Best of enemies: Using social network analysis to explore a policy network in European smoke-free policy
Introduction
The investigation of policies is an integral part of public health research because political decisions considerably impact on population health. Stemming from a recognition that the development of effective public health policies require concerted effort from various stakeholders (Edwards, 2004, Heclo, 1975), the concept of policy networks, an approach which tries to capture the contribution of various actors in the development of policy, has received increasing attention among the academic community (Bomberg et al., 2008, Marsh, 1998, Rhodes, 1997). Peterson and Bomberg (1999, p. 8) define a policy network as “a cluster of actors, each of which has an interest, or a ‘stake’ in a given […] policy sector and the capacity to help determine policy success or failure”. As complex, non-hierarchical groups of mutually dependent actors that engage in policymaking (Heclo, 1975, Peterson, 2009), policy networks allow stakeholders with joint interests and similar values and positions to form alliances and jointly influence policymaking within a given area (Keck and Sikkink, 1998, Sabatier, 1998, Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith, 1993). While some scholars have critiqued concepts of policy networks as being insufficient to provide explanations for policy change or yield detailed insights into the dynamics of policymaking (Dowding, 1994, Dowding, 1995), others have argued that the analysis of policy networks can increase understanding of policy outcomes (Marsh and Smith, 2000). (For detailed reflections on the concept of policy networks and its application in different legislative contexts, see, for example, Bessusi (2006) or Börzel (1998)). Despite of disagreement in the academic literature about the explanatory power of the policy network concept, social network analysis (SNA) has emerged as a useful tool to map and analyse networks of interconnected actors. One of the major strengths of SNA is its compatibility with other methodological approaches and its malleability to different political concepts.
Several scholars have highlighted the crucial role of networks and coalitions in the development and implementation of tobacco control policies (Cairney, 2007, Farquharson, 2003, Princen, 2007, Read, 1992). Their work suggests that policy networks in tobacco control are distinctly and unusually polarised and characterised by two groups which hold strongly opposing views and compete against each other when trying to advance their interests at the political level. Analysing the history of global tobacco control, Farquharson (2003, p. 90) argues that tobacco control policymaking is dominated by “two easily distinguishable and competing” alliances. She describes an anti-tobacco alliance of experts and activists who campaign for comprehensive tobacco control policy and whose views are diametrically opposed to those of tobacco sector representatives who aim to influence “tobacco policy at all levels of government, ensuring that regulations […] are minimal” (Farquharson, 2003, p. 85). Elaborating on this idea, Smith (2013, p. 382) employs the term “tobacco wars” to describe the hostile debates between proponents and opponents of comprehensive tobacco control policy. A stark divide is also illustrated by articles describing Japanese (Sato, 1999), British (Arnott et al., 2007, Read, 1992), Scottish (Harrison and Hurst, 2005) and Irish (Currie and Clancy, 2011) tobacco control policy. Accounts of tobacco control policy suggest that opponents of tobacco control have historically been more successful in influencing national policies (Read, 1992, Sato, 1999), but that recently and with regard to smoke-free policies, tobacco control coalitions have emerged as a considerable counterforce against tobacco industry action (Arnott et al., 2007, Currie and Clancy, 2011, Drope, 2010, Harrison and Hurst, 2005). Cairney et al. (2011), who provide one of the most recent analyses of global tobacco control, confirm this shift in power within policy networks in tobacco control towards increasing recognition of public health and declining power of tobacco industry alliances.
