framing social marketing as a system of interaction: a neo-institutional approach to alcohol...

This article was downloaded by: [Swinburne University of Technology]On: 04 September 2014, At: 03:05Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Marketing ManagementPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjmm20

Framing social marketing as a systemof interaction: A neo-institutionalapproach to alcohol abstinenceHélène Cherriera & Lauren Gurrieriba Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Australiab Department of Marketing, Swinburne University of Technology,AustraliaPublished online: 08 Jan 2014.

To cite this article: Hélène Cherrier & Lauren Gurrieri (2014) Framing social marketing as asystem of interaction: A neo-institutional approach to alcohol abstinence, Journal of MarketingManagement, 30:7-8, 607-633, DOI: 10.1080/0267257X.2013.850110

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2013.850110

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjmm20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/0267257X.2013.850110

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2013.850110

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Framing social marketing as a system of interaction:A neo-institutional approach to alcohol abstinence

Helene Cherrier, Griffith Business School, Griffith University, AustraliaLauren Gurrieri, Department of Marketing, Swinburne University ofTechnology, Australia

Abstract We employ Giddens’ structuration theory to gain insights into theinteraction between upstream/midstream and downstream social marketingperspectives. This is conducted through thirteen phenomenological interviewswith informants who stand outside of the practice of alcohol consumptionthrough their voluntary engagement in one month of sobriety. Our studyidentifies the ‘modalities’ located at the intersection between individualactions and the institutions of alcohol. By identifying these ‘modalities’, weconceptualise social marketing in interaction, which incorporates theinstitutional orders of domination, signification and legitimation, and theindividual actions of power, communication and sanction. Specific domains ofinterventions are identified, namely marketplace offerings and promotionaltechniques, social grouping and positional status and rituals and traditions,through which social marketers can enact social change.

Keywords social marketing; upstream; downstream; midstream; institutions;alcohol; abstinence

Introduction

Much discussion in social marketing has its origins in Kotler and Zaltman’s(1971, p. 5) definition of the concept as ‘the design, implementation andcontrol of programs calculated to influence the acceptability of social ideas’.Years later, Andreasen (1994, p. 110) observed that social marketing influencesnot only ideas but also attitudes and behaviours and re-defined the concept as‘programs designed to influence the voluntary behaviour of target audiences toimprove their personal welfare and that of the society of which they are part’.Although social marketers align on the key concern to influence changes thatbenefit the actor and their environment (Andreason, 2003; Dann, 2010; Peattie& Peattie, 2009), approaches to enacting social change are diverse, historicallyevolving from downstream interventions targeting individuals to upstreaminterventions focusing on institutions (Andreasen, 1997; Goldberg, 1995;Wallack, Dorfman, Jernigan, & Themba, 1993). In this study, we respond tothe current call for social marketing to integrate both downstream andupstream approaches to social change (French, Blair-Stevens, McVey, & Merritt,

Journal of Marketing Management, 2014Vol. 30, Nos. 7–8, 607–633, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2013.850110

© 2014 Westburn Publishers Ltd.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

2010). Our analysis of narratives of temporal alcohol abstinence performed in thecontext of Australian drinking culture provides insights on the ‘coupling elements’or ‘modalities’ (Giddens, 1979), whereby individuals and institutions interrelate.By identifying the intersection between individual actions and the institutions ofalcohol, we develop a theoretically informed framework that conceives socialmarketing in interaction, which incorporates both upstream/midstream structuralcomponents and downstream concerns with individual actions.

Our paper is structured as follows. First, we review the literature ondownstream and upstream/midstream approaches to enacting social change andhighlight the complimentarity of both perspectives. Second, we draw upon neo-institutional/post-structuralist theorists (e.g. Barley & Tolbert, 1997; Friedland &Alford, 1991; Giddens, 1984) and Gidden’s (1984) structuration theory to gaininsights on the intersections between institutions and human actions within thecontext of alcohol. Third, based on 13 phenomenological interviews withindividuals who ceased their alcohol consumption for one month, we note thatthe institutions of alcohol and individual practices of alcohol consumption/non-consumption interrelate through the modalities of resources (marketplaceofferings and promotional techniques), interpretive schemes (social grouping andpositional status) and norms (rituals and traditions). In addition to providing asense-making device for the fragmented state of extant alcohol research, we offera framework that conceives social marketing in interaction between theinstitutional orders of signification, domination and legitimation and theindividual actions of communication, power and sanctions. This frameworkoffers social marketers a lens that takes into account upstream/midstream anddownstream perspectives, highlighting their observed complementarity andinteractivity (Andreasen, 2006; French et al., 2010; Goldberg, 1995; Lagarde,2012; Lee & Kotler, 2011).

