CLICK4HP Archives

Health Promotion on the Internet

CLICK4HP@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Geoff Rowlands <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Health Promotion on the Internet (Discussion)
Date:
Tue, 21 May 1996 09:36:05 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (102 lines)
Don't know of any specific literature, but here's a story:

I introduced the smoking bylaw in Vancouver in 1986 which was the first in
Canada to involve the workplace as well as public spaces.  This required a
critical mass of support (I appreciate that a "critical mass" is not
necessarily the same as "community mobilization".)

It involved five distinct management phases:  1.) thorough market analysis
(commissioned through Dr Fred Bass), 2.) key stakeholder analysis with
specific approaches for positive, neutral and negative stakeholders,  3.)
expert legal involvement,  4.) tailored approaches for the key stakeholder
groups, 5.) thorough marketing.

The second-hand smoking problem was explained to all stakeholders.  (It is
very important (and probably essential) to "sell" the problem before selling
the solution or action).  The stakeholders who were analyzed as likely to be
"positive" or "neutral to positive" were approached personally or in writing
and asked to make their opinions known to the legislators.

This would have been greatly simplified if they could have been accessed
directly through an e-mail mailing list.

The marketing approach included mailouts, tv and radio etc.  We would also
have used bulletin boards and listservs etc today.

I had publicized my office phone number for members of the public to call.
In the six weeks following implementation, we received 2600 calls and I
would interpret only about 30 of them to be wholly negative.  Most were
extremely favourable.   I would have also used my an e-mail address today.

Geoff



At 09:22 21/05/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Thanks Dennis, for your summary.  I am interested more broadly in
>mobilization of potential stakeholders in advocacy issues. Are we as
>health promoters using outdated techniques?  Is there a literature
>describing evaluations of effective mobilization methods?
>
>Two recent events
>provided some focus for me on the issue.  Both deal with tobacco
>legislation.
>
>1.  Waterloo Region (Southern Ontario, Canada) Council is considering
>restrictions on  smoking,
>especially in restaurants in the region.  There have been several
>successes in attempts to mobililize expressions of support:
>-  several letters to the editor and "second opinion" pieces on the
>editorial page of the local papers (especially in response to one city
>councillor who responded negatively to the proposed legislation)
>-  40+ delegations to a health & social services committee meeting
>considering the proposal
>
>However, the local voluntary group (Council for a Smoke-Free Waterloo
>Region) has had less success in encouraging residents to directly write
>or call their councillors in order to keep up the pressure.
>
>2.  At a recent conference of tobacco researchers, programmers and policy
>makers, participants were encouraged to write or phone our federal
>government about new legislation to replace Canada's ban on tobacco
>advertising.  My sense is that even in the room of individuals committed
>to tobacco use reduction, relatively few will follow through.
>
>Dennis got two responses to his plea.  Are there better ways?
>
>On Sat, 18 May 1996, d.raphael wrote:
>
>> Dear Click for HP'ers:
>>
>> The facilitator of this list-serve has asked that I report on the effects
of our plea for
>> community support related to opposing front-yard parking in the city of
Toronto,
>> Canada.
>>
>> In response to my posting (apparently sent to over 250 individuals
concerned with
>> health promotion), requesting that letters of support for tougher
legislation be sent
>> to City of Toronto Mayor Hall, the following was received:
>>
>> 1) A statement from a user in Missouri, indicating that this is an issue
there as
>> well. (not sent to Mayor)
>>
>> 2) An inquiry from a city assistant in Edmonton. (sent to Mayor)
>>
>...snip
>
>--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===-
>Steve Manske,   Health Behaviour Research Group, U Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1
>Ph: 519-888-4747 x6552 Fax: 746-8171 Email: [log in to unmask]
>--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===--===-
>
>
Geoff Rowlands
Partner
Health Management Resource Group
Vancouver, British Columbia
Voice (604) 730 0121   Fax (604) 730 0120

ATOM RSS1 RSS2