Legitimacy of stakeholder voices in tobacco control in Aotearoa New Zealand.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Maria Hepi, Mathew Walton, Andrew Waa, Lani Teddy, Lindsey Te Ata Tū MacDonald, Sudesh Raj Sharma
{"title":"Legitimacy of stakeholder voices in tobacco control in Aotearoa New Zealand.","authors":"Maria Hepi, Mathew Walton, Andrew Waa, Lani Teddy, Lindsey Te Ata Tū MacDonald, Sudesh Raj Sharma","doi":"10.1136/tc-2025-059791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Achieving equitable and effective tobacco control policy in Aotearoa New Zealand requires an understanding of the broader policy system in which such policies are developed. This study applied a critical systems lens, using boundary critique, to explore how certain perspectives and actors become legitimised or excluded in the tobacco policy space. In Critical Systems Heuristics (CSH), a 'boundary' refers to the practical line that determines what and who are considered inside the system, such as which goals, actors and knowledge are included and what is positioned outside it. Using this lens, we examined how legitimacy is constructed and contested within the tobacco control system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The research employed CSH to guide two sets of qualitative interviews: one with Indigenous Māori participants (n=10) and another with non-Māori participants (n=14). Thematic analysis was conducted separately for each group focusing on the four domains of CSH, knowledge, motivation, legitimacy and power followed by a comparative analysis to identify areas of overlap and divergence in perspectives. This paper focuses on the legitimacy domain as findings in this area were central to participant discussions and echoed in the other domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three key legitimacy boundary issues emerged from the analysis: (1) whether tobacco control policy should prioritise a tobacco-free versus addiction-free narrative; (2) the tension between biomedical and holistic health paradigms and (3) whether individual rights or collective rights should be the foundation of policy direction. These boundary issues influenced who was seen as a legitimate actor in policy development and how policy processes were shaped.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Understanding and navigating these boundary issues is crucial for progressing tobacco control policy that is both equitable and effective. Greater critical awareness of how perspectives are legitimised or marginalised can support more inclusive and transformative policy approaches in Aotearoa.</p>","PeriodicalId":23145,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Control","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/tc-2025-059791","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Achieving equitable and effective tobacco control policy in Aotearoa New Zealand requires an understanding of the broader policy system in which such policies are developed. This study applied a critical systems lens, using boundary critique, to explore how certain perspectives and actors become legitimised or excluded in the tobacco policy space. In Critical Systems Heuristics (CSH), a 'boundary' refers to the practical line that determines what and who are considered inside the system, such as which goals, actors and knowledge are included and what is positioned outside it. Using this lens, we examined how legitimacy is constructed and contested within the tobacco control system.

Methods: The research employed CSH to guide two sets of qualitative interviews: one with Indigenous Māori participants (n=10) and another with non-Māori participants (n=14). Thematic analysis was conducted separately for each group focusing on the four domains of CSH, knowledge, motivation, legitimacy and power followed by a comparative analysis to identify areas of overlap and divergence in perspectives. This paper focuses on the legitimacy domain as findings in this area were central to participant discussions and echoed in the other domains.

Results: Three key legitimacy boundary issues emerged from the analysis: (1) whether tobacco control policy should prioritise a tobacco-free versus addiction-free narrative; (2) the tension between biomedical and holistic health paradigms and (3) whether individual rights or collective rights should be the foundation of policy direction. These boundary issues influenced who was seen as a legitimate actor in policy development and how policy processes were shaped.

Conclusions: Understanding and navigating these boundary issues is crucial for progressing tobacco control policy that is both equitable and effective. Greater critical awareness of how perspectives are legitimised or marginalised can support more inclusive and transformative policy approaches in Aotearoa.

新西兰奥特罗阿地区烟草控制中利益相关者声音的合法性。
导言:在新西兰奥特罗阿实现公平和有效的烟草控制政策需要了解制定此类政策的更广泛的政策体系。本研究采用关键系统视角,使用边界批判,探索某些观点和行为者如何在烟草政策领域被合法化或被排除在外。在关键系统启发式(CSH)中,“边界”是指确定系统内部考虑的内容和人员的实际线,例如包括哪些目标,参与者和知识以及定位在系统之外的内容。通过这一视角,我们研究了在烟草控制系统中合法性是如何构建和争议的。方法:采用CSH指导两组定性访谈:一组是土著Māori参与者(n=10),另一组是non-Māori参与者(n=14)。对每一组分别进行专题分析,重点关注社会安全、知识、动机、合法性和权力四个领域,然后进行比较分析,以确定观点重叠和分歧的领域。本文的重点是合法性领域,因为该领域的研究结果是参与者讨论的核心,并在其他领域得到了回应。结果:分析中出现了三个关键的合法性边界问题:(1)控烟政策是否应该优先考虑无烟草与无成瘾的叙述;(2)生物医学和整体健康范式之间的紧张关系;(3)个人权利还是集体权利应该成为政策方向的基础。这些边界问题影响到谁被视为政策制定中的合法行动者,以及政策进程如何形成。结论:理解和处理这些边界问题对于推动公平有效的烟草控制政策至关重要。提高对观点如何被合法化或边缘化的批判性意识,可以支持在澳大利亚采取更具包容性和变革性的政策方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Tobacco Control
Tobacco Control 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
26.90%
发文量
223
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Tobacco Control is an international peer-reviewed journal covering the nature and consequences of tobacco use worldwide; tobacco''s effects on population health, the economy, the environment, and society; efforts to prevent and control the global tobacco epidemic through population-level education and policy changes; the ethical dimensions of tobacco control policies; and the activities of the tobacco industry and its allies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书