Week 2 Discussion: Initial Post Due Wednesday By Midnight

Week 2 Discussion : Initial post due Wednesday by midnight EST

Your state has a forthcoming referendum concerning no smoking in public places including bars and restaurants. Follow the ten steps on page 137 on negotiation planning. A word response must be posted to the discussion forum. The post must be submitted by Wednesday at midnight. Each student is to post a reply to another student's posting (minimum 100 words) and must be posted by 9:00 pm on Sunday.

For each discussion, you are required to write an initial post (300 words) and one secondary post (200 words). The discussion forums will be worth 40 points apiece—25 points for the initial post and 15 points for the secondary post. For your initial post, you must have two academic peer-reviewed articles for references. You must get them from the library. There are directions at the top of our Moodle page showing how to utilize the library. Reply to a classmate with approximately 250 words.

Paper For Above instruction

The upcoming referendum on implementing a no-smoking policy in public venues such as bars and restaurants presents a complex negotiation challenge that requires strategic planning and stakeholder engagement. Applying the ten steps outlined on page 137 of the negotiation planning text offers a structured approach to address this issue effectively. These steps include defining your objectives, understanding the interests of all parties involved, assessing the environment, and developing a clear negotiation strategy.

In advocating for smoke-free public spaces, it is essential to consider the health implications for nonsmokers and the societal benefits, such as reduced health care costs and increased quality of life. Research indicates that comprehensive smoke-free laws significantly decrease exposure to secondhand smoke, which is linked to respiratory illnesses, cardiovascular diseases, and various forms of cancer (World Health Organization, 2022). Therefore, convincing stakeholders—business owners, residents, and policymakers—requires presenting compelling evidence of these health benefits along with economic data showing potential boosts in local economies due to increased patronage at smoke-free establishments.

Conversely, opponents may argue about personal freedoms and the economic impact on businesses, particularly bars and restaurants that rely heavily on smoking patrons. Addressing these concerns involves demonstrating that smoke-free policies do not necessarily weaken business revenue; studies have shown that establishments can thrive under smoke-free regulations as they attract non-smoking customers and reduce cleaning and health-related costs (Fichtenberg & Glantz, 2002). Negotiation steps such as building rapport, exploring options, and creating mutual gains are essential in persuading stakeholders to support the law's enactment.

Furthermore, public education campaigns are crucial to change perceptions and garner public support for smoke-free policies. Engaging community leaders and health organizations can lend credibility and help facilitate a broader acceptance of the law. This aligns with the negotiation step of developing communication strategies and fostering community involvement.

In conclusion, the success of the referendum depends on meticulous negotiation planning that considers all stakeholder interests, presents evidence-based arguments, and builds broad consensus. By following the ten negotiation steps, advocates can develop a comprehensive approach that maximizes the likelihood of passing the no-smoking law, ultimately leading to healthier public spaces and improved community well-being.

References

• Fichtenberg, C. M., & Glantz, S. A. (2002). Effect of smoke-free workplaces on smoking behaviour: Systematic review. British Medical Journal, 325(7357), 188-194.
• World Health Organization. (2022). WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic 2022. Geneva: WHO Press.
• Page, R. L., et al. (2020). Strategies for negotiation in public health policy. Public Health Nursing, 37(3), 341-347.
• Schmidt, H., & Larkey, L. K. (2019). Building stakeholder support for public health legislation: Strategies and case studies. Health Promotion Practice, 20(2), 282-291.
• Stewart, J., & Manwaring, S. (2017). Negotiating policy change: Building consensus in public health. American Journal of Public Health, 107(5), 707-713.