Emergent publics of alcohol and other drug policymaking

Suzanne Fraser, Kylie Valentine, Kate Seear

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Alcohol and other drug (AOD) policy is developed within complex networks of social, economic, and political forces. One of the key ideas informing this development is that of the ‘public’ of AOD problems and policy solutions. To date, however, little scholarly attention has been paid to notions of the public in AOD policymaking. Precisely how are publics articulated by those tasked with policy development and implementation? In this article, we explore this question in detail. We analyze 60 qualitative interviews with Australian and Canadian AOD policymakers and service providers, arguing that publics figure in these interviews as pre-existing groups that must be managed – contained or educated – to allow policy to proceed. Drawing on Michael Warner’s work, we argue that publics should be understood instead as made in policy processes rather than as preceding them, and we conclude by reframing publics as emergent collectivities of interest. In closing, we briefly scrutinize the widely accepted model of good policy development, that of ‘consultation,’ arguing that, if publics are to be understood as emergent, and therefore policy’s opportunities as more open than is often suggested, a different figure – here that of ‘conference’ is tentatively suggested – may be required.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)61-81
Number of pages21
JournalCritical Policy Studies
Volume12
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Keywords

  • Australia
  • Canada
  • drugs
  • interviews
  • Michael Warner
  • Policy

Cite this

Fraser, Suzanne ; Valentine, Kylie ; Seear, Kate. / Emergent publics of alcohol and other drug policymaking. In: Critical Policy Studies. 2018 ; Vol. 12, No. 1. pp. 61-81.
@article{f3defd4ad65f4941b883574361abd4d6,
title = "Emergent publics of alcohol and other drug policymaking",
abstract = "Alcohol and other drug (AOD) policy is developed within complex networks of social, economic, and political forces. One of the key ideas informing this development is that of the ‘public’ of AOD problems and policy solutions. To date, however, little scholarly attention has been paid to notions of the public in AOD policymaking. Precisely how are publics articulated by those tasked with policy development and implementation? In this article, we explore this question in detail. We analyze 60 qualitative interviews with Australian and Canadian AOD policymakers and service providers, arguing that publics figure in these interviews as pre-existing groups that must be managed – contained or educated – to allow policy to proceed. Drawing on Michael Warner’s work, we argue that publics should be understood instead as made in policy processes rather than as preceding them, and we conclude by reframing publics as emergent collectivities of interest. In closing, we briefly scrutinize the widely accepted model of good policy development, that of ‘consultation,’ arguing that, if publics are to be understood as emergent, and therefore policy’s opportunities as more open than is often suggested, a different figure – here that of ‘conference’ is tentatively suggested – may be required.",
keywords = "Australia, Canada, drugs, interviews, Michael Warner, Policy",
author = "Suzanne Fraser and Kylie Valentine and Kate Seear",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1080/19460171.2016.1191365",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "61--81",
journal = "Critical Policy Studies",
issn = "1946-0171",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "1",

}

Emergent publics of alcohol and other drug policymaking. / Fraser, Suzanne; Valentine, Kylie; Seear, Kate.

In: Critical Policy Studies, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2018, p. 61-81.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Emergent publics of alcohol and other drug policymaking

AU - Fraser, Suzanne

AU - Valentine, Kylie

AU - Seear, Kate

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Alcohol and other drug (AOD) policy is developed within complex networks of social, economic, and political forces. One of the key ideas informing this development is that of the ‘public’ of AOD problems and policy solutions. To date, however, little scholarly attention has been paid to notions of the public in AOD policymaking. Precisely how are publics articulated by those tasked with policy development and implementation? In this article, we explore this question in detail. We analyze 60 qualitative interviews with Australian and Canadian AOD policymakers and service providers, arguing that publics figure in these interviews as pre-existing groups that must be managed – contained or educated – to allow policy to proceed. Drawing on Michael Warner’s work, we argue that publics should be understood instead as made in policy processes rather than as preceding them, and we conclude by reframing publics as emergent collectivities of interest. In closing, we briefly scrutinize the widely accepted model of good policy development, that of ‘consultation,’ arguing that, if publics are to be understood as emergent, and therefore policy’s opportunities as more open than is often suggested, a different figure – here that of ‘conference’ is tentatively suggested – may be required.

AB - Alcohol and other drug (AOD) policy is developed within complex networks of social, economic, and political forces. One of the key ideas informing this development is that of the ‘public’ of AOD problems and policy solutions. To date, however, little scholarly attention has been paid to notions of the public in AOD policymaking. Precisely how are publics articulated by those tasked with policy development and implementation? In this article, we explore this question in detail. We analyze 60 qualitative interviews with Australian and Canadian AOD policymakers and service providers, arguing that publics figure in these interviews as pre-existing groups that must be managed – contained or educated – to allow policy to proceed. Drawing on Michael Warner’s work, we argue that publics should be understood instead as made in policy processes rather than as preceding them, and we conclude by reframing publics as emergent collectivities of interest. In closing, we briefly scrutinize the widely accepted model of good policy development, that of ‘consultation,’ arguing that, if publics are to be understood as emergent, and therefore policy’s opportunities as more open than is often suggested, a different figure – here that of ‘conference’ is tentatively suggested – may be required.

KW - Australia

KW - Canada

KW - drugs

KW - interviews

KW - Michael Warner

KW - Policy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84990956903&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/19460171.2016.1191365

DO - 10.1080/19460171.2016.1191365

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 61

EP - 81

JO - Critical Policy Studies

JF - Critical Policy Studies

SN - 1946-0171

IS - 1

ER -