Improving Tobacco-Free Advocacy on College Campuses: A Novel Strategy to Aid in the Understanding of Student Perceptions About Policy Proposals

Abstract

Objective: Tobacco-control policy proposals are usually met with opposition on college campuses. Research to understand students’ viewpoints about health-related policy proposals and messaging strategies, however, does not exist. This study investigated students’ perceptions about a smoke-free policy proposal to help understand their positions of support and opposition and to inform the development of effective messaging strategies. Participants: In January 2012, 1,266 undergraduate students from a midwestern university completed an online questionnaire about smoke-free campus policies. Methods: Responses were coded and analyzed using Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count software and chi-square, independent-samples t tests, and binary logistic models. Results: Most students who supported a smoke-free policy considered environmental or aesthetic conditions, whereas most opponents used personal freedom frames of thought. Supporters viewed smoking policies in personal terms, and opponents suggested means-ends policy reasoning. Conclusions: Taken together, points of reference and emotions about proposed policies provided insight about participants’ perspectives to help inform effective policy advocacy efforts.     

Does federal flood hazard mitigation assistance affect community rating system participation?

With the inexorable march of climate change, increased flooding is inevitable. Understanding the feedback between federal flood mitigation policies and the ways in which local governments build flood resilience is a significant gap in the literature. In particular, the effect that federal flood mitigation grants have on the intensity of local flood mitigation is nonexistent. This work measures flood risk mitigation by using the level of participation in FEMA's Community Rating System (CRS). Communities that participate in the CRS and undertake mitigation are awarded points; more points imply a higher level of participation. Since its inception in 1990, CRS communities have received considerably more federal pre-disaster flood mitigation grants compared to non-CRS communities. This study assesses the effect of federal pre-disaster flood mitigation grants on the level of participation in the CRS program. We use data on Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs and CRS participation data between 2010 and 2015. We link these data to flood risk and socioeconomic information. Our results indicate (i) federal pre-disaster flood mitigation grants do not appear to significantly influence the level of CRS participation, (ii) the effect of flood risk and socioeconomic factors on the level of CRS participation are mixed, and (iii) the current level of CRS participation is influenced by the previous level of CRS participation, which is not tied to federal pre-disaster flood mitigation grant. These findings add to the growing discussions on the drivers and barriers of local flood risk mitigation.