How does the alcohol industry attempt to influence marketing regulations? A systematic review

Emily Savell, Gary Fooks, Anna B. Gilmore

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

57 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim
To systematically review, using a qualitative, narrative synthesis approach, papers examining alcohol industry efforts to influence alcohol marketing policy, and compare with those used by the tobacco industry.

Methods
Literature searches were conducted between April and July 2011, and updated in March 2013. Papers were included if they: made reference to alcohol industry efforts to influence (a) policy debates concerning marketing regulations, (b) new specific marketing policies or (c) broad alcohol policy which included marketing regulations; were written in English; and concerned the period 1990–2013. Alcohol industry political activity was categorized into strategies/tactics and frames/arguments. Data extraction was undertaken by the lead author and 100% of the papers were fully second-reviewed. Seventeen papers met the review criteria.

Results
Five main political strategies and five main frames were identified. The alcohol industry argues against marketing regulation by emphasizing industry responsibility and the effectiveness of self-regulation, questioning the effectiveness of statutory regulation and by focusing on individual responsibility. Arguments relating to industry responsibility are often reinforced through corporate social responsibility activities. The industry primarily conveys its arguments through manipulating the evidence base and by promoting ineffective voluntary codes and non-regulatory initiatives.

Conclusions
The alcohol industry’s political activity is more varied than existing models of
corporate political activity suggest. The industry’s opposition to marketing regulation centres on claims that the industry is responsible and that self regulation is effective. There are considerable commonalities between tobacco and alcohol industry political activity, with differences due potentially to differences in policy contexts and perceived industry legitimacy.
LanguageEnglish
Pages18-32
JournalAddiction
Volume111
Issue number1
Early online date27 Aug 2015
DOIs
StatusPublished - Jan 2016

Fingerprint

Marketing
Industry
Alcohols
Politics
Tobacco Industry
Illegitimacy
Social Responsibility

Keywords

  • Alcohol Industry
  • corporate policy influence
  • corporate political activity
  • framing
  • marketing policy
  • marketing regulation
  • systematic review
  • tobacco industry

Cite this

How does the alcohol industry attempt to influence marketing regulations? A systematic review. / Savell, Emily; Fooks, Gary; Gilmore, Anna B.

In: Addiction, Vol. 111, No. 1, 01.2016, p. 18-32.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5bb10d93fc6345e89d822260f729b6f0,
title = "How does the alcohol industry attempt to influence marketing regulations? A systematic review",
abstract = "AimTo systematically review, using a qualitative, narrative synthesis approach, papers examining alcohol industry efforts to influence alcohol marketing policy, and compare with those used by the tobacco industry. Methods Literature searches were conducted between April and July 2011, and updated in March 2013. Papers were included if they: made reference to alcohol industry efforts to influence (a) policy debates concerning marketing regulations, (b) new specific marketing policies or (c) broad alcohol policy which included marketing regulations; were written in English; and concerned the period 1990–2013. Alcohol industry political activity was categorized into strategies/tactics and frames/arguments. Data extraction was undertaken by the lead author and 100{\%} of the papers were fully second-reviewed. Seventeen papers met the review criteria. Results Five main political strategies and five main frames were identified. The alcohol industry argues against marketing regulation by emphasizing industry responsibility and the effectiveness of self-regulation, questioning the effectiveness of statutory regulation and by focusing on individual responsibility. Arguments relating to industry responsibility are often reinforced through corporate social responsibility activities. The industry primarily conveys its arguments through manipulating the evidence base and by promoting ineffective voluntary codes and non-regulatory initiatives. Conclusions The alcohol industry’s political activity is more varied than existing models ofcorporate political activity suggest. The industry’s opposition to marketing regulation centres on claims that the industry is responsible and that self regulation is effective. There are considerable commonalities between tobacco and alcohol industry political activity, with differences due potentially to differences in policy contexts and perceived industry legitimacy.",
keywords = "Alcohol Industry, corporate policy influence, corporate political activity, framing, marketing policy, marketing regulation, systematic review, tobacco industry",
author = "Emily Savell and Gary Fooks and Gilmore, {Anna B.}",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1111/add.13048",
language = "English",
volume = "111",
pages = "18--32",
journal = "Addiction",
issn = "0965-2140",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How does the alcohol industry attempt to influence marketing regulations? A systematic review

AU - Savell, Emily

AU - Fooks, Gary

AU - Gilmore, Anna B.

