METHODS: review of thirty-nine public opinion surveys on the death penalty carried out in five Asian countries which retain the death penalty for drugs or are considering re-introducing it. The review was conducted by analysing and comparing design, methodology, findings, and the relationship between these elements.
RESULTS: all but two surveys recorded a majoritarian support for the death penalty, driven by beliefs in (a) deterrent effect of the death penalty, and (b) perfect justice - both disproven. Complex surveys found a low intensity of support, and a limited interest and knowledge by the public in capital punishment. Support for capital punishment is lower for drug offences specifically, and it decreases significantly when expressed with reference to real-life cases. Limited data suggest that the public in the focus countries has reservations on the effectiveness of the death penalty to reduce drug offences, and prefers a discretionary system of punishment. The analysis also revealed correlations between the framing of survey questions and their findings.
CONCLUSION: Public opinion surveys conducted in China, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand suggest that the public knows little and has little interest in the death penalty. Although majoritarian, its support is based on a faulty understanding of key facts related to capital punishment, and an increase in knowledge is correlated to a decrease in support. More rigorous polling exercises demonstrate that public support for capital punishment - both in general and for drug offences specifically - is instinctive, abstract, elastic, and contextual.
METHODS: A mixed survey questionnaire with open- and closed-ended questions relating to HTA governance, HTA infrastructure, supply and demand of HTA and global HTA networking opportunities in each country was administered electronically to representatives of HTA nodal agencies of all ASEAN members. In-person meetings or email correspondence were used to clarify or validate any unclear responses. Results were collated and presented quantitatively.
RESULTS: Responses from eight out of ten member countries were analysed. The results illustrate that countries in the ASEAN region are at different stages of HTA institutionalization. While Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand have well-established processes and methods for priority setting through HTA, other countries, such as Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, the Philippines and Vietnam, have begun to develop HTA systems in their countries by establishing nodal agencies or conducting ad-hoc activities.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The study provides a general overview of the HTA landscape in ASEAN countries. Systematic efforts to mitigate the gaps between the demand and supply of HTA in each country are required while ensuring adequate participation from stakeholders so that decisions for resource allocation are made in a fair, legitimate and transparent manner and are relevant to each local context.