For the first time in its history, the Global Alcohol Policy Conference (GAPC) touched down in Latin America. Brazil hosted the event, and over 360 participants from more than 45 countries attended, including academics, policymakers, civil society organisations, and advocates united around one urgent goal: reducing alcohol harm worldwide.

A Government That Is Listening

The most striking headline to emerge from this year’s GAPC was the visible alignment between Brazil’s government and the public health community. Laura Cury, from ACT Health Promotion Brazil, made no effort to hide her excitement.

“Having our Minister of Health say that alcohol policy is a priority for the government and that we’re looking at excise taxation. For me, that is a huge advocacy win,” she said.

Brazil’s Ministry of Health and Ministry of Justice co-hosted the conference. The Ministry of Finance also sent representatives to side events on tax reform. Brazil is currently mid-way through a broader tax reform process. That process includes proposals for excise taxes on unhealthy products, among them alcohol. Senior government figures publicly endorsed that direction. The Health Minister even delivered a recorded video message, signalling a shift that campaigners have spent years pushing for.

Global Alcohol Policy: Brazil Builds a Conflict of Interest Blueprint

One of the most closely watched sessions addressed conflict of interest in global alcohol policy, and Brazil took centre stage. The country’s Ministry of Health recently launched a new reference framework. It explicitly targets industry interference in health policymaking, covering alcohol alongside tobacco and ultra-processed products.

The framework sets out clearer rules on transparency, public-private interactions, and evidence-based decision-making. It frames conflict of interest as a threat to public interest rather than a procedural formality.

Brazil’s tobacco control history lends real weight to this development. Through decades of FCTC implementation, Brazil built strong institutional habits around keeping industry influence out of policymaking. Those same habits now support alcohol harm prevention efforts.

Emma Thompson, researcher at IAS and the University of Edinburgh, sees real potential here. “In a UK context, there is so much to be learned from these efforts. Countries that take this issue forward make it easier for others to follow.”

Colleagues from the Caribbean and Mexico have developed similar frameworks. PAHO has also been working on conflict of interest guidance covering unhealthy commodities more broadly. Latin America is building genuine momentum.

Alcohol Harm in Brazil: The Numbers Behind the Debate

Latin America ranks second globally for alcohol prevalence, behind Europe. Heavy episodic drinking remains Brazil’s dominant pattern. Consumption among younger generations has plateaued in recent surveys, yet one trend demands attention: women’s alcohol consumption has roughly doubled over the past decade.

Beer makes up the bulk of what Brazilians drink, which creates a tricky communications challenge. Industry voices have sometimes tried to reframe beer as lower risk by pointing to countries where switching from spirits reduced harm. In Brazil, where beer is already the default choice, that argument does not hold up, and advocates say so plainly.

Alcohol Harm Prevention in the Digital Age

The sheer scale of digital alcohol marketing dominated several sessions at this year’s GAPC. The challenge it poses for alcohol harm prevention was a thread running throughout the conference.

Researchers presented evidence of no and low alcohol product advertising flooding platforms like TikTok, particularly in Vietnam. Brands position these products explicitly as health choices. The products may carry less alcohol, but the marketing builds brand loyalty and normalises consumption. Advocates call it a deliberate loophole.

Researchers also raised alarm over algorithms as active drivers of harm. The real problem, several argued, is not any single product but the architecture of the platforms themselves. What algorithms reward shapes what people see, and right now they reward exactly the kind of content that drives unhealthy consumption.

Lithuania offered the counterpoint the room needed. After introducing a comprehensive alcohol marketing ban, the country recorded a 35% reduction in adolescent drinking. That figure drew sustained applause and will feature in forthcoming research from the Institute of Alcohol Studies.

Equity, Colonialism and Who Bears the Cost

The equity plenary produced some of the most powerful moments of the conference. Speakers examined alcohol’s historical role in colonialism. They also argued that today’s picture, where large multinationals based in the global north drive consumption in lower-income populations and extract the profit, continues that colonial legacy.

One presentation looked at the marketing of alcohol as empowerment to Black Brazilian women, despite those communities already carrying disproportionate burdens of harm. Emma Thompson called it “really illuminating,” noting how industry messaging borrows the language of progress while deepening inequality.

Indigenous communities also had a presence at the conference. Laura Cury described that as significant. “Our indigenous peoples have been exterminated, basically. So having them there and seeing them there was really important.”

What the Global Alcohol Policy Picture Looks Like

Regional groups met separately, and different priorities emerged. Latin American delegates focused on tax reform, advertising regulation, and alcohol labelling. African delegates leaned towards equity and under-resourced health systems. European delegates discussed cross-border digital marketing regulation.

Despite those differences, the overall mood pointed towards alignment. Emma Thompson summed it up clearly: there is broad global agreement that alcohol harm is a crisis and that fighting industry interference is the biggest shared challenge.

Wipro captured the feeling of the conference best with a phrase that stuck: “Getting to SAFER, faster.”

Challenges and What Comes Next

The conference was candid about its own shortcomings. Funding is a serious constraint, both for events like GAPC and for alcohol harm prevention work at large. Getting delegates from lower and middle-income countries to attend remains genuinely difficult, even with tiered registration fees.

Young people were largely absent from proceedings despite featuring heavily in discussions. People with lived experience of alcohol harm were similarly underrepresented. Several delegates flagged both gaps as priorities for future editions.

The year 2030 now stands as the next major focal point. It marks the end of both the WHO Global Action Plan on Alcohol and the Sustainable Development Goals deadline. The 2025 High Level Meeting on NCDs disappointed many in the field after industry interference watered down key commitments. The community is already working out how to do better before 2030 arrives.

Norwegian NGO Forut offered one of the more creative approaches. Researchers found that Norway’s public pension fund could, under its own investment guidelines, exclude alcohol industry holdings on ethical grounds. It is precisely the kind of lateral thinking that campaigners say the movement needs more of right now.

Source: dbrecoveryresources