Perspectives in social marketing

In this section, we explore downstream and upstream approaches to social change.We then present arguments on the complementarity of downstream and upstreamsocial marketing perspectives.

The downstream approach to social change

Predominantly, social marketing has focused on downstream behaviour changeinterventions targeting individuals. With a managerial and applied emphasis,downstream social marketing interventions emanate from powerful institutionswho identify what must be done and move ‘downward’ to enact behaviouralchange amongst end-consumers. This approach employs the technicality andapplicability of exchange theory, target audience, segmentation, customerorientation, monitoring and the marketing mix to influence an individual’scognitive processes (Grier & Bryant, 2005; Hoek & Jones, 2011). Based on aclear understanding of the message to convey to a target audience, strategiescomprise a social proposition (product), accessibility (place), communication(promotion) and cost (price) (Peattie & Peattie, 2009). One defining feature of thedownstream approach originates from Rothschild’s (1999) foundational claim that

608 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 30

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

any tendencies can be altered if the individuals concerned possess the appropriateinformation, want to alter the behaviour and have the ability and opportunity to doso. By educating consumers and providing the support, resources and infrastructurenecessary for behavioural change, individuals are made responsible on issues andconsequences related to their personal consumption choices (Wolburg, 2005). Forexample, prescribed acceptable concentrations of alcohol (PCA) inform consumersabout what is ‘safe/normal/acceptable’ and ‘risky/abnormal/unacceptable’consumption. Deviance from the PCA is regulated using legal penalties such asfines, deduction of points on the driving license or imprisonment. By urgingconsumers to comply with recommended alcohol intake prescriptions, thisapproach regards alcohol as a substance ‘that is problematic only when users makethe wrong decisions’ (Wolburg, 2005, p. 176). This perspective assumes that alcoholconsumption is a rational, cognitive decision linked to information processing,awareness and choice. Similarly, interventions such as ‘DrinkWiseAustralia’ conveyinformation about the consequences associated with drinking and driving, bingedrinking and alcohol-induced sexual assaults (Rimal & Real, 2003). By urgingconsumers to drink ‘wisely’ and comply with recommended alcohol intakeprescriptions, this intervention attempts to solve alcohol-related issues through therational decision-making processes of individual consumers. By emphasisingrationality, choice and the autonomy of individuals it is inferred that consumershave the capacity to engage in self-regulation and risk management behaviours, asthey possess the power to make informed decisions regarding healthy versusunhealthy consumption choices.

Opponents to the downstream approach point to the dangers of applying a formof expert-driven social control (Wallack et al., 1993), which risks confining end-users to the periphery of social problems and perpetuating a culture of ‘victimblaming’. This is because the downstream model renders consumers whollyresponsible for the implementation of promoted healthy practices. Yet, withhealth research now recognising that individuals cannot be conceived asautonomously making self-governing decisions in a social vacuum (Demers et al.,2002), this view of individualised responsibility is problematised. Additionally, ithas been observed that this focus on the individual to enact social changehas uncomfortable parallels with the ‘individual choice’ arguments presented bythe tobacco, alcohol and fast-food industries (Hoek & Jones, 2011). Futhermore,the downstream assumption that consumers can understand, comprehend andtrust the information they are provided has also attracted criticism. Pointing tothe ‘junk science’ peddled by manufacturers and industries, critics argue thatconfusion, scientific doubt and uncertainty are often created in consumers’ minds.This, in turn, counters the credibility and trust in downstream social marketinginterventions (Chapman & Liberman, 2005). Combined, these criticisms helpexplain the failure of downstream interventions such as individual responsibilitycampaigns (Szmigin, Bengry-Howell, Griffin, Hackley, & Mistral, 2011) and riskawareness programmes (Berger & Rand, 2008; Cherrier, 2012), to enact socialchange.

The upstream approach to social change

Challengers to the downstream approach shift the concept of social marketingbeyond the individualist–functionalist paradigm to consider the external

