Search

The article discusses why police officers tend to oppose drug policy liberalization. It highlights that surveys in the United States and Norway have found that police officers generally favor punitive approaches to drug use and strongly disagree with decriminalization. The article suggests that there are several possible reasons for this opposition, including the visibility bias that police officers primarily encounter the most dysfunctional drug users, the influence of attitudes on behavior, the racial bias in drug crime policing, and the economic incentives for police departments to support drug criminalization. The article concludes that while some police officers may genuinely be concerned about the well-being of young people, comparative harm assessments indicate that worries over adolescent well-being should focus more on alcohol than cannabis. [Extracted from the article]

Motivating active transport is a health and environmental policy priority, and plays an important role in achieving the necessary shift toward a sustainable transport system. Financial incentives to promote cycling are used in many countries, but very few studies document causal effects. Using a randomized controlled trial in the field, we provide causal evidence of the effect of different types of economics incentives on cycling activity in Norway. Participants' mobility is monitored through an innovative mobile app that registers travel behavior automatically. Results show that both a flat rate and a conditional lottery motivate people to cycle more. Compared to the control group, participants who received an economic incentive cycled 36% more and 18% more often. The conditional lottery appears to be an effective and economically efficient solution and the only treatment with a lasting effect after the incentives were removed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes the theoretical background and results of a focus group study on determinants of energy related behaviour in Norwegian households. 70 Norwegians between 18 and 79 years of age participated in eight focus-groups in four Norwegian cities. The aim of the study was to identify behaviours that Norwegians consider relevant with respect to energy use, the main determinants of those behaviours, as well as barriers against and facilitators of energy efficiency. The most important behaviours from the participants' perspectives were heating, water heating, use of white ware and mobility. The main motivators named were minimising behavioural costs, value orientations, perceived consumer efficacy and social norms. The most important barriers were structural misfits, economic, effort, time consumption, low consumer efficacy and lack of relevant and trustworthy information. The most potent facilitators were economic incentives, gains in comfort, reduced effort, tailored practical information, individual feedback and legislative actions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: There is an increased use of key performance indicators and incentive schemes in the petroleum industry. Applying modern incentive theory, we explore what implications this management trend has for injury and major accident prevention efforts and safety. Can economic incentives be designed for accident prevention activities? In cases where this is not possible, what are the challenges for the safety efforts? In particular, how are safety efforts affected by enhanced economic incentives for other performance dimensions like production and rate of return? Can safety be neglected? What remedies are available? [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Aims: Low back pain (LBP) is a major public health problem in both Norway and Sweden. The aim of the study was to estimate the prevalence of LBP and sickness absence due to LBP in two neighbouring regions in Norway and Sweden. The two areas have similar socioeconomic status, but differ in health benefit systems. Methods: A representative sample of 1,988 adults in Norway and 2,006 in Sweden completed questionnaires concerning LBP during 1999 and 2000. For this study only individuals in part or full time jobs, (n = 1,158 in Norway and n = 1,129 in Sweden) were included. Results: In Norway the lifetime prevalence was 60.7% and in Sweden 69.6%, the one‐year prevalence was 40.5% and 47.2%, and the point prevalence 13.4% and 18.2% respectively. There was a significantly higher risk of reporting LBP in Sweden, even after controlling for gender, age, education, and physical workload. There was no difference in risk of self‐certificated short‐term sickness absence (1–3 days), but it was a 40% lower risk of sickness absence with medical sickness certification in Sweden compared with Norway. Conclusion: The prevalence of LBP was higher in the Swedish area than in the Norwegian. The risk of self‐certificated sickness absence, however, showed no differences and the risk of medically certificated sickness absence was lower in the Swedish area. This contradiction might partly be explained by the economical “disincentives” in the Swedish health compensation system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]