Alcohol is the most commonly used drug in New Zealand, and is one of the leading causes of drug-related harm. The Government’s response to addressing alcohol-related harm has been previously guided by the joint Ministry of Health and the Alcohol Advisory Council’s (ALAC) publication, the National Alcohol Strategy (2000-2003) (NAS).
This report is the product of a review of the NAS. It results from a qualitative, and where possible quantitative, review of the NAS, with information drawn from three sources:
- A document review identifying relevant national alcohol policies.
- Interviews with key stakeholders.
- Written material provided from other key stakeholders.
Methodology
The project was overseen by the NAS Working Group, a working group consisting of Inter-Agency Committee on Drugs-member agencies (IACD) with an interest in alcohol policy.
A Project Team from Allen and Clarke undertook a document search and review to identify evidence to support best practice approaches to the development of strategic alcohol policy in jurisdictions comparable to New Zealand, the scope of jurisdictions’ national alcohol policies, and to source any published literature on New Zealand’s NAS, particularly any evaluative studies.
A small number of key stakeholders were identified by the NAS Working Group and Allen and Clarke, and contacted to be a part of the review. This was a targeted approach designed to provide information relevant to the Terms of Reference for the review (appendix B). Stakeholders were asked a series of questions on specific elements of the NAS, such as its approach, specified outcomes, priorities, and target groups. Stakeholders were also asked about the impact of the NAS, communication and collaboration with stakeholders, the effectiveness of governance mechanisms, and future directions for alcohol policy. A questionnaire was also sent to a small number of other key stakeholders with whom the Project Team could not meet.
The Project Team received responses from a wide range of stakeholders, including 12 key government agencies, three local government organisations, interest groups, industry groups, research organisations, liquor licensing enforcement agencies, a treatment provider and a district health board. This provided a generally representative snapshot of sectors and agencies involved in alcohol policy.
Key Results
- Leadership needs to be stronger, and specific responsibilities given with agencies accountable for the delivery of specified outcomes.
- There is a need for a robust monitoring framework with requirements for reporting, which needs to be specifically resourced.
- The profile and the messages contained within the document need to be more visible, particularly for non-government sectors.
- An evidence-based approach needs to form the basis of a new Alcohol Action Plan.
- A new Alcohol Action Plan will need to ensure buy-in from those organisations to be involved in its development and implementation.
Most concerns were raised in relation to the effectiveness of the implementation of the NAS and the lack of monitoring and accountability to ensure that the NAS was implemented. A strong need for better leadership, clear responsibilities, and accountability was identified, as well as better and more extensive communication.
A variety of limitations of the NAS have been identified in this review, a number of which at a basic level stem from a lack of collaboration and communication. While the governance structures and mechanisms for collaboration were considered to be theoretically sound, the perception from stakeholders is that the NAS has not been as effective as it could have been.
It was not widely communicated, has been under-utilised and under-resourced, and for many agencies was considered out of date.
A number of considerations are put forward to assist in the development of a new Alcohol Action Plan.