Alcohol industry involvement in policymaking: a systematic review

Abstract

AimsTo summarize the substantive findings of studies of alcohol industry involvement in national or supranational policymaking, and to produce a new synthesis of current evidence.MethodsThis study examined peer‐reviewed journal reports published in the English language between 1980 and 2016 of studies of alcohol industry involvement in policymaking. Included studies were required to provide information on data collection and analysis and to have sought explicitly to investigate interventions by alcohol industry actors within the process of public policymaking. Eight electronic databases were searched on 27 February 2017. The methodological strengths and limitations of individual studies and the literature as a whole were examined. A thematic synthesis using an inductive approach to the generation of themes was guided by the research aims and objectives.ResultsTwenty reports drawn from 15 documentary and interview studies identify the pervasive influence of alcohol industry actors in policymaking. This evidence synthesis indicates that industry actors seek to influence policy in two principal ways by: (1) framing policy debates in a cogent and internally consistent manner, which excludes from policy agendas issues that are contrary to commercial interests; and (2) adopting short‐ and long‐term approaches to managing threats to commercial interests within the policy arena by building relationships with key actors using a variety of different organizational forms. This review pools findings from existing studies on the range of observed impacts on national alcohol policy decision‐making throughout the world.ConclusionsAlcohol industry actors are highly strategic, rhetorically sophisticated and well organized in influencing national policymaking.

‘If someone donates $1000, they support you. If they donate $100 000, they have bought you’. Mixed methods study of tobacco, alcohol and gambling industry donations to Australian political parties

“…A recent Australian analysis showed that delays by government in implementing alcohol warning labels were probably due in large part to lobbying by the alcohol industry . This is in keeping with systematic review evidence that a range of methods are used to influence alcohol policies, among which donations may serve to support long‐term relationship building with key political actors, and can be integrated with other methods of influence .…”

The impact of high profile restrictions on support for alcohol control policies

“…Despite this evidence, governments are often reluctant to implement public health‐oriented policies. This is partly due to the formidable efforts of the alcohol industry , but also because many evidence‐based policy options are not widely supported by the general public . There is strong evidence that public opinion is a key contributor to public policy decisions , so understanding how public support for evidence‐based policy changes is important.…”

Drinking patterns and the distribution of alcohol-related harms in Ireland: Evidence for the prevention paradox

“…A high-risk approach targets a small number of high-risk drinkers, while a population-based strategy aims to reduce alcohol-related harms through interventions targeted at the whole population. Lobbyists representing the alcohol industry often argue that policies to reduce alcohol-related harm should be based exclusively on the former, high-risk approach (7). However, Krietman (8) and subsequent researchers (6,(9)(10)(11)(12) have demonstrated that the majority of alcoholrelated harms tend to occur among low and moderate-risk drinkers, simply because they are more numerous in the population than high-risk drinkers, who still have a higher individual risk of experiencing harms.…”