The 131st Annual Meeting (November 15-19, 2003) of APHA

Abstract #72530

Thomas K. Greenfield, PhD¹, Norman A. Giesbrecht, PhD², and Stephan Brown, MA¹. (1) Alcohol Research Group, 2000 Hearst Avenue, Suite 300, Berkeley, CA 94709, 510-642-5208, tgreenfield@arg.org, (2) Social, Prevention & Health Policy Research Department, Centre for Addiction & Mental Health, 33 Russell Street, Toronto, ON M5S 2S1, Canada

The goals of this project, funded between 1996 and 1999, were to identify factors influencing alcohol policy formation at the US federal level, to assess the role of actors and agencies, secular events, research information, and informal relationships in the policy development process, and to explore John Kingdon’s “Policy Stream” model, which identifies three streams: problem recognition, formulation of policy alternatives, and political contexts and events. Federal alcohol policy cases studied included federal excise taxes; policies related to promotion and counter-advertising; prevention agency re-authorization; and federally mandated warnings on labels and advertisements. Data sources included both key-informant interviewing with snowball sampling and archival data. We qualitatively analyzed government documents, scientific journals, print and electronic media (radio, TV and Web), trade magazines, and newsletters. Sixty-four in-depth interviews were completed with public health activists, alcohol industry representatives, researchers, journalists, and members of the executive and legislative branches of the federal government. This presentation examines how policy initiatives came on the agenda and factors related to potential legislative efforts’ outcomes – be it passage or defeat of a bill, or its never making it to, or through, relevant committees. Importance of constituency support in the alcohol policy process is considered. We examine the positioning of alcohol policy in the larger ideological context and the relative importance of interest groups, research evidence, and public opinion in legislative outcomes. We conclude with suggestions for raising the profile of public health in public policy.

Learning Objectives:

At the end of this presentation, the participant will be able to:
• Describe John Kingdon’s “Policy Stream” model and how it applies to US national alcohol experiences.
• Discuss how different national policy initiatives emerged and factors leading to their outcome -- passage or defeat of a bill, or postponement.
• Identify several suggestions for raising the profile of public health in alcohol policy initiatives.

Keywords: Legislative, Social Activism

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.