Analysis of Alcohol Industry Submissions against Marketing Regulation

Abstract

A growing body of literature points to the role of vested interests as a barrier to the implementation of effective public health policies. Corporate political activity by the alcohol industry is commonly used to influence policy and regulation. It is important for policy makers to be able to critique alcohol industry claims opposed to improved alcohol marketing regulation. The Australian National Preventive Health Agency reviewed alcohol marketing regulations in 2012 and stakeholders were invited to comment on them. In this study we used thematic analysis to examine submissions from the Australian alcohol industry, based on a system previously developed in relation to tobacco industry corporate political activity. The results show that submissions were a direct lobbying tactic, making claims to government that were contrary to the evidence-base. Five main frames were identified, in which the alcohol industry claimed that increased regulation: (1) is unnecessary; (2) is not backed up by sufficient evidence; (3) will lead to unintended negative consequences; and (4) faces legal barriers to implementation; underpinned by the view (5) that the industry consists of socially responsible companies working toward reducing harmful drinking. In contrast with tobacco industry submissions on public policy, which often focused on legal and economic barriers, the Australian alcohol industry placed a heavier emphasis on notions of regulatory redundancy and insufficient evidence. This may reflect differences in where these industries sit on the ‘regulatory pyramid’, alcohol being less regulated than tobacco.

Strategies used by the Canadian food and beverage industry to influence food and nutrition policies

“…To our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating the lobbying strategies used by industry to influence Canadian food and nutrition policies. Our study found that Canadian food industry utilized similar strategies to those used by their counterparts in other jurisdictions [16,17,22,23] and by other industries such as alcohol and tobacco [20,[26][27][28]. For instance, Canadian industry stakeholders commonly used the practice of "framing the debate on diet-and public health-related issues", through the mechanisms of "emphasizing industry's actions to address obesity and chronic disease, "promoting the good intentions and stressing the good traits of industry" and "shifting the blame and drawing attention away from industry".…”

Alcohol industry strategies to influence the reform of the Finnish Alcohol Law

“…A growing body of literature points to the role of vested interests as a barrier to the implementation of public health policies aiming to reduce alcohol-related harm and to the ability of governments to pursue public interest policies such as alcohol regulation. Corporate political activity by the alcohol industry is commonly used to influence policy and regulation in ways favourable to the industry, since the industry is heavily involved in planning of public health policy (Martino, Miller, Coomber, Hancock, & Kypri, 2017). Research suggests that such partnerships advance the interests of the industry rather than public health because the industry merely promotes policies that fail to reduce alcohol sales.…”

Challenging, co-operating and splitting: a qualitative analysis of how the trade press responded to cumulative impact policies in England and Wales

“…Studies have also been conducted for other sectors such as food and tobacco and found evidence of comparable responses (Bond, 2010;Jensen & Ronit, 2015;Kickbusch, 2012;Marks, 2014;Moodie et al, 2013;Orford, 2013;Petticrew, Lee & McKee,2012;Ronit & Jensen, 2014). However, the similarities of approach across commercial sectors should not be overstated: a recent Australian study found similarities but also differences between alcohol and tobacco industry lobbying, with the alcohol industry placing a heavier emphasis (contrary to the current evidence base) on notions of regulatory redundancy and insufficient evidence (Martino, Miller, Coomber, Hancock & Kypri, 2017).…”

“…Proposals for increased regulation and restriction of alcohol availability is a particularly contentious issue. Such approaches have been opposed by sections of the alcohol industry in favour of voluntary and industry-led approaches (Martino, Miller, Coomber, Hancock & Kypri, 2017;McCambridge, Hawkins & Holden, 2013;Savell, Fooks & Gilmore 2016). For example, in the United Kingdom (UK), numerous studies have explored how different alcohol industry actors framed their opposition to (so far unimplemented) proposals for legislation to set a minimum price on beverages based on alcohol content (minimum unit pricing, or MUP) Hawkins and Holden, 2013;Holden, Hawkins & McCambridge, 2013;Katikireddi et al, 2014;Katikireddi & Hilton 2015).…”