Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:57:53.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

European policymaking on the tobacco advertising ban: the importance of escape routes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2010

Sandra Adamini ,
Esther Versluis  and
Hans Maarse
Sandra Adamini*
Affiliation:
Consultant Health, ECORYS Nederland, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Esther Versluis
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
Hans Maarse
Affiliation:
Professor of Health Care Policy Analysis, Department of Health Organisation, Policy and Economics, Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
*
Correspondence to: Sandra Adamini, Consultant Health, ECORYS Nederland, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article analyses the European Union policymaking process regarding tobacco advertising. While others already highlighted the importance of intergovernmental bargaining between member states to explain the outcome of the tobacco advertising case, the main aim of this article is to identify the use of escape routes by the Commission, the European Parliament, the Council and interest groups that played an important role in overcoming the deadlock. When looking at the different institutions that structure policymaking, we argue that indeed focusing on escape routes provides a clear insight in the process and in what strategies were necessary to ‘make Europe work’. In the end, it appears to be a combination of escape routes that resulted in the final decision.

Type
Articles
Information
Health Economics, Policy and Law , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , 26 January 2011 , pp. 65 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agence Europe (1997a), ‘Netherlands Will Support “in Principle” The Ban on Tobacco Advertising’, 27 November, no 7108.Google Scholar
Agence Europe (1997b), ‘The Ban on Tobacco Advertising was Made Problematic by Spain’s Announced Abstention’, 5 December, no 7114.Google Scholar
Agence Europe (1997c), ‘Political Agreement on Ban on Advertising of Tobacco Products’, 6 December, no 7115.Google Scholar
Aspect Consortium (2004), Tobacco or Health in the European Union – Past, Present and Future, Luxembourg: European Commission.Google Scholar
Bachinger, E., McKee, M.Gilmore, A. (2008), ‘Tobacco policies in Nazi Germany: not as simple as it seems’, Public Health, 122: 497–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bitton, A., Neuman, M.Glantz, S. (2002), Tobacco Industry Attempts to Subvert European Union Tobacco Advertising Legislation, San Francisco: Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education.Google Scholar
Boessen, S.Maarse, H. (2008), ‘The impact of the treaty basis on health policy legislation in the European Union: a case study on the tobacco advertising directive’, BMC Health Services Research, 8(77).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boessen, S.Maarse, H. (2009), ‘A Ban on Tobacco Advertising: the Role of Interest Groups’, in D. Coen and J. Richardson (eds), Lobbying in the European Union, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 212–232.Google Scholar
Bouma, J. (2001), Het Rookgordijn. De macht van de Nederlandse Tabaksindustrie, Amsterdam: L.J. Veen.Google Scholar
Bouwen, P. (2002), ‘Corporate lobbying in the European Union: the logic of access’, Journal of European Public Policy, 9(3): 365–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commission of the European Communities (1989), ‘Proposal for a Council Directive on the Advertising of Tobacco Products in the Press and by Means of Bills and Posters (COM (89) 163 final/2 -syn 194’. Luxembourg: Official Journal of the European Communities, no. C124 of May 1989: 5–6.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities (1991), ‘Modified Proposal for a Council Directive on Advertising for Tobacco Products’, Luxembourg: Official Journal of the European Communities, C167 of 27 June 1991: 3–5.Google Scholar
Council of the European Union (1993), ‘Legal Service Opinion (10732/93), Brussels 3 December 1993: 1–11. Cracknell, D. Ministers hit by sleaze row over ‘stars for Labour’, The Sunday Times (2004), http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1379049_2,00.html [8 March 2006].Google Scholar
Cram, L. (1997), Policy-Making in the EU. Conceptual Lenses and the Integration Process, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Doyle, L (1995), ‘Brussels Stubs Out Cash for Anti-smoking Group’, 29 November, The Guardian.Google Scholar
Duina, F.Kurzer, P. (2004), ‘Smoke in your eyes: the struggle over tobacco control in the European Union’, Journal of European Public Policy, 11(1): 47–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ECL (1998a), ‘Newsletter S.T.o.P (Stop Tobacco Promotion)’ issue 1, Brussels, March.Google Scholar
ECL (1998b), ‘Newsletter S.T.o.P (Stop Tobacco Promotion)’ issue 3. Brussels: April 1998.Google Scholar
Eising, R. (2000), Bounded Rationality and Policy Learning in EU Negotiations: the Liberalization of the Electricity Supply Industry, Florence: European University Institute.Google Scholar
Fairbrass, J.Jordan, A. (2003), ‘The Informal Governance of EU Environmental Policy: the Case of Biodiversity’, in T. Christiansen and S. Piattoni (eds), Informal Governance in the European Union, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited: 94–113.Google Scholar
Gilmore, A.McKee, M. (2004), ‘Tobacco-control Policy in the European Union’, in E. A. Feldman and R. Bayer (eds), Unfiltered: Conflicts Over Tobacco Policy and Public Health, Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press: 219–254.Google Scholar
Girod, L., Greenberg, D. I. (1993), ‘Corporate Affairs Weekly Highlights’, 6 August 1993, http://www.pmdocs.com/getallimg.asp?if=avpidx&DOCID=2500064870/4872 [4 February 2005].Google Scholar