While the existing literature on stakeholder engagement in tobacco control policy offers useful insights into the antagonism in tobacco control policy debates, most of it is either dated or based on observational accounts of policy processes. No study to date provides empirical evidence or a systematic analysis of the composition and dynamics of policy networks and coalitions of stakeholders involved in tobacco control, a gap which this study aims to fill. Applying concepts of policy networks and alliance-building to an empirical study, this paper analyses the engagement and collaboration of organisational stakeholders in the development of EU action to reduce exposure to second-hand smoke (SHS). The paper, which is the first to employ qualitative and quantitative SNA of documentary and interview data to explore EU public health policymaking, aims to assess the utility of SNA for developing a comprehensive understanding of the structure and formation of a policy network in EU tobacco control policy, shed light on the extent and dynamics of the schism between tobacco industry and tobacco control advocates and explore how the division developed in the context of EU tobacco control policy. Contrasting existing tobacco control research, which has overwhelmingly focused on tobacco industry interference, this paper adds a new perspective on the broader dynamics of tobacco control policy by providing empirical data on the overall policy network and exploring the complex set of social interactions that occur in the political environment.
In the following section, the key events in the development of EU tobacco control and smoke-free policy are summarised. Then, the network analysis of 176 policy submissions and the qualitative analysis of 32 semi-structured interviews are described. After presenting findings on the policy network, its polarity, the position of EU institutions and the actions of tobacco control advocates, the paper discusses potential reasons for the structure, formation and dynamics of the network and outlines implications for tobacco control policy and practice.
Section snippets
The development of EU tobacco control and smoke-free policy
Despite its limited competence to adopt public health legislation, the EU has built a substantial track record of tobacco control policy. EU initiatives to tackle tobacco were first triggered by the Europe against Cancer Programme and the establishment of the Bureau for Action on Smoking Prevention in the late 1980s, followed in subsequent decades by several directives concerning tobacco advertising, tobacco products and the exposure to SHS in the workplace. In 1989, negotiations were initiated
Methods
This study was conducted at the University of Edinburgh, UK, between October 2009 and December 2012. Publicly available policy documents of relevance to the process of adopting EU smoke-free policy (earlier drafts of the policy, responses and opinions produced by EU institutions, minutes of meetings, consultation submissions, briefings, reports, surveys, research reports and other documents) were reviewed. The consultation submissions of 176 organisational actors were selected for systematic
Findings
The 176 consultation responses to the Green Paper included responses from 86 health-related organisations, 35 tobacco industry organisations, 36 national, regional or local authorities, 16 social partners, two EU institutions and one representative of another industry sector (description of organisations based on categorisations undertaken by DG SANCO (2007b)). The network analysis showed that half of all stakeholders (n = 88) were part of the main component of the network, whereas the other
Discussion
Previous work on stakeholder engagement in tobacco control has described the “adversarial nature” of tobacco control (Farquharson, 2003, p. 80). This study is the first to employ SNA to comprehensively map and systematically analyse a policy network in tobacco control. Using a mixed method approach to SNA, our paper not only provides empirical evidence that smoke-free is a policy area which is characterised by a stark division between two competing coalitions of stakeholders, but provides an
Conclusion
Building on previous research on EU policymaking, this paper shows that SNA is a useful tool to investigate the constraints and opportunities of members of a policy network and provides valuable insights into the complex interactions that occur in the political environment. Drawing on EU smoke-free policy as a case study, the paper provides empirical evidence of the stark division of a network of actors involved in EU tobacco control policy and the ability of supporters of comprehensive EU
Acknowledgement
The authors thank Jasmin Lange for help with data conversion and data entry.
References (67)
- et al.
Tobacco industry strategies for influencing European Community tobacco advertising legislation
Lancet
(2002) The Smoke Filled Room: How Big Tobacco Influences Health Policy in the UK
(2010)- et al.
Comprehensive smoke-free legislation in England: how advocacy won the day
Tob. Control
(2007) - et al.
Towards a politics of health
Health Promot. Int.
(2005) Policy networks: conceptual developments and their European applications
- et al.
Tobacco Industry Attempts to Subvert European Union Tobacco Advertising Legislation
(2002) - et al.
Introduction
NetDraw Software for Network Visualization
(2002)- et al.
UCINET for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis
(2002) Organising Babylon - on the different conceptions of policy networks
Public Adm.
(1998)