberta and Québec, Canada.ParticipantsMembers of the general public (n 2400) and policy influencers (n 302) in Alberta and Québec. RESULTS: General public and policy influencer survey respondents were more supportive of healthy eating policies if they were less intrusive on individual autonomy. However, in comparing levels of support between groups, we found policy influencers indicated significantly stronger support overall for healthy eating policy options. We also found that policy influencers in Québec tended to show more support for more restrictive policy options than their counterparts from Alberta. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that additional knowledge brokering may be required to increase support for more intrusive yet impactful evidence-based policy interventions; and that the overall lower levels of support among members of the public may impede policy influencers from taking action on policies to promote healthy eating.

Advancing Strategies for Agenda Setting by Health Policy Coalitions: A Network Analysis of the Canadian Chronic Disease Prevention Survey.

Health in all policies can address chronic disease morbidity and mortality by increasing population-level physical activity and healthy eating, and reducing tobacco and alcohol use. Both governmental and nongovernmental policy influencers are instrumental for health policy that modifies political, economic, and social environments. Policy influencers are informed and persuaded by coalitions that support or oppose changing the status quo. Empirical research examining policy influencers' contact with coalitions, as a social psychological exposure with health policy outcomes, can benefit from application of health communication theories. Accordingly, we analyzed responses to the 2014 Chronic Disease Prevention Survey for 184 Canadian policy influencers employed in provincial governments, municipalities, large workplaces, school boards, and the media. In addition to contact levels with coalitions, respondents' jurisdiction, organization, and ideology were analyzed as potential moderators. Calculating authority score centrality using network analysis, we determined health policy supporters to be more central in policy influencer networks, and theorized their potential to impact health policy public agenda setting via priming and framing processes. We discuss the implications of our results as presenting opportunities to more effectively promote health policy through priming and framing by coordinating coalitions across risk behaviors to advance a societal imperative for chronic disease prevention.

Advocacy coalition impacts on healthy public policy-oriented learning in Alberta, Canada (2009-2016): A difference-in-differences analysis.

Since 2009, the Alberta Policy Coalition for Chronic Disease Prevention (APCCP) has pursued policy, systems, and environmental change strategies engaging policy elites to promote healthy public policy for chronic disease prevention in Alberta, Canada. Employing Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) vocabulary to facilitate our analysis, we examined whether concerted advocacy by the APCCP shifted elites' belief system structures over an eight year period compared to the general public as a baseline, by fostering healthy public policy-oriented learning. As data for the study, we employed a trend design series of cross-sectional Chronic Disease Prevention Surveys in Alberta, Canada between 2009 and 2016, comparing policy elite responses in 2009 (n = 183) and 2016 (n = 174) with general public responses in 2010 (n = 1203) and 2016 (n = 1200). Drawing on four scales developed in a published exploratory factor analysis, we examined changes in elite versus public beliefs with respect to (i) behavioral etiology, (ii) socio-ecological etiology, (iii) individual responsibility, and (iv) societal responsibility. Each scale was analyzed for reliability using Cohen's alpha (α), tested for sample mean (µ) value differences with analysis of variance (ANOVA) (p < .05), and compared between groups over time using difference-in-differences analysis. Cohen's alphas above approximately 0.700 indicated acceptable scale reliability (0.692≤α ≤ 0.879). ANOVA testing indicated significant group mean difference for every scale but societal responsibility among elites (µ2009 = 13.2, µ2016 = 13.7; p = .06). Standardized beta coefficients (ß) presented significant differences between elites and the public for three of four scales, excepting behavioral etiology (ß = -0.009, p = .746). In ACF terms, transformation of elites' policy core beliefs is necessary, but not sufficient, for major policy change such as healthy public policy. Spanning provincial policy communities relevant to whole-of-government intervention for chronic disease prevention, our results provide evidence to support the plausibility of long term socio-ecological strategies aiming to foster policy-oriented learning among elites by advocacy coalitions like the APCCP.

Check the score: Field validation of Street Smart Walk Score in Alberta, Canada.

Walk Score® is a proprietary walkability metric that ranks locations by proximity to destinations, with emerging health promotion applications for increasing walking as physical activity. Currently, field validations of Walk Score® have only occurred in metropolitan regions of the United States; moreover, many studies employ an earlier Walk Score® version utilizing straight line distance. To address this gap, we conducted a field validation of the newest, network-based metric for three municipal types along a rural-urban continuum in Alberta, Canada. In 2015, using street-level systematic observations collected in Bonnyville, Medicine Hat, and North Central Edmonton in 2008 (part of the Community Health and the Built Environment (CHBE) project), we reverse engineered 2181 scores with the network Walk Score® algorithm. We computed means, 95% confidence intervals, and t-tests (α = 0.05) for both sets of scores. Applying the Clifford-Richardson adjustment for spatial autocorrelation, we calculated Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficients (rho, rs) and adjusted p-values to measure the strength of association between the derived scores and original network scores provided by Walk Score®. Spearman's rho for scores were very high for Bonnyville (rs = 0.950, adjusted p < 0.001), and high for Medicine Hat (rs = 0.790, adjusted p < 0.001) and North Central Edmonton (rs = 0.763, adjusted p < 0.001). High to very high correlations between derived scores and Walk Scores® field validated this metric across small, medium, and large population centres in Alberta, Canada. However, we suggest caution in interpreting Walk Score® for planning and evaluating health promotion interventions, since the strength of association between destinations and walking may vary across different municipal types.