Public-private partnerships and the politics of alcohol policy in England: the Coalition Government’s Public Health ‘Responsibility Deal’

Benjamin Hawkins · Jim McCambridge

32 citations0/0 files storedBMC Public Health

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology Public Health Policies and Education Community Health and Development

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The 2010-2015 Conservative-led Coalition Government launched their flagship Public Health Responsibility Deal (PHRD) for England in 2011; a year before their alcohol strategy. This co-regulatory regime placed alcohol industry actors at the heart of policy-making, but was viewed with scepticism by public health actors. This article examines the ways in which the PHRD structured the alcohol policy environment throughout this period, which included the rejection of evidence-based policies such as minimum unit pricing. METHODS: This article draws on 26 semi-structured interviews with policy actors (parliamentarians, civil servants, civil society actors and academics) in 2018. Respondents were identified and recruited using purposive sampling. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic coding. RESULTS: The PHRD shaped the context of alcohol policy development at Westminster throughout this period. It circumscribed the policy space by taking evidence-based measures not amenable to industry partnership off the agenda. While the PHRD created important opportunities for industry engagement with policy-makers, it undermined public health actors' access to government, particularly following their withdrawal from the process. Moreover, the PHRD demonstrates the enduring appeal of partnership as a policy idea for governments, despite a lack of evidence of their effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: This study of the PHRD demonstrates the ways in which industry actors are able to influence policy through long-term relationship building and partnership working on policy decision-making. Whilst such partnership approaches may appear to have the potential to mitigate some of alcohol harms, they create fundamental conflicts of interest, and may undermine the very causes they seek to further.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 32 citations exist upstream.

References

2006Using thematic analysis in psychology 1996Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data 2010Alcohol: No Ordinary Commodity 2000Stakeholder analysis: a review 2000A stakeholder analysis 2013Qualitative Interviewing 2017Quantitative and qualitative research: further reflections on their integration 2018Alcohol industry involvement in policymaking: a systematic review

Cited by

2021Co-regulation and alcohol industry political strategy: A case study of the Public Health England-Drinkaware Drink Free Days Campaign 2022Food industry influence in collaborative governance: The case of the Dutch prevention agreement on overweight 2023Influencing the global governance of alcohol: Alcohol industry views in submissions to the WHO consultation for the Alcohol Action Plan 2022-2030 2022The emperor has no clothes: a synthesis of findings from the Transformative Research on the Alcohol industry, Policy and Science research programme 2021The informal governance of public-private partnerships in UK obesity policy: Collaborating on calorie reduction or reducing effectiveness?

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.