The impact of smoke-free policies on smoking at outdoor sports clubs:A qualitative study

Objectives Smoking may still occur at sports clubs with an outdoor smoke-free policy (SFP). This study aims to map the occurrence of smoking at various sports clubs in the Netherlands and to understand why smoking occurs at some clubs but not at others. Study design This was a qualitative design in the form of semistructured interviews. Methods Semistructured interviews (n = 34) were held online with smoking and non-smoking members of 17 Dutch outdoor sports clubs (in field hockey, korfball, football, and tennis) with an outdoor SFP. Data were analyzed using content analysis. Results We identified four situations where smoking still occurred: (1) directly at the entrance, (2) at some distance from the entrance, (3) in particular places on the premises, and (4) in various places or on occasions when alcohol is consumed. Smoking directly at the entrance was most often perceived as a bothersome situation that was difficult to avoid. The occurrence of these situations differed per sports club depending on the scope of the SFP (the comprehensiveness of the SFP and the presence or absence of a smoking area) and factors influencing policy compliance (physical characteristics of the sports club's premises, the presence or absence of children, and several enforcement difficulties). Conclusion In some sports clubs, smoking remained common on the premises despite an outdoor SFP. Exposure to second-hand smoke might be reduced by formulating a comprehensive SFP, improving policy compliance also in situations where children are absent, and organizing the enforcement of the policy

Why Secondary Schools Do Not Implement Far-Reaching Smoke-Free Policies: Exploring Deep Core, Policy Core, and Secondary Beliefs of School Staff in the Netherlands

Background: Secondary schools that implement smoke-free policies are confronted with students who start smoking outside their premises. One solution is to complement smoke-free policies with prohibitions for all students to leave the school area during school hours, technically making school hours a smoke-free period. However, there are strikingly few Dutch secondary schools that implement this approach. This study explores why staff members in the Netherlands decide not to implement smoke-free school hours for all students. Method: We interviewed 13 staff members, with different functions, from four secondary schools. The analysis was informed by the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to delve into the values, rationales, and assumptions of staff with the aim to identify deep core, policy core, and secondary beliefs. Results: We identified six beliefs. Two deep core beliefs are that schools should provide adolescents the freedom to learn how to responsibly use their personal autonomy and that schools should only interfere if adolescents endanger or bother others. Three policy core beliefs identified included the following: that smoking is not a pressing issue for schools to deal with; that schools should demarcate their jurisdiction to intervene in adolescents’ lives in time, space, and precise risk behavior; and that implementing smoke-free school hours would interfere with maintaining positive student-staff relationships. One secondary belief identified was that smoke-free school hours would be impossible to enforce consistently. Conclusion: This paper was the first to demonstrate the many beliefs explaining why schools refrain from voluntary implementing far-reaching smoke-free policies

Determinants of regional differences in lung cancer mortality in the Netherlands

Although regional differences in lung cancer mortality are likely to be attributable to regional differences in tobacco smoking, studies in various countries found only weak relationships. This paper aimed at explaining regional differences in lung cancer mortality in the Netherlands. In a first step, clues for the role of smoking were obtained from a detailed description of regional mortality differences. These differences were found to be strongly determined by cohort effects: they vary between birth cohorts, and have been stable for over 30 years. Regional mortality differences reflect a diffusion of the lung cancer epidemic from high-income regions to low-income regions. These findings are suggestive of a relationship with regional differences in trends in cigarette smoking. In a second step, by means of multiple regression analysis, mortality differences in 1980–84 were related to available data on cigarette smoking and two other possible risk factors: work in transport and manufacturing industry, and air contamination. The independent variables referred to the 1970s. Positive associations with various smoking measures were found for women, but for men the associations were weak or non-existent. Mortality differences among men 45–64 years were associated with work in transport and manufacturing industry. Strong associations w