Lucy Gavens1, John Holmes1, Penny Buykx2, Frank de Vocht3, Matt Egan4, Daniel Grace5, Karen Lock4, John D Mooney6, Alan Brennan1. 1. University of Sheffield, School of Health and Related Research, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK. 2. University of Sheffield, School of Health and Related Research, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK. Electronic address: p.f.buykx@sheffield.ac.uk. 3. University of Bristol, School of Social and Community Medicine, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove, Clifton BS8 2BN, UK. 4. London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, SPHR@L, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK. 5. University of Toronto, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Health Sciences Building, 155 College St., Toronto, Ontario M5T 3M7, Canada. 6. University of Sunderland, Department of Pharmacy, Health and Well-being, Health Sciences Complex, City Campus, Sunderland SR1 3SD, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Recent years have seen a rise in new and innovative policies to reduce alcohol consumption and related harm in England, which can be implemented by local, as opposed to national, policy-makers. The aim of this paper is to explore the processes that underpin the adoption of these alcohol policies within local authorities. In particular, it aims to assess whether the concept of policy transfer (i.e. a process through which knowledge about policies in one place is used in the development of policies in another time or place) provides a useful model for understanding local alcohol policy-making. METHODS: Qualitative data generated through in-depth interviews and focus groups from five case study sites across England were used to explore stakeholder experiences of alcohol policy transfer between local authorities. The purposive sample of policy actors included representatives from the police, trading standards, public health, licensing, and commissioning. Thematic analysis was used inductively to identify key features in the data. RESULTS: Themes from the policy transfer literature identified in the data were: policy copying, emulating, hybridization, and inspiration. Participants described a multitude of ways in which learning was shared between places, ranging from formal academic evaluation to opportunistic conversations in informal settings. Participants also described facilitators and constraints to policy transfer, such as the historical policy context and the local cultural, economic, and bureaucratic context, which influenced whether or not a policy that was perceived to work in one place might be transferred successfully to another context. CONCLUSIONS: Theories of policy transfer provide a promising framework for characterising processes of local alcohol policy-making in England, extending beyond debates regarding evidence-informed policy to account for a much wider range of considerations. Applying a policy transfer lens enables us to move beyond simple (but still important) questions of what is supported by 'robust' research evidence by paying greater attention to how policy making is carried out in practice and the multiple methods by which policies diffuse across jurisdictions.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Recent years have seen a rise in new and innovative policies to reduce alcohol consumption and related harm in England, which can be implemented by local, as opposed to national, policy-makers. The aim of this paper is to explore the processes that underpin the adoption of these alcohol policies within local authorities. In particular, it aims to assess whether the concept of policy transfer (i.e. a process through which knowledge about policies in one place is used in the development of policies in another time or place) provides a useful model for understanding local alcohol policy-making. METHODS: Qualitative data generated through in-depth interviews and focus groups from five case study sites across England were used to explore stakeholder experiences of alcohol policy transfer between local authorities. The purposive sample of policy actors included representatives from the police, trading standards, public health, licensing, and commissioning. Thematic analysis was used inductively to identify key features in the data. RESULTS: Themes from the policy transfer literature identified in the data were: policy copying, emulating, hybridization, and inspiration. Participants described a multitude of ways in which learning was shared between places, ranging from formal academic evaluation to opportunistic conversations in informal settings. Participants also described facilitators and constraints to policy transfer, such as the historical policy context and the local cultural, economic, and bureaucratic context, which influenced whether or not a policy that was perceived to work in one place might be transferred successfully to another context. CONCLUSIONS: Theories of policy transfer provide a promising framework for characterising processes of local alcohol policy-making in England, extending beyond debates regarding evidence-informed policy to account for a much wider range of considerations. Applying a policy transfer lens enables us to move beyond simple (but still important) questions of what is supported by 'robust' research evidence by paying greater attention to how policy making is carried out in practice and the multiple methods by which policies diffuse across jurisdictions.
Authors: Niamh Fitzgerald; Matt Egan; Frank de Vocht; Colin Angus; James Nicholls; Niamh Shortt; Tim Nichols; Nason Maani Hessari; Cheryl McQuire; Richard Purves; Nathan Critchlow; Andrea Mohan; Laura Mahon; Colin Sumpter; Linda Bauld Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2018-11-06 Impact factor: 4.615