Cherrier and Gurrieri Framing social marketing as a system of interaction 609

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

constraining forces to behavioural change (Demers et al., 2002; Rolfe, Orford, &Dalton, 2009). ‘Upstream’ social marketing focuses on the ‘institutions that form thesocial system within which the individual operates’ (Goldberg, 1995, p. 365), or whatWallack et al. (1993) call ‘the fabric of society’. By aiming to encourage regulators torefine or improve industry regulations and policies, upstream social marketingfocuses on the social consequences of commercial marketing activities and onconsumer behaviour (Hastings, Anderson, Cooke, & Gordon, 2006; Jones &Donovan, 2002; Seiders & Petty, 2004). For example, Goldberg (1995) discussespossible upstream social marketing inquiries, including: ‘what are the effects in teensof the extensive promotional efforts of cigarettes? What are the advertising affects onteens of the association between alcohol/tobacco and fun, sex, and sports?’ (p. 359).These inquiries adopt a consumer-based perspective to account for the socialconsequences of commercial marketing activities and policies (Hastings & Saren,2003). The findings aim to encourage ‘laws makers to adopt new policies andorganisations to make improvements to their services and practice’ (Gordon,Harris, MacKintosh, & Moodie, 2011, p. 152). Similarly, Hastings and Saren(2003) discuss the use of upstream measures that critiqued the tobacco industryand the marketing techniques used to encourage consumers to smoke, which inturn led to outcomes such as controls and bans on tobacco marketing. In thecontext of alcohol, upstream social marketing considers ‘the role the liquorindustry plays in fostering drinking’ (Goldberg, 1995, p. 365) and the influence ofalcohol-marketing with the aim of refining the way individuals perceive alcohol(Goldberg, 1995; Gordon et al., 2011; Hastings & Saren, 2003; Hastings et al.,2006; Szmigin et al., 2011). As such, the upstream approach calls for social marketersto first understand individuals within the situation at hand and then search for signsof unsatisfactory, unacceptable or problematic conditions. In doing so, environmentscan be altered in ways that support and promote behaviour change objectives.

Mostly, arguments against the upstream approach emanate from industry, whichsupports a neo-liberal approach to consumption, whereby consumers should be freeto consume as they desire (Shankar, Cherrier, & Canniford, 2006). For example, thetobacco industry in New Zealand argued against political restriction, claiming‘smoking is, and should continue to be, a matter of informed adult choice’ (Hoek& Jones, 2011, p. 35). By feeding into arguments against the creation of a ‘nannystate’ (Jochelson, 2006), such critics argue in favour of self-regulation as opposed tooutright policy interventions or bans that impinge upon consumers’ freedoms andchoices. Given the highly liberal environments organisations have traditionallyparticipated in, the receptiveness of business to any perceived regulations alsocreates an uphill battle for upstream social marketers (Jones & Donovan, 2002).This has led to questions about whether pursuing initiatives that involve ‘sleepingwith the enemy’ may be more worthwhile, capitalising on the keenness oforganisations and industry groups to demonstrate corporate social responsibility.Yet, the competing interests between industry and social marketers raise validconcerns about whether social change agendas may be compromised in suchalliances (Weis & Arnesen, 2007). Moreover, the ongoing change, complexity anddynamism of such environments poses additional challenges to upstream socialmarketers, who have attracted criticism for attempting to enact change throughcontrolling regulatory measures within conditions that rarely remain static (Hoek& Jones, 2011).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

The complementarity and interactivity of downstream and upstream perspectives

Recent work in social marketing has called for and developed broader analyticalframeworks that consider the complementarity of downstream and upstreamperspectives. For example, Lee and Kotler (2011) discuss social marketing at theintersection between primary audience (downstream), policymakers and corporations(upstream) and friends, family and influential others (midstream), and French et al.(2010) offer the eight-point benchmark criteria for social marketing, which situatesthe customer at the centre of social marketing whilst recognising the importance ofthe social context as influencing individual behaviour. Most recently, Lagarde (2012)describes key social marketing principles in terms of behaviour focus, audienceorientation, segmentation, value exchange, marketing mix, upstream strategies,midstream, promotion and sustainability. Explicit to these perspectives is thatconsumption choices are not individual, rational and autonomous decisions but areinstead influenced by a system of codification, symbolic representations and socialnorms embedded in upstream audiences (i.e. policy makers/industry) and midstreaminfluences (i.e. family/friends). This view is exemplified in alcohol studies in whichconsideration is made of the symbolic meanings of alcohol consumption, such asalcohol advertising that communicates positive alcohol-related identity attributes,including youth, masculinity and strength (Heath, 2000; Pettigrew, 2002; Szmigin,Griffin, & Hackley, 2008; Szmigin et al., 2011), as well as communal bonding andcollective consciousness (Griffin, Bengry-Howell, Hackley, Mistral, & Szmigin,2009a, 2009b; Holder, 2003; Perkins & Berkowitz, 1986; Rolfe et al., 2009;Smith & Foxcroft, 2009). Further, authors ascribe the meaning systems of alcoholto social events such as ‘spring break’ (Lee, Maggs, & Rankin, 2006), bacheloretteparties (Montemurro & McClure, 2005), pub attendance (Pettigrew, 2002),birthdays, weddings or funerals (Grekin, Sher, & Krull, 2007; Lee et al., 2006;Weitzman, Nelson, & Wechsler, 2003), underlining that our knowledge regardingwhat is considered ‘normal/acceptable’ and ‘abnormal/unacceptable’ consumptionemanates from the alcohol industry and governmental regulations, as outlined inupstream social marketing (Goldberg, 1995), but also by our friends and family, asdiscussed in the mid-stream social marketing approach (Lee & Kotler, 2011).

