13.0 Conclusions

13.1 The aim of public policy should be to reduce the harm associated with alcohol use. However, as there is a direct link between the extent of alcohol problems and the overall level of alcohol consumption, it is idle to suppose that alcohol problems can be reduced without this having significant impact on alcohol consumption. Reduced consumption is both a consequence of reducing alcohol problems, and a means of achieving such a reduction.

13.2 It is also futile to pretend that a choice must be made between preventative measures which target 'actual abusers' and measures which target the whole drinking population. Far from being in opposition, these two approaches are complementary and interrelated.

13.3 There is no single solution to alcohol problems. Because alcohol problems affect a large number of people in many different ways, a range of responses is required. Because of national and cultural differences, a single policy blueprint is unlikely to be equally applicable to all times and places.

13.4 However, the research evidence ¹⁷ suggests that a preventative policy is is likely to be effective if it:

• uses alcohol taxation;
• places controls on physical access to alcohol;
• includes proper provision of treatment, especially intervention strategies in primary health care setting;
• supports countermeasures against drinking and driving.

13.5 Although there is less hard evidence of effectiveness for them, other policy initiatives likely to be helpful include:

• prevention and management of alcohol problems in workplaces;
• controls on the advertising and promotion of alcoholic drink;
• alcohol education programmes.

13.6 The WHO Action Plan is based upon this research evidence. Contrary to the claims of the alcoholic drinks industry, the Action Plan is not a rigid set of detailed prescriptions but a framework for action designed to be adapted to differing national needs and circumstances. It does however provide criteria for judging the acceptability of policies on alcohol.