Golub, J. (1996), ‘State power and institutional influence in European integration: lessons from the packaging waste directive’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(3): 313–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grüning, T., Gilmore, A.McKee, M. (2006), ‘Tobacco industry influence on science and scientists in Germany’, American Journal of Public Health, 96: 20–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayes-Renshaw, F. (2002), ‘The Council of Ministers’, in J. Peterson and M. Shackleton (eds), The Institutions of the European Union, New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press: 47–70.Google Scholar
Hayes, A. J. (1993), ‘European community tobacco lobby’, Tobacco Control, 2(2): 170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedetoft, U. (2003), ‘Cultures of States and Informal Governance in the EU: an Exploratory Study of Elites, Power and Identity’, in T. Christiansen and S. Piattoni (eds), Informal Governance in the European Union, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited: 36–56.Google Scholar
Héritier, A. (1998), Second-order Institutionalization in Europe: how to Solve Collective Action Problems Under Conditions of Diversity, Bonn: Max Planck Institute for research on collective Goods.Google Scholar
Héritier, A. (1999), Policy-Making and Diversity in Europe. Escape from Deadlock, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Héritier, A. (2000), ‘Overt and Covert Institutionalization in Europe’, in A. Stone Sweet, W. Sandholtz and N. Fligstein (eds), The Institutionalization of Europe, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 56–70.Google Scholar
Hervey, T. K. (2001a), ‘Up in smoke? community (anti)-tobacco law and policy’, European Law Review, 26(2): 101–125.Google Scholar
Hervey, T. K. (2001b), ‘Community and national competence in health after tobacco advertising’, Common Market Law Review, 38(6): 1421–1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khanna, D. (2001), ‘The defeat of the European tobacco advertising directive: a blow for health’, Yearbook of European Law, 20: 113–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingdon, J. W. (1984), Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, New York: Haper Collins.Google Scholar
Lesny, J.A. (1993), ‘Tobacco proves addictive: the European Community’s stalled proposal to ban tobacco advertising’, Vanderbilt Journal of International Law, 26: 149–178.Google Scholar
Matilla, M. (2004), ‘Contested decisions: empirical analysis of voting in the European Union Council of Ministers’, European Journal of Political Research, 43(1): 29–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayntz, R.Scharpf, F. W. (1995), Gesellschaftliche Selbstregelung und politische Steuerung, Cologne: Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, D. (1998), ‘Leadership in European Union negotiations: the presidency of the Council’, International Negotiation, 3: 413–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mossialos, E., Permanand, G. (2000), ‘Public health in the European Union: Making it relevant’, LSE Health Discussion paper No 17. London: LSE Health.Google Scholar
Neuman, M., Bitton, A.Glantz, S. (2002), ‘Tobacco industry strategies for influencing European Community tobacco advertising legislation’, Lancet, 359(9314): 1323–1330.Google ScholarPubMed
Nugent, N. (2003), The Government and Politics of the European Union, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Peters, B.G. (1997), ‘Escaping the joint-decision trap: repetition and sectoral politics in the European Union’, West European Politics, 20(2): 22–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, J.Bomberg, E. (1999), Decision-making in the European Union, Hampshire: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philip, Morris (1992). ‘Letter from Ian C. Sargeant’, Director Corporate Affairs, Policies & Programmes to K. Clarke, Secretary of State for Education & Science, 26 February, http://www.pmdocs.com/PDF/2501015052_5053_0.PDF [2 March 2005].Google Scholar
Philip, Morris (1993a). ‘History and Description of Commission Proposed ban’, 25 October, http://www.pmdocs.com/getallimg.asp?if=avpidx&DOCID=2501029018/9021 [4 February 2005].Google Scholar
Philip, Morris (1993b). ‘Marketing Freedoms’, http://www.pmdocs.com/getallimg.asp?if=avpidx&DOCID=2501021740/1746 [25 February 2005].Google Scholar
Poetschke Langer, M.Schunk, S. (2001), ‘Germany: tobacco industry paradise’, Tobacco Control, 10(4): 300–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Princen, S. (2007), ‘Advocacy coalitions and the internationalization of public health policies’, Journal of Public Policy, 27(1): 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Princen, S.Rhinard, M. (2006), ‘Crashing and creeping: agenda-setting dynamic in the European Union’, Journal of European Public Policy, 13(7): 1119–1132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Randall, E. (2001), The European Union and Health Policy, Hampshire: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scharpf, F. W. (1997), Games Real Actors Play: Actor-centered Institutionalism in Policy Research, Oxford: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Scharpf, F. W. (2000), Notes Towards a Theory of Multilevel Governing in Europe, Cologne: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.Google Scholar
Scharpf, F. W. (2006), ‘The joint-decision trap revisited’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 44(4): 845–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, V. A. (2003), ‘The Boundaries of ‘Bounded Generalizations’: Discourse as the Missing Factor in Actor-centered Institutionalism’, in R. Mayntz and W. Streeck (eds), Die Reformierbarkeit der Demokratie. Innovationen und Blockaden, Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar
Tridimas, G.Tridimas, T. (2002), ‘The European Court of Justice and the annulment of the tobacco advertisement directive: friend of national sovereignty or foe of public health?’, European Journal of Law and Economics, 14(2): 171–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Schendelen, R. (2002), Machiavelli in Brussels. The Art of Lobbying the EU, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, H. (2000), ‘The Policy Process’, in H. Wallace and W. Wallace (eds), Policy-Making in the European Union, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 39–64.Google Scholar