Considering that individuals cannot be conceived as autonomously making self-governing decisions (Demers et al., 2002) and recognising the current consensus onthe need to further develop social marketing approaches that incorporatedownstream, upstream and midstream perspectives (Andreasen, 2006; French et al.,2010; Goldberg, 1995), this study draws upon a neo-institutional/post-structural lensto develop a framework that positions the interactivity of downstream and upstream/midstream social marketing perspectives through modalities. In the following section,we first emphasise that, from a neo-institutional perspective, institutions cannot beseparated from individual actions. We then provide Giddens’ structuration theory asa sensitising device to analyse alcohol consumption and identify the interactive spacebetween institutions and individual actions.

A neo-institutional perspective

Friedland and Alford (1991) describe institutions as supraorganisational patterns ofhuman activity, and Barley and Tolbert (1997, p. 94) define them as ‘socially


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

constructed templates for action, generated and maintained through ongoinginteractions’. Institutions provide ‘organizing principles’ or ‘guidelines for practicalaction’ (Rao, Monin, & Durand, 2003, p. 795) and are encoded in norms, establishmeanings and create relations of power (Giddens, 1984). By pointing to theinseparability between the social (people) and the institutional domains that formthe social system (Giddens, 1984), neo-institutional theorists emphasise thatinstitutions are property of the social system, embedded in social practices,including politics, schools, religions as well as fashion, festivals, public opinion,entertainment, sports, family, rituals, customs, ceremonies, cultural memory andeven in people’s relations to themselves (Barley & Tolbert, 1997; Castoriadis,1997; Shankar et al., 2006). Importantly, whilst institutions set bounds onbehaviour by restricting opportunities and alternatives, individuals have the powerto modify, and even eliminate, institutions (Barley & Tolbert, 1997; Craib, 1992;Giddens, 1979, 1984). Such ‘deinstitutionalisation’ can occur when previouslyinstitutionalised practices lose meaning and legitimacy, such as the use of plasticbags, and/or when ‘better’ options are recognised, such as using re-usable shoppingbags (Cherrier, 2006). Theorists also note that where institutionalised practices areold and well established, some ‘disruptions’ may be necessary to initiate change(Giddens, 1979, 1984).

To further understand the mutual constituency of institutions and individualactions, we draw on Giddens’ structuration theory. This helps frame the modalitiesthrough which institutions and individual actions are ‘dissolved in favour of anacknowledgement of the interaction’ (Giddens, 1979, p. 81), and, in the context ofour study, allows us to understand how alcohol practices respond to institutionalinfluences and, at the same time, can participate in the modification of theinstitutions of alcohol. In doing so, we are able to provide insights into how socialmarketing can enact social change as a system of interaction.

Giddens’ structuration theory

Giddens’ structuration theory draws on the notion that institutions are both aproduct of and constraint on actions (Barley & Tolbert, 1997). By focusing on theintersections between institutions and actions, Giddens negotiates micro and themacro levels of change enactment to offer a process-oriented theory through whichinstitutions and actions simultaneously affect one another via ‘modalities’. The keyprinciple in Giddens’ structuration theory is that individual practices are enabled andconstrained by institutional orders and that these are the result of human behaviours(Barley & Tolbert, 1997; Craib, 1992; Giddens, 1979, 1984). By claiming thatinstitutional orders result from the actions of individuals, structuration theorysituates social change as predicated upon social interactions. Giddens describesinstitutional orders, or the structures in social systems, in terms of systems ofdomination, which refers to the production of and exercise of power originatingfrom the control of resources; signification, which represents the production ofmeanings through organised interpretive schemes; and legitimation, which refers tothe production of rights and obligations. In contrast to these institutional orders thatoffer rules and typifications, the realm of action refers to the ‘social arrangements ofpeople, objects, and events in the minute-by-minute flow of social life’s unfolding(Barley & Tolbert, 1997, p. 98). Giddens conceives three key processes of human


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

action during social interaction, namely communication, the exercising of power andsanctioning of conduct.

