酒类零售游说:对营利性和非营利性酒类零售高峰机构向澳大利亚议会质询的书面意见书的比较分析

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Claire Wilkinson , Michala Kowalski
{"title":"酒类零售游说:对营利性和非营利性酒类零售高峰机构向澳大利亚议会质询的书面意见书的比较分析","authors":"Claire Wilkinson ,&nbsp;Michala Kowalski","doi":"10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104900","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aims</h3><div>The alcohol, tobacco and gambling industries are notorious for lobbying against increased taxation and public-health focused regulations. These actions are often attributed to the commercial structure of these industries. Here, we examine whether a not-for-profit alcohol retail industry does the same.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>We sampled ‘matched’ written submissions from the peak bodies representing Australia’s key not-for-profit and for-profit alcohol retail sectors (licensed clubs and hotels respectively) to alcohol-related parliamentary inquiries from 2009 to 2021 (11 inquiries; 22 submissions). We analysed submissions using content and thematic analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>There was a very high degree of overlap in positions of the state and territory divisions of Clubs Australia and the Australian Hotel Association. Peak bodies representing both clubs and hotels lobbied for favourable market conditions and generally opposed measures that would limit their access to the retail market, such as limiting advertising and reducing venue access. Justifications for peak body positions centred around themes of ‘community’, ‘belonging’, and ‘good business’. In general, peak bodies for hotels used the language of ‘business’, while peak bodies for clubs argued from a place of ‘community’.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Australia's not-for-profit alcohol retail sector differs from the for-profit sector in their utilisation of the proceeds from alcohol sales. However, retail structure did not affect acceptance of health and safety measures when those impinge on revenues. Retail structure alone may not be sufficient to motivate ‘healthy’ trading behaviour in the absence of a robust regulatory system.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48364,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Drug Policy","volume":"143 ","pages":"Article 104900"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alcohol Retail Lobbying: A comparative analysis of profit and not-for-profit alcohol retail peak body written submissions to Australian parliamentary inquiries\",\"authors\":\"Claire Wilkinson ,&nbsp;Michala Kowalski\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104900\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Aims</h3><div>The alcohol, tobacco and gambling industries are notorious for lobbying against increased taxation and public-health focused regulations. These actions are often attributed to the commercial structure of these industries. Here, we examine whether a not-for-profit alcohol retail industry does the same.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>We sampled ‘matched’ written submissions from the peak bodies representing Australia’s key not-for-profit and for-profit alcohol retail sectors (licensed clubs and hotels respectively) to alcohol-related parliamentary inquiries from 2009 to 2021 (11 inquiries; 22 submissions). We analysed submissions using content and thematic analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>There was a very high degree of overlap in positions of the state and territory divisions of Clubs Australia and the Australian Hotel Association. Peak bodies representing both clubs and hotels lobbied for favourable market conditions and generally opposed measures that would limit their access to the retail market, such as limiting advertising and reducing venue access. Justifications for peak body positions centred around themes of ‘community’, ‘belonging’, and ‘good business’. In general, peak bodies for hotels used the language of ‘business’, while peak bodies for clubs argued from a place of ‘community’.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Australia's not-for-profit alcohol retail sector differs from the for-profit sector in their utilisation of the proceeds from alcohol sales. However, retail structure did not affect acceptance of health and safety measures when those impinge on revenues. Retail structure alone may not be sufficient to motivate ‘healthy’ trading behaviour in the absence of a robust regulatory system.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48364,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Drug Policy\",\"volume\":\"143 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104900\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Drug Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955395925002002\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Drug Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955395925002002","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

酒业、烟草业和赌博业以游说反对增税和公共卫生法规而臭名昭著。这些行为通常归因于这些行业的商业结构。在这里,我们研究了非营利酒精零售行业是否也会这样做。方法:我们从代表澳大利亚主要非营利和营利性酒精零售部门(分别是持执照的俱乐部和酒店)的高峰机构中抽样“匹配”的书面提交,以应对2009年至2021年期间与酒精相关的议会调查(11项调查;22日提交)。我们使用内容和主题分析来分析提交的内容。结果澳大利亚俱乐部和澳大利亚酒店协会的州和地区部门的职位高度重叠。代表俱乐部和酒店的高峰团体为争取有利的市场条件进行游说,并普遍反对限制其进入零售市场的措施,如限制广告和减少进入场地的机会。以“社区”、“归属感”和“好生意”为主题的巅峰身体位置的理由。一般来说,酒店的高峰团体使用“商业”的语言,而俱乐部的高峰团体则从“社区”的地方进行辩论。结论:澳大利亚的非营利性酒精零售部门不同于营利性部门,他们利用酒精销售的收益。然而,当健康和安全措施影响到收入时,零售结构并不影响人们对这些措施的接受程度。在缺乏健全监管体系的情况下,仅凭零售结构可能不足以激励“健康”的交易行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Alcohol Retail Lobbying: A comparative analysis of profit and not-for-profit alcohol retail peak body written submissions to Australian parliamentary inquiries

Aims

The alcohol, tobacco and gambling industries are notorious for lobbying against increased taxation and public-health focused regulations. These actions are often attributed to the commercial structure of these industries. Here, we examine whether a not-for-profit alcohol retail industry does the same.

Method

We sampled ‘matched’ written submissions from the peak bodies representing Australia’s key not-for-profit and for-profit alcohol retail sectors (licensed clubs and hotels respectively) to alcohol-related parliamentary inquiries from 2009 to 2021 (11 inquiries; 22 submissions). We analysed submissions using content and thematic analysis.

Results

There was a very high degree of overlap in positions of the state and territory divisions of Clubs Australia and the Australian Hotel Association. Peak bodies representing both clubs and hotels lobbied for favourable market conditions and generally opposed measures that would limit their access to the retail market, such as limiting advertising and reducing venue access. Justifications for peak body positions centred around themes of ‘community’, ‘belonging’, and ‘good business’. In general, peak bodies for hotels used the language of ‘business’, while peak bodies for clubs argued from a place of ‘community’.

Conclusion

Australia's not-for-profit alcohol retail sector differs from the for-profit sector in their utilisation of the proceeds from alcohol sales. However, retail structure did not affect acceptance of health and safety measures when those impinge on revenues. Retail structure alone may not be sufficient to motivate ‘healthy’ trading behaviour in the absence of a robust regulatory system.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
11.40%
发文量
307
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Drug Policy provides a forum for the dissemination of current research, reviews, debate, and critical analysis on drug use and drug policy in a global context. It seeks to publish material on the social, political, legal, and health contexts of psychoactive substance use, both licit and illicit. The journal is particularly concerned to explore the effects of drug policy and practice on drug-using behaviour and its health and social consequences. It is the policy of the journal to represent a wide range of material on drug-related matters from around the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信