The WHO’s ‘tobacco playbook’ targets alcohol
The global drinks industry faces an existential threat as the World Health Organisation adopts a zero-tolerance stance on alcohol, echoing tobacco control tactics. Writing for db, Mike Coppen-Gardner argues that understanding this strategy is no longer optional – it’s the key to survival.
The global drinks industry stands at a critical juncture. The World Health Organisation has fired the starting gun for the imminent implementation of what is otherwise referred to as the “tobacco playbook” – a proven regulatory strategy that transforms legitimate businesses into heavily restricted industries through incremental policy escalation. Health authorities worldwide will no doubt pick up and adopt the WHO’s “no safe limit” stance, likely driven by activist health organisations pushing for the tobacco playbook to be deployed. For drinks companies, understanding this playbook isn’t just strategic planning; it’s survival.
The World Health Organisation’s declaration “there is no safe amount [of alcohol] that does not affect health” represents more than public health guidance – it’s the opening salvo in a coordinated regulatory assault. This absolutist position, published in The Lancet Public Health, deliberately echoes tobacco policy by eliminating any distinction between moderate consumption and abuse. By declaring no safe level exists, regulators create justification for unlimited intervention.
Industry leaders sound the alarm
Leading industry executives are already voicing concerns about this regulatory trajectory. Diageo chief executive Debra Crew told the Financial Times that the spirits giant was talking to policymakers to weed out inaccurate data on the health impacts of alcohol, saying, “There is some science going out there that is just not accurate, so we are trying to combat that.” Meanwhile, Asahi chief executive Atsushi Katsuki told the FT that while he was “absolutely not denying that there are risks” attached to drinking, he believed the message of “no safe level” was misleading, arguing there was “lots of evidence” that moderate alcohol consumption could have health and wellbeing benefits.
The playbook unfolds
The tobacco regulatory template follows a predictable sequence: mandatory health warnings escalate to comprehensive advertising bans, plain packaging requirements, punitive taxation, and ultimately, product design restrictions. Each step creates precedent for the next, making resistance increasingly difficult as the industry becomes systematically demonised.
We’re already witnessing early-stage deployment. The WHO explicitly demands “cancer-related health information messages on labels of alcoholic beverages, following the example of tobacco products.” This mirrors exactly how tobacco regulation began – with mandatory health warnings that gradually expanded and became more graphic over time. The organisation places alcohol in “the highest risk group, which also includes asbestos, radiation and tobacco,” deliberately conflating moderate consumption with genuinely toxic substances.
Financial devastation awaits
The economic implications are staggering. Brand Finance’s 2024 Alcoholic Drinks analysis reveals the enormous wealth at stake: Moutai at $50.1 billion, Wuliangye at $25.9 billion, Corona Extra at $10.4 billion and Heineken at $9.0 billion. The spirits sector alone represents $149.8 billion in total brand value across the top 50 brands globally.
Previous Brand Finance analysis showed that alcohol companies like AB InBev, Diageo, Heineken, and Pernod Ricard faced 100% revenue exposure to marketing restrictions, with potential brand contribution losses exceeding $267 billion across just nine major companies. When applied to today’s market valuations, the destruction would be even more severe.
Marketing restrictions and plain packaging requirements devastate companies’ ability to differentiate products. Brand values collapse under regulatory pressure, as seen in tobacco, where companies experienced systematic erosion of intellectual property built over decades. Compliance costs alone – warning labels, packaging redesigns, legal submissions – will cost hundreds of millions annually.
Innovation under threat
Perhaps most perniciously, the tobacco playbook threatens the very innovation that’s delivering positive health outcomes. Recent Portman Group data shows 38% of UK drinkers now consume low and no-alcohol products semi-regularly, up from 29% in 2022. Among 25-34-year-olds, nearly half consider themselves regular consumers of alcohol alternatives. This organic shift toward moderation proves informed consumers make responsible choices when given quality alternatives.
Partner Content
Yet regulatory restrictions on product design and appeal will stifle innovation, preventing companies from developing new offerings that meet consumer preferences. Research and development investments become stranded assets as regulatory constraints make product differentiation nearly impossible. The irony is profound: just as consumers embrace moderation voluntarily, regulators prepare to impose restrictions that will destroy the industry innovation enabling this positive trend.
Smaller craft producers and regional companies will be eliminated entirely, unable to absorb regulatory compliance costs. This consolidation reduces consumer choice while concentrating market power among only the largest multinational corporations capable of bearing compliance burdens. The diversity that defines modern drinks markets – from craft spirits to artisanal wines – faces extinction under regulatory pressure designed for mass-market tobacco products.
The ripple effects extend throughout entire supply chains: agricultural suppliers face reduced demand, packaging companies lose major customers, hospitality venues struggle with restricted offerings, and tourism regions dependent on the drinks industry confront economic decline.
Litigation and legal exposure
The WHO’s carcinogen classification creates massive litigation risks. Companies will face mounting legal costs defending against class-action lawsuits, potentially reaching the billions seen in tobacco settlements. Legal reserves and insurance costs will drain resources from productive business activities, further accelerating industry consolidation.
The drinks industry must recognise that this regulatory assault represents a fundamental threat to business models built on brand differentiation, consumer choice, and innovation. The tobacco playbook’s incremental nature makes it particularly dangerous, as each seemingly reasonable restriction creates precedent for more severe measures.
Unlike tobacco, however, the drinks industry has powerful counterarguments. Consumer behaviour is already shifting organically toward moderation. Innovation in low and no-alcohol products is creating precisely the outcomes health authorities claim to want. Most critically, moderate alcohol consumption remains a legitimate consumer choice supported by decades of research showing negligible individual risk levels.
The path forward
The industry must unite to resist regulatory overreach while supporting continued innovation in moderation products. This means challenging the WHO’s absolutist position with evidence-based advocacy, supporting research that demonstrates the distinction between moderate consumption and abuse, and highlighting the positive trends already occurring through market-driven solutions.
The stakes extend beyond corporate profits to fundamental questions of adult autonomy and consumer choice. The tobacco playbook succeeds by treating entire industries as inherently harmful, regardless of usage patterns or individual responsibility. For the drinks industry, recognising and resisting this playbook isn’t just good business, it’s essential for preserving the legitimate choices of millions of responsible consumers worldwide.
The regulatory tsunami is building. The industry’s response will determine whether it faces the same systematic destruction that transformed tobacco, or whether evidence-based advocacy and consumer choice can prevail against paternalistic overreach disguised as public health policy.
Mike Coppen-Gardner is the founder and chief executive of SPQR, specialising in regulatory strategy and public mobilisation for major corporations facing policy challenges.
Related news
Will all English wines soon be whole bunch?