To understand how individuals’ actions contribute to the formation andmaintenance of institutional orders, and how these orders can change as the resultof human behaviours, Giddens speaks of modalities, which are ‘institutional featuresof systems of social interactions’ (Giddens, 1979, p. 81). Modalities occur at theintersection of institutions and actions, providing the linkage between processes ofinteraction and the structural components of social systems. Modalities can beunderstood in two ways (Willmott, 1981) – stocks of knowledge that individualsdraw upon in the production of interactions and the means of mobilising thesestocks to change institutional orders. In other words, modalities can be seen as thetools that make interaction possible as well as being influenced. Giddens conceivesmodalities as resources, interpretive schemes and norms. First, resources intersectstructures of domination and human actions of power, where relations of autonomyand dependence in social interaction are reproduced. Giddens emphasises thatresources are asymmetric and vehicles for power. He defines two types ofresources – authoritative resources that generate power by having command overpersons and allocative resources that generate power by having command overobjects and the material. Second, interpretive schemes mediate between structuresof signification and individual acts of communication, sustaining an ‘accountableuniverse’ where mutual knowledge is established. Interpretive schemes determinewhat constitutes meanings and governs communication in interactions. Third, normsrefer to the intersection between structures of legitimation and actions of sanction,where rights are actualised and obligations are enacted. Individuals can draw uponthese norms in the sanctioning of their own and others’ behaviour or their conductin interactions.

Bearing these modalities in mind, the construction and maintenance of thethree institutional orders can be understood as follows: individuals deal withpower, communicate meanings and sanction their own behaviours and that ofothers by drawing on modalities (resources, interpretive schemes and norms),and in doing so reproduce the institutional orders of domination, significationand legitimation. But, equally, these modalities can serve as the means forindividuals to modify the institutional components of social systems. Barleyand Tolbert (1997, p. 98) describes Giddens’ three modalities as the ‘actors’stocks of practical knowledge,’ which influence how individuals enact power,communicate and evaluate the behaviour to sanction and reward. In this manner,modalities are primarily mental models that are enacted through scripts or‘behavioural regularities’. Individuals’ reflexive ability is triggered when‘regularized acts’ (Giddens, 1979, p. 56) and routinised patterns of behaviourare interrupted. When reflexive or knowledgeable, individuals are capable ofpurposive actions and choices, and, in turn, can transform institutions throughthe choices they make.

In this study, we analyse the modalities that individuals draw upon when talkingabout alcohol and their experience of alcohol abstinence. Understanding modalitiesin the context of alcohol will help us frame how institutions and individual actionsinteract. In the following sections, we outline our empirical study and its analyticalfindings.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

Methodological overview

Using Giddens’ structuration theory as a sensitising device, our empirical study aims togain insights into the modalities of alcohol. A consideration in employing thestructuration lens is to deal with time/space issues (Busco, 2009; Giddens, 1984;Hotho, 2008; Pozzebon & Pinsonneault, 2005). When describing the theory,Giddens (1984, p. 87) explains that analysing the interaction between institutionalorders and individual actions requires researchers to focus on a particular context,which involves a specific change or ‘disjuncture’ in human social interactions(Pozzebon & Pinsonneault, 2005). As Barley and Tolbert (1997, p. 102) emphasise,‘contextual change is usually necessary for collectively questioning scripted patterns ofbehaviour’. In this study, we consider the specific context of alcohol consumption andfocus on individuals’ temporal changes (cessation) in alcohol consumption practices.

Finding access to individuals who temporally ceased their alcohol consumption waschallenging. The decision to abstain from alcohol consumption offers a restrictednumber of sites that can be chosen, namely, drinking support organisations (e.g.Alcoholics Anonymous), or charities seeking to raise awareness and funds forabstaining from drinking alcohol. We focused on people who freely chose to stopdrinking alcohol as opposed to those who ceased due to problems relating to addiction,as the latter group often cease alcohol consumption indefinitely (Cain, 2009). Inaddition, we undertook our study in the context of Australia, where alcoholconsumption is perceived as culturally embedded (Pettigrew, 2002), recently definedas a ‘culture of intoxication’ (Fry, 2010). In this context, individuals who reject alcoholconsumption suffer social stigmatisation and exclusion (Cherrier & Gurrieri, 2012).For this study, we selected the Australian not for profit organisation ‘FebFast’. FebFastis an organisation that invites people to forgo their alcohol consumption alongsidefundraising activities during February at a cost of $25 per person. During the month ofFebruary, FebFast supports its participants by providing information about alcoholwithdrawal effects and provides a social platform to share experiences and strugglesin resisting alcohol. FebFast participants have the option to pay $20 for a ‘night out’from alcohol abstinence. In its four years of operation, FebFast has recruited almost20,000 people who collectively raised more than $2,600,000 in charitable donations tobe distributed to drug and alcohol organisations and foundations across Australia(www.febfast.org.au).

