Discussion and Conclusion
This chapter discusses the study findings in light of relevant theory on policy transfer and multi-level governance. Three theoretical conclusions are made: (1) public health policies today are often subject to a policy transfer ‘web’, in which networks of actors involving both policy-makers and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are required to navigate various different jurisdictions and levels of governance in order to ensure that a policy is successfully adopted; (2) transnational corporations have analytically-significant consequences for policy transfer processes and may act intentionally to disrupt such processes; and (3) the activities of transnational corporate actors can shape subsequent transfer processes, as policy-makers and NGOs build relationships and coalitions in an effort to adapt to, and counteract, global corporate political strategies.
KeywordsPolicy transfer Multi-level governance Transnational tobacco companies Standardised packaging Plain packaging EU Tobacco Products Directive
- Bomberg, E., & Peterson, J. (2000). Policy transfer and Europeanization: Passing the Heineken Test? (Queen’s Papers on Europeanisation p0002). Queen’s University Belfast.Google Scholar
- Chapman, S., & Freeman, B. (2014). Removing the emperor’s clothes: Australia and tobacco plain packaging. Sydney: Sydney University Press.Google Scholar
- Gleditsch, K. S., & Ward, M. D. (2006). Diffusion and the spread of democratic institutions. International Organisations, 60, 911–933.Google Scholar
- Hawkins, B., & Holden, C. (2016). A corporate veto on health policy? Global constitutionalism and investor-state dispute settlement. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 13, 1–19.Google Scholar
- Holden, C., & Hawkins, B. (2017). Law, market building and public health in the European Union. Global Social Policy, 1–17. Google Scholar
- Hudson, J., & Lowe, S. (2009). Understanding the policy process: Analysing welfare policy and practice (2nd ed.). Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
- Jones, T., & Newburn, T. (2006). Policy transfer and criminal justice. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
- Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
- Peeters, S., Costa, H., Stuckler, D., McKee, M., & Gilmore, A. B. (2015). The revision of the 2014 European Tobacco Products Directive: An analysis of the tobacco industry’s attempts to ‘break the health silo’. Tobacco Control. https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2014-051919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- World Health Organization (WHO). (2003). WHO framework convention on tobacco control [Online]. Available at https://www.who.int/tobacco/framework/WHO_FCTC_english.pdf. Accessed 5 February 2019.