My View: Targeted alcohol policy makes more sense

The first maintains that reductions in drinking levels are best achieved through higher pricing and taxes, restricting where and when it can be sold and served, and limiting marketing and advertising.

Yet restrictive regulatory measures alone have hardly proven the panacea for alcohol problems. In many countries, decades of such policies have failed to reduce high rates of alcohol misuse, while unduly burdening those whose who drink responsibly. In some cases, stringent measures have given rise to new social and health issues, including increased illicit production, cross-border trade and a growth in the black market.

The second view is more pragmatic, recognising that while some drinkers experience problems, the majority do not.

A targeted approach makes more sense, focusing efforts and resources on individuals, behaviours and settings where risk is high. Proven and successful interventions aimed at problem drinkers, nightlife flashpoints, young people and drink-driving already exist.

The key to developing alcohol policy, whether at the national or global level, is not about grabbing headlines and grand gestures. It is about what is feasible and realistic -and likely to make a real difference.

Marjana Martinic, vice president for public health, International Center for Alcohol Policies