Another difficulty in empirically utilising Giddens’ structuration theory is toincorporate knowledgeability into practical activities. Pozzebon and Pinsonneault(2005) emphasise this challenge and recommend considering individuals’construction of detailed stories of their daily activities. For this reason, we used thephenomenological interviewing method, which provides in-depth discovery ofmeanings and solicits informants’ reflexivity on their daily actions.Phenomenological interviews are largely unstructured and conversational in nature,allowing both parties to freely interact and giving prominence to the subjectivemeanings of the life worlds of the informants (Thompson, Locander, & Pollio, 1989).

Drawing on the participant database of FebFast, we conducted phenomenologicalinterviews with 13 informants who had participated in the FebFast initiative for thepast one or more years. A diversity of informants across gender, age, socio-economicstatus, drinking history and cultural background were interviewed to generatedifferent perspectives on alcohol practices (Table 1). Importantly, our aim is not to


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

http://www.febfast.org.au

Table

1Inform

ants’details.

Name1

Gender

Age

Status

Childre

nAlcohol*

FebFast**

Occupation

Arm

and

Male

41

Married

One

Heavy

3Partneratlaw

firm

Cathie

Female

28

Single

None

Medium

3Psych

ologist

Chloe

Female

39

Married

None

Heavy

3Manageratloca

lhosp

ital

Denise

Female

62

Inarelationsh

ipNone

Medium

3Retired

Elodie

Female

42

Married

One

Medium

3Freelance

publish

erandeditor

Joanne

Female

42

Married

Two

Low

3Form

erlawyernow

homemaker

Kelly

Female

44

Married

Two

Medium

1Business

managerforUniversityrese

archce

ntre

Lea

Female

26

Married

None

Heavy

1Administrationworkerforloca

lcity

council

Naomi

Female

24

Engaged

None

Heavy

1Disabilityse

rvicesworkerfornon-profitorganisation

Neal

Male

41

Inarelationsh

ipNone

Medium

1Project

managerforloca

lcity

council

Ralf

Male

40

Married

Two

Heavy

1Smallpublish

ingbusiness

owner

Sally

Female

26

Single

None

Heavy

1Tenancy

workerfornon-profitorganisation

Sophie

Female

56

Married

Three

Medium

1Officemanagerforco

mmunityadulteduca

tionce

ntre

Notes:

*Alcoholco

nsu

mptionpriorto

FebFast

participation.Heavy

(more

thantw

odrinksperday);Medium

(one/twodrinksperday+heavierdrinkingonweekends/

socialoccasions);Low

(mainly

weekendsandoccasionalalcoholco

nsu

mption).

**Numberoftimesinform

antparticipatedin

FebFast.

1Pse

udonym

suse

din

this

study.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

analyse the effectiveness of FebFast in promoting alcohol abstinence, but rather todevelop a theoretically informed framework, which incorporates downstream,upstream and midstream social marketing perspectives. Toward this aim, the goalof the interviews was to capture the modalities of alcohol (non)consumptionpractices. Thus, we focused the interview on: (1) the informants’ experience ofalcohol cessation during a month of alcohol abstinence, (2) their perceptions ofalcohol consumption in Australia and how alcohol abstinence influenced theseperceptions and (3) the life story of the informants as alcohol drinkers before andafter their participation in a month of alcohol abstinence. The recorded interviewslasted between 90 and 120 minutes and were transcribed verbatim for analysis. First,each interview transcript was reviewed to generate an understanding of theinformants’ life stories and experiences of the (non)consumption of alcohol.Second, constant comparative coding and comparison across informants wasconducted to establish patterns. Third, these codes were inductively modified basedon the theoretical underpinnings of the research as the analysis progressed. Finally,the process of writing up combined our findings from the empirical research withexisting studies on alcohol. This enabled us to develop a framework of socialmarketing in interaction (Figure 1).

The modalities between institutions of alcohol and individualactions

For our informants, participating in alcohol abstinence for one month represents achallenging and difficult process of distancing oneself from alcohol consumptionpractices. Despite this, all of our informants remained committed to FebFastthroughout the month of February with only two informants (Chloe and Kelly),who purchased one ‘night-out’. In the discussion below, we highlight how individuals

Figure 1 The social marketing system of interaction.

Signification Domination Legitimation

Interpretive schemes

Social groupingPositional status

ResourcesMarketplace offerings

Promotional techniques

NormsRitualsTraditions

Institutional orders

Realm of action Communication Power Sanctions

Modalities

Individual focus

Institutional focus


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

exercise one-month of alcohol abstinence in a dominant drinking culture throughthree modalities, namely, systems of resources (marketplace offerings andpromotional techniques), interpretive schemes (social grouping and positionalstatus) and norms (rituals and traditions). Specifically, we note that these threemodalities are located at the intersection between three institutional orders ofdomination, signification and legitimation and three realms of individual actions,identified as power, communication and sanction.

