Environmental measures to help individuals protect themselves can work together with population-based public policies. Environmental and occupational interventions for primary prevention of cancer and other NCDs must also be directed at individuals. Many members of the public remain unaware of common environmental carcinogens such as radon and even secondhand smoke or manufacturing and combustion by-products that are released into the environment. Environmental and occupational risk communication should be emphasized; public awareness and perception of risk can be improved using social marketing techniques and by involving the media. For example, school-based programs focused on preventing skin cancer could target vulnerable populations, such as children and fair-skinned individuals, and encourage them to avoid too much sunlight at midday and to use personal protection measures. An example of improving individual and community behaviors concerning sun protection was the Pool Cool program () in the United States, an educational prevention program against skin cancer directed at children enrolled in swim lessons, their parents, and staff at outdoor swimming pools. Reasons for successful implementation included the provision of a toolkit, ease of implementing measures, and field coordinators’ support. As social norms, policies, and participation in the program increased, sunburns tended to decrease; protective behaviors have also been effective among outdoor workers (, ; ). Another example is the SunSmart Schools program in Australia ().
Fifteen industrial processes or occupations such as the rubber industry, iron and steel founding, and painting have been classified by the IARC as falling within Group 1 (carcinogenic to humans) (). Occupational cancer directly caused by or related to recognized carcinogens tends to be concentrated among relatively small groups of persons, among whom the individual risk of developing the disease may be quite high. These cancers are almost entirely preventable by eliminating or reducing the relevant exposure, substituting safer materials for carcinogenic materials, or in some cases, adjusting industrial processes and ventilation or providing worker protection to avoid direct contact with the carcinogen. Measures to control work hazards should therefore have a high priority in any program of cancer prevention, even if they are responsible for only a small proportion of all cancers. Measures may include those described by the , , , the , and WHO (, ). [For a list of example control measures, see Supplemental Material (pp. 2–3 ().] A useful strategy for each jurisdiction is to assess systematically the range and hierarchy of cancer risks to which individuals are exposed. Subsequently, a systematic process can be established to act first on the carcinogens with the highest risk and widest reach, and then work progressively through the prioritized list. Policy makers in a number of countries are working intensively to develop public policies and cancer prevention programs to create occupational exposure matrixes (OEMs) and information systems on cancer exposures such as CAREX (CARcinogen EXposure), for which Finland was the pioneer () and which other countries such as Canada, Costa Rica, and the countries of the European Union have now adopted (; ; ).
Since 2010, the government’s long-term economic plan has been focussed on ensuring sound public finances, while delivering the supply-side reforms necessary to improve long-term productivity. That has allowed active monetary policy to support the economy while ensuring the fiscal position is sustainable. As a result of the government’s action to date:
From integration of environmental and occupational causes of cancer into the global cancer agenda to broadening to cancer prevention in all policies. The conference held in Asturias, Spain, on 17–18 March 2011 reinforced the understanding that many cancers of environmental and occupational origin such as lung cancer, mesothelioma, and melanoma are preventable and advocated for integrating primary prevention of environmental and occupational cancers into a global cancer agenda. The conference recommended that more emphasis be placed on including rigorous primary prevention strategies in cancer control policies. Because cancer is a global public health problem, prevention should be part of all policies: That is, the potential effects of any policy, particularly regarding the development of cancer, should be considered before its implementation by policy makers. Growing awareness about environmental and occupational risk factors for cancer has led policy makers in many countries to take actions for primary prevention. For example, bans and restrictions on the production, marketing, and use of some major carcinogens, such as asbestos and secondhand smoke from tobacco, have been implemented. However, an unacceptable consequence of measures taken at national or regional levels (e.g., by the European Union) has been the transfer of carcinogenic materials to countries lacking effective cancer prevention policies. Companies based in developed countries often employ less stringent controls on carcinogens in their factories located in developing countries if not otherwise forced by national regulation (; ; ; ). Thus, international efforts are required to reduce global cancer rates.
Finally, it has been demonstrated that public policies such as legislation on smokefree workplaces not only protect nonsmokers from the dangers of secondhand smoke, but they also create an environment that encourages smokers to reduce or stop smoking (). It needs to be noted however that active pressure should only be encouraged for established carcinogens with the guidance of public health specialists, as the public perception of risks does not always correspond to the true harmfulness of an agent, as for instance in the case of electromagnetic fields. presents nine risk factors for occupational and environmental-related cancers and our perception of the state of the evidence concerning measures that support primary prevention, and highlighting key areas that need to be strengthened.
Objects granted exemption from Estate Duty – The government will introduce a number of technical amendments to the current legislative framework for Estate Duty to ensure the legislation works in line with the publicly stated policy objective. (Finance Bill 2016)
Consistent with its commitment to transparency, the government is also publishing the methodology underlying the calculation of the fiscal impact of each policy decision. This is included in the supplementary document ‘Budget 2016 policy costings’ published alongside this Budget.
Alongside this Budget, the Office for Budget Responsibility () has published an independent forecast of the public finances and the economy, incorporating Budget policy decisions. To produce the Budget forecast, the has certified the government’s assessment of the direct cost or yield of Budget policy decisions that affect the economy and public finance forecasts and has made an assessment of the indirect effects of Budget measures on the economy.
Relative to this, the specific focus of the following briefing paper analyses the methodological steps required by the policy makers in the Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP to assess current issues correctly in order to apply appropriate strategic policy action....
The Budget continues to reform public services in a way that is fair. The policies of this government mean that the richest are paying an increasing share of taxes, with those lower down the income distribution continuing to pay less. Distributional analysis published today confirms that half of public spending continues to go to the poorest 40% of households, and that the richest 20% will pay over half of taxes in 2019-20. In addition, the richest 1% paid over 28% of all income tax revenue in 2013-14 – a higher proportion than in any year of the last two decades.
Publication of articles in EHP does not mean that the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) condones, endorses, approves, or recommends the use of any products, services, materials, methodology, or policies stated therein. Conclusions and opinions are those of the individual authors and advertisers only and do not reflect the policies or views of the NIEHS.
It is not often that Canadians have been begrudged the opportunity to participate in public hearings, citizen polls and other consultative methods; however, the degree to which their voices have been taken into account often falls short.
This is the biggest challenge for the US government as the increasing cost makes it impossible for the government to allocate appropriate resources in managing the requirements of the ACA public policy....