ArticleHealth policy and planning2024
Collaborative dynamics and shared motivation: exploring tobacco control policy development in Zambia.
Article in Health policy and planning, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identifying how tobacco industry-targeted communities perceive California's tobacco endgame initiative.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2025Article
- The puzzle of intersectoral collaboration and health. Revisiting implementation research.Health policy and planning · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In Zambia, efforts to produce a tobacco control policy have stalled for over a decade, and the country is not yet close to developing one. Limited studies have explored the dynamics in this policy process and how they affect the attainment of policy goals and outcomes. This study explored how collaborative dynamics within tobacco control policy development shaped shared motivation among stakeholders in Zambia. The study used a qualitative case study design that adopted a collaborative governance lens, comprising an in-depth exploration of the tobacco control policy working group meetings and their internal collaborative dynamics. The integrative framework for collaborative governance, which identifies mutual trust, mutual understanding, internal legitimacy and shared commitment as key elements of shared motivation, was adapted for this study. Data were collected from 27 key informants and analysed using thematic analysis. Several collaborative dynamics thwarted mutual trust among tobacco control stakeholders, including concerns about associated loyalties, fear of a ban on tobacco production, silo-mentality and lack of comprehensive dialogue. All stakeholders agreed that the limited sharing of information on tobacco control and the lack of reliable local evidence on the tobacco burden hindered mutual understanding. Diverse factors hampered internal legitimacy, including sector representatives' lack of authority and the perceived lack of contextualization of the proposed policy content. Acknowledgement of the need for multisectoral action, lack of political will from other sectors and limited local allocation of funds to the process were some of the factors that shaped shared commitment. To accelerate the development of tobacco control policies in Zambia and elsewhere, policymakers must adopt strategies founded on shared motivation that deliberately create opportunities for open discourse and respectful interactions, promote a cultural shift towards collaborative information sharing and address unequal power relations to enable shaping of appropriate tobacco control actions in respective sectors.
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.