Modalities of resources

Whilst previous studies note the influence of alcohol marketing (Hastings & Saren,2003; Hastings et al., 2006) and alcohol advertising (Goldberg, 1995) on alcoholconsumption, our findings highlight that FebFast participants are not ‘social dupes’governed by these dominating institutional forces. On the contrary, our informantswere highly reflexive individuals who discussed the asymmetric nature of these‘resources’ or ‘media of power’ (Giddens, 1979, p. 92) and critically identified twotypes of resources. First, they emphasised marketplace offerings as the allocativeresources that deal with objects and the material. These ‘non-human’ resources aremanufactured by the marketplace to enhance and maintain power. Second, theydiscussed promotional techniques, which represent the authoritative resources thatdeal with persons, including knowledge and emotional commitments. In monitoringtheir personal alcohol consumption and breaking their previous consumptionpractices, our informants reflexively expressed concerns against asymmetricresources, critically aware of how material offerings and promotional techniqueshave come to dominate Australian culture and their personal lives. In this respect,whilst the institutional order of domination exercises power over individuals,individuals also have the capacity to exercise power over this dominance throughtheir individual actions. By identifying issues that affect their daily life and well-beingthrough a reflexive understanding of the mechanisms of power that embed alcoholconsumption within culture, our informants modified their patterns of consumptionand resisted, albeit temporally, the dominant drinking culture. In the next section, weprovide narrative excerpts that show individuals’ awareness of asymmetric resourcesand the means for enacting change in their consumption practices.

Marketplace offerings

Within our informants’ narratives, the practice of alcohol consumption is locatedwithin a dominant commercial ethos, whereby market systems prevail. Althoughoffering convenience and stimulating freedom of choice are pillars of the neo-liberal axiom by which consumers should be free to choose from an array ofproducts, our informants associated the availability and choice of alcoholicbeverages with a system of domination. For example, Cathie below recounts theeasy availability and the inexpensiveness of alcohol offerings during her universityyears as ‘ridiculous’ and ‘insane’.

Cathie (F-28): They had a Dial-a-drink where you could actually call and order16 cartons and they delivered them to the uni, and as long as the person whopicked them up was over 18, you could get them. So the [delivery] guys wouldleave and shitloads of people would come and pick up their carton. It was just


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

everywhere. I think there were only two nights a week that we didn’t drink torecover from the weekend. It was ridiculous. It was an insane amount ofalcohol, insane.

Cathie’s recollection of her past alcohol consumption is linked to her participation inone month of alcohol abstinence. For Cathie, remaining alcohol-free for one monthwas challenging. Cathie’s struggles and hardship to resist alcohol consumption inAustralia made her critically aware of the omnipresence of alcohol, the wide diversityof alcohol offerings in wines, spirits and beers, the range of distributors, and theaffordability of the product. Similarly, Kelly, a 44-year-old business manager, reflectsthat retailers’ pricing strategies are encouraging dangerous behaviours – ‘I think it’swrong and encourages people to drink.’ In a similar vein, for Sophie, a 56-year-oldmother of three, the provision of easily accessible and affordable alcohol is notsomething beneficial for consumers – in fact, evidence of the contrary exists:

Sophie (F-56): It’s just more available, it’s cheaper. It wasn’t something – Iwould never have dreamed of trying to get hold of a bottle of wine or a bottle ofspirits when I was under 20. But these days and we’ve done the same, we’ve hadteenagers’ birthday parties here and supplied alcohol for them. But now there’sobviously, they’ve got ads on the TV now haven’t they saying there’s been moreresearch that it affects young people’s brains and you shouldn’t give themalcohol at all. It makes you think, we did the wrong thing.

For our informants, marketplace offerings based on availability and affordabilitycreate an ‘unhealthy’ (Neal) culture of alcohol consumption. In asserting thedominance of marketplace offerings, our informants in turn monitored theiractivities against this same system. For example, Kelly’s reflexivity on this issuenow means that she will no longer ‘just open the bottle’ and drink ‘cheap’ wineswithout thinking:

Kelly (F-44): We found this wine and it was only about $2 a bottle. It was quitenice. So I started to drink this wine and you’d think it’s only $2 a bottle. It’s onlycheap. It doesn’t matter. Whereas now we buy $10 bottles of wine and think,well I don’t want to be getting through that so quickly. Or I’d be like that’s areally special bottle. I’m not going to open that on a Tuesday night, because it’sa special bottle. So that helps actually. Simon will buy more expensive winebecause he knows I won’t just open them. Whereas a $2 bottle you would thinknothing, I’ll just open the bottle.

