Preventing tobacco use and harm: what is evidence based policy?

The majority of tobacco users commence in early to mid-adolescence. Tobacco smoking can be characterised as a chronic, relapsing disorder. While risk increases with amount smoked, there is no safe level of use (i.e., all use is risky). Duration of use is the most important predictor of premature death with the majority of excess morbidity and mortality avoidable if people quit before middle age. Investment in initiatives that reduce smoking among pregnant women and those at risk of cardiovascular disease provide quickest returns -in reduced health care episodes and expenditure.  Measures that successfully reduce smoking among parents probably reduce smoking uptake by children, and high levels of smoking among both children and parents appear to be associated with higher levels of illicit drug use.
The evidence base for pharmcotherapies in the treatment of tobacco dependence is very strong. Population-level initiatives such as tax increases, mass media-led campaigns and smoke-free policies are all highly cost-effective in reducing population-smoking levels, including among children and young people.
Australian tobacco control initiatives have been based on "social ecology" conceptualisations of the problem, which acknowledge the pivotal role of the media in shaping social values, and public and political opinion.
Broad social change, as well as more focused prevention and cessation initiatives, has drawn heavily on research findings from the behavioural sciences. Considerable effort (mainly, in Australian, in the NGO sector) has gone into documenting policy inputs and monitoring impact and outcome measures.
This chapter discusses why conceptualising tobacco-related harm from legal, economic and social policy perspectives should also help build support for tobacco control policy among academic and practising economists and lawyers, and in the business, welfare and government sectors.

Refugee law: time for a fundamental re-think: need as the criterion for assistance

Concern that the definition of refugee based on race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion found in 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees is unduly narrow and arbitrary and should be replaced by a definition reflecting the concept of deprivation and need.

Refugee law: the irrelevance of the framers` intentions

The Convention relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 ("the Convention") is over fifty years old. It is the most comprehensive legally binding international standard for the treatment of refugees.' The Convention governs the rights of refugees and the obligations of ratifying State parties towards refugees. The key aspect of the Convention is article 1A(2), which sets out the Convention definition of a refugee. It provides that a refugee is a person who: Owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his or her nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.2 At the international law level the definition has remained (effectively)3 unchanged during this period. However, there has been a considerable amount of uncertainty at the domestic level concerning the precise meaning that should be given to important aspects of the definition, such as "particular social group" and "persecution". Given that the Convention is the principal international instrument dealing with the rights of refugees (since it was ratified by Denmark in 1952, 140 states have acceded to the Convention)4 and the importance of the interests and indeterminate nature of several aspects of the definition of refugee, the interpretive approach adopted in relation to the Convention is of considerable importance.

Race as political strategy by US presidential candidates: a case study

Race has played an important part in US presidential politics in contemporary history. Different political parties and candidates have followed covert strategies playing on the prejudices of white voters both cognitively and emotionally by linking racerelated issues to the majority's individual and group interests. This elite discourse carried to the public by the mainstream media, along with media's practices of stereotyping, priming, framing and agenda setting, help to justify racial prejudice, discrimination against minorities and their marginalized status, while maintaining the status quo. Taking the social constructionist position, this case study examines the opinions expressed by a sample of undecided voters selected from different geographic locations at various stages of the 1992 US presidential campaign under the themes 'Candidates' racial prejudice' and 'Race is used as political strategy by candidates.'

Law-and-order politics, public-opinion polls, and the media

Over the past two decades, considerable political rhetoric has focused on the need to get tough on crime. Justification for this hard-line approach has been the public's apparent concem about rising crime rates and its increasing dissatisfaction with criminal sentencing. In this paper, we consider characteristics both of the measurement of public opinion and of the influences upon public opinion that may contribute to the depiction of a fearful, punitive community. In particular, we identify sources of bias in the methods and contexts of opinion-polling that promote a distorted representation of the discrepancy between community expectations of sentencing and the practices of the judiciary. We argue that the practices of pollsters, politicians, and media combine to create a self-sustaining obstacle to considered community discussion of crime and criminal sentencing.

Sceptical partisans: How citizens think about political finance

This article investigates how citizens form their opinions on political-finance issues. Two distinct mechanisms are elaborated. First, citizens may be ‘faithful followers’, adopting positions that reflect their partisan loyalties. Second, citizens may be ‘sceptical’ and lean against cues from their party leaders. Drawing on a survey of Australian attitudes to political finance, I assess the extent to which predictions from these theories are observed in reality. The evidence suggests that Australians interpret political finance as ‘sceptical partisans’, broadly sceptical of political elites, while retaining partisan loyalties that are triggered when two conditions are satisfied: the issue has obvious partisan implications, but encouragement of partisan impulses does not threaten the competitiveness of elections.

Public opinion, social cohesion and the politics of immigration in South Korea

This article analyses public opinion in order to explore the politics of immigration in South Korea. It argues that there are divergent views about immigration and the obligations of the host society to accommodate migrants. Younger, better-educated citizens are representative of a majority that has a generally positive view of immigrants and immigration. A sizeable minority of older and less well-educated citizens, however, is warier of immigration and its effects on South Korean society. Men were more likely than women to have a positive view of immigration, but the differences along gender lines were small. The article also finds that attitudes towards immigration depend to a significant degree on how migrants are described. It thereby highlights the possibility that South Korea’s leaders could use immigration for political gain while also seeking to attract new migrants in order to resolve the country’s economic and demographic problems.

Cycles in public opinion and the dynamics of stable party systems

We study a dynamic model of elections where many parties may enter or exit political competition. At each election a new political leadership arrives for each party. The leadership cannot choose the party's platform (ideological identities are fixed) but must decide whether or not to contest the election. Contesting elections is costly and this cost is higher if the party has recently been inactive. The distribution of voters' ideal policies, or public opinion, changes over time via a Markov process with a state independent persistence parameter. We characterise stable party systems where the set of contestants is invariant to the recent most observed opinion. We show that stable party systems exist only when public opinion is sufficiently volatile, while highly persistent moods lead to instability and change in the party system whenever public opinion changes.