IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v25y2008i5p393-410.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

U.S. Tobacco Control: Public Health, Political Economy, or Morality Policy?

Author

Listed:
  • Donley T. Studlar

Abstract

Tobacco control policy usually has been framed in terms of public health and political economy, but it also has been called a morality issue. Through a systematic historical analysis, this paper examines dimensions of morality policy and evaluates tobacco control in the United States for its fit with those characteristics. Moral concerns have been a part of tobacco control policy at certain times, first in the early twentieth century, and, more recently, since the mid‐1980s with the rise of “denormalization” of tobacco as a goal of some antitobacco organizations. Drawing from recent studies of other “morality” policy issues, it argues that tobacco control is a “blended” issue, one which can take on different dimensions depending on successful interest group framing. The adoption of Healthy Public Policy as a governmental goal has coincided with a movement toward a “secular morality” in the political culture, facilitating a broader appeal to the public.

Suggested Citation

  • Donley T. Studlar, 2008. "U.S. Tobacco Control: Public Health, Political Economy, or Morality Policy?," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 25(5), pages 393-410, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:25:y:2008:i:5:p:393-410
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-1338.2008.00343.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2008.00343.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2008.00343.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nathalie Burlone & Rebecca Grace Richmond, 2018. "Between morality and rationality: framing end-of-life care policy through narratives," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(3), pages 313-334, September.
    2. Donley Studlar & Gordon Burns, 2015. "Toward the permissive society? Morality policy agendas and policy directions in Western democracies," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 273-291, September.
    3. Raymond Tatalovich & Dane G. Wendell, 2018. "Expanding the scope and content of morality policy research: lessons from Moral Foundations Theory," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(4), pages 565-579, December.
    4. Yongjin Choi & Ashley M. Fox, 2022. "Fact‐value framework for adjudicating public health policy debates," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(6), pages 820-844, November.
    5. Schudson, Michael & Baykurt, Burcu, 2016. "How does a culture of health change? Lessons from the war on cigarettes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 289-296.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:25:y:2008:i:5:p:393-410. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.