How deeply has the alcohol industry penetrated governments worldwide? 24 countries

What is it about?

The alcohol industry employs many of the same strategies as the tobacco industry to influence policy, including lobbying, funding research, forming industry-friendly partnerships, and placing industry representatives in government roles. Unlike tobacco, there is no international treaty framework equivalent to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control that protects alcohol policies from industry interference. This cross-sectional study, conducted as part of the International Alcohol Control (IAC) Study, drew on researchers in 24 jurisdictions spanning high, middle and low income countries to document the presence or absence of 22 indicators of alcohol industry penetration and government safeguards. Data were collected from publicly available sources including government reports, media releases, industry websites and research articles. Findings revealed high levels of industry penetration across virtually all jurisdictions, with all 24 reporting the presence of transnational alcohol corporations, 63% reporting revolving doors between industry and senior government roles, and widespread examples of corporate social responsibility partnerships during COVID-19. Government safeguards against this influence were found to be minimal, with only the Philippines reporting explicit policy restrictions on government interactions with the alcohol industry.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

The tobacco industry's political interference in health policy has been extensively documented and is subject to binding international obligations under Article 5.3 of the FCTC. No equivalent framework exists for alcohol, leaving governments around the world without shared standards for protecting alcohol policy from industry influence. This study provides the first systematic, multi-country empirical assessment of alcohol industry penetration using a standardised tool, creating a baseline for monitoring and comparison over time. The finding that almost no government had meaningful safeguards in place, combined with evidence of industry penetration through revolving doors, CSR activities and lobbying, makes the case for urgent international action to develop binding protections equivalent to those in tobacco control.