ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2017
Advocacy coalitions involved in California's menu labeling policy debate: Exploring coalition structure, policy beliefs, resources, and strategies.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Identifying barriers and facilitators in the development and implementation of government-led food environment policies: a systematic review.Nutrition reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Longitudinal policy surveillance of state obesity legislation in California, 1999-2020.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Examining the Role and Strategies of Advocacy Coalitions in California's Statewide Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax Debate (2001-2018).American journal of health promotion : AJHP · 2024Article
- Emergence of National Nutrition Policy in the Lao People's Democratic Republic: an analysis of collaborations between governmental and external actors.Tropical medicine and health · 2023Article
- Analysis of stakeholders' responses to the food warning labels regulation in Mexico.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- News coverage of Mexico's front-of-package food label policy.BMJ global health · 2022Article
- Implementation of two policies to extend maternity leave and further restrict marketing of breast milk substitutes in Vietnam: a qualitative study.Health policy and planning · 2022Article
- Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods.Health research policy and systems · 2022Review
- County-Level Recreational Marijuana Policies and Local Policy Changes in Colorado and Washington State (2012-2019).The Milbank quarterly · 2021Article
- Who influences nutrition policy space using international trade and investment agreements? A global stakeholder analysis.Globalization and health · 2021Article
- Regulating the Fast-Food Landscape: Canadian News Media Representation of the Healthy Menu Choices Act.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Use of research evidence in state health policymaking: Menu labeling policy in California.Preventive medicine reports · 2019Article
- Understanding Health Promotion Policy Processes: A Study of the Government Adoption of the Achievement Program in Victoria, Australia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
- Factors affecting engagement between academic faculty and decision-makers: learnings and priorities for a school of public health.Health research policy and systems · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Advocacy coalitions often play an important role in the state health policymaking process, yet little is known about their structure, composition, and behavior. In 2008, California became the first state to enact a menu labeling law. Using the advocacy coalition framework, we examine different facets of the coalitions involved in California's menu labeling policy debate. We use a qualitative research approach to identify coalition members and explore their expressed beliefs and policy arguments, resources, and strategies by analyzing legislative documents (n = 87) and newspaper articles (n = 78) produced between 1999 and 2009. Between 2003 and 2008, six menu labeling bills were introduced in the state's legislature. We found the issue received increasing media attention during this period. We identified two advocacy coalitions involved in the debate-a public health (PH) coalition and an industry coalition. State organizations acted as coalition leaders and participated for a longer duration than elected officials. The structure and composition of each coalition varied. PH coalition leadership and membership notably increased compared to the industry coalition. The PH coalition, led by nonprofit PH and health organizations, promoted a clear and consistent message around informed decision making. The industry coalition, led by a state restaurant association, responded with cost and implementation arguments. Each coalition used various resources and strategies to advance desired outcomes. PH coalition leaders were particularly effective at using resources and employing advocacy strategies, which included engaging state legislators as coalition members, using public opinion polls and information, and leveraging media resources to garner support. Policy precedence and a local policy push emerged as important policymaking strategies. Areas for future research on the state health policymaking process are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.