PY - 2016/1

Y1 - 2016/1

N2 - AimTo systematically review, using a qualitative, narrative synthesis approach, papers examining alcohol industry efforts to influence alcohol marketing policy, and compare with those used by the tobacco industry. Methods Literature searches were conducted between April and July 2011, and updated in March 2013. Papers were included if they: made reference to alcohol industry efforts to influence (a) policy debates concerning marketing regulations, (b) new specific marketing policies or (c) broad alcohol policy which included marketing regulations; were written in English; and concerned the period 1990–2013. Alcohol industry political activity was categorized into strategies/tactics and frames/arguments. Data extraction was undertaken by the lead author and 100% of the papers were fully second-reviewed. Seventeen papers met the review criteria. Results Five main political strategies and five main frames were identified. The alcohol industry argues against marketing regulation by emphasizing industry responsibility and the effectiveness of self-regulation, questioning the effectiveness of statutory regulation and by focusing on individual responsibility. Arguments relating to industry responsibility are often reinforced through corporate social responsibility activities. The industry primarily conveys its arguments through manipulating the evidence base and by promoting ineffective voluntary codes and non-regulatory initiatives. Conclusions The alcohol industry’s political activity is more varied than existing models ofcorporate political activity suggest. The industry’s opposition to marketing regulation centres on claims that the industry is responsible and that self regulation is effective. There are considerable commonalities between tobacco and alcohol industry political activity, with differences due potentially to differences in policy contexts and perceived industry legitimacy.

AB - AimTo systematically review, using a qualitative, narrative synthesis approach, papers examining alcohol industry efforts to influence alcohol marketing policy, and compare with those used by the tobacco industry. Methods Literature searches were conducted between April and July 2011, and updated in March 2013. Papers were included if they: made reference to alcohol industry efforts to influence (a) policy debates concerning marketing regulations, (b) new specific marketing policies or (c) broad alcohol policy which included marketing regulations; were written in English; and concerned the period 1990–2013. Alcohol industry political activity was categorized into strategies/tactics and frames/arguments. Data extraction was undertaken by the lead author and 100% of the papers were fully second-reviewed. Seventeen papers met the review criteria. Results Five main political strategies and five main frames were identified. The alcohol industry argues against marketing regulation by emphasizing industry responsibility and the effectiveness of self-regulation, questioning the effectiveness of statutory regulation and by focusing on individual responsibility. Arguments relating to industry responsibility are often reinforced through corporate social responsibility activities. The industry primarily conveys its arguments through manipulating the evidence base and by promoting ineffective voluntary codes and non-regulatory initiatives. Conclusions The alcohol industry’s political activity is more varied than existing models ofcorporate political activity suggest. The industry’s opposition to marketing regulation centres on claims that the industry is responsible and that self regulation is effective. There are considerable commonalities between tobacco and alcohol industry political activity, with differences due potentially to differences in policy contexts and perceived industry legitimacy.

KW - Alcohol Industry

KW - corporate policy influence

KW - corporate political activity

KW - framing

KW - marketing policy

KW - marketing regulation

KW - systematic review

KW - tobacco industry

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/add.13048

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/add.13048

U2 - 10.1111/add.13048

DO - 10.1111/add.13048

M3 - Article

VL - 111

SP - 18

EP - 32

JO - Addiction

T2 - Addiction

JF - Addiction

SN - 0965-2140

IS - 1

ER -