Kelly, above, describes the negative effect marketplace offerings and its affordabilityused to have on her alcohol consumption. Since participating in a month of alcoholabstinence, Kelly’s husband no longer purchases the ‘cheap’ wines that are so easilyand conveniently consumed without thinking. Clear to our analysis is that alcoholabstinence offered our informants a personal space for reflexivity on the taken-for-granted social prescriptions that guide alcohol consumption practices in Australia. AsNeal explains, ‘certainly a break away from that culture is probably a goodopportunity to re-evaluate and have a think about it’. This stress on reflexivity isimportant as it offers ‘the thoughtful and deliberate examination of underlyingassumptions, motives, values, or intensions of groups and individuals’ (Murray &Ozanne, 1991, p. 142). In conjunction with becoming highly reflexive on theexcessive availability and affordability of alcohol, our informants explained


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

developing strategies to resist the dominating marketplace offerings. For example,they enact power over marketplace alcohol offerings by consuming alternative drinks,such as sparkling water (Ralf), soda water (Elodie), non-alcoholic beer (Naomi) orcranberry juice (Chloe). They also restrained from attending pubs and bars, optinginstead to go for a walk (Kelly) or to the gym (Kelly, Naomi). As Ralf explains below,resisting easily accessible alcohol consumption is a conscious choice he developedduring FebFast:

Ralf (M-40): The first week when I stop drinking is always a bit of a challenge.I get to the end of the day and my body says well I’m usually getting alcohol nowso what’s going on? But once I drink – actually I find sparkling water, mineralwater with a splash of lemon or lime, once I drink that it’s fine. I actually thinkthat often I’m just thirsty as I am needing alcohol. But you get to the end of theday – that’s one of my strategies – I don’t do it enough but one of strategies is tofirst drink water because I probably haven’t had enough during the day. I’vemaybe drunk too much coffee or whatever. But it’s interesting that for me atleast there are triggers that I’ve associated with oh I need a drink where I couldbe thirsty.

Participating in an alcohol-free month made Ralf aware of his socio-culturallyinstitutionalised ways of thinking about alcohol consumption, which he asserts is a‘drug consumption’ normalised by the alcohol industry and the government. Byparticipating in a one month of alcohol abstinence, our informants were able toenact power over this dominating institutional order by developing strategies thatcounter the asymmetric resources of the marketplace. This reflexivity establishedduring FebFast, led our informants to interrogate their personal alcoholconsumption and the impact marketplace offerings have on their personal choice.The intersection between the dominant institutional order of alcohol and humanactions was also discussed in terms of asymmetric resources of promotionaltechniques.

Promotional techniques

In addition to marketplace offerings located at the intersection between theinstitutional order of domination and human actions, our informants discussedasymmetric resources of promotional techniques. In the excerpt below, Joanneblames aggressive marketing campaigns for normalising alcohol consumption:

Joanne (F-42): We see alcohol in lots of situations in the media – television,movies, the association with sport and the advertising that’s on. And it’s onduring children’s viewing times, particularly the sport, the cricket, the tennis.And I think over generations that does normalise it ... It’s associated withsuccess in the context of sport, and it’s associated with successful sportspeople. You never see a lowly ranked cricketer or tennis player advertising. Soit’s success and particularly with beer, that connotation of being the Australianman, and it just being what you do.

The promotion of alcoholic beverages during children’s television programmes isfor Joanne, a 42-year-old mother of two, quite disconcerting. She fears raisingchildren in a world where alcohol consumption is an embedded part of Australianculture. Later in her narrative, Joanne differentiates the Australian drinking culture


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

where ‘being drunk has been okay’ to other cultures ‘like the Mediterranean,European countries where it’s just part of their life in moderation.’ For ourinformants, seeing ‘people drinking early in the morning on the street’ and‘falling in the street, being hit by cars or drink driving’ (Neal) are representationsof everyday Australian culture and result from aggressive alcohol promotions.Armand, a 41-year-old father of one and law firm partner, has also experiencedthe burden of the normalisation of alcohol, having experienced heavy drinking andunderstanding the toll it has taken on his body. Armand likens alcohol consumptionto ‘a drug consumption’, ‘destructive as cigarettes’ and blames the power of alcoholadvertising and its techniques of persuasion for influencing individuals to acceptalcohol consumption as a normal practice:

Armand (M-41): Advertising is very strong, so it links enjoyment and convivialitywith alcohol, so the advertising industry and the alcohol industry has created apretty strong powerful message. I think there is an expectation that to have funyou’ve got to be drinking something, and that’s a pretty powerful message. I don’tknow how you reverse that... Well, it’s culture. Culture is what we say and do everyday. Part of what we say and do every day is we receive messages every day onalcohol.

As Ralf acknowledges that living in a culture of alcohol consumption is ‘a very scarythought’, and Joanne asserts that it is a ‘general social issue’, our informants’reflexivity on the dominating marketplace and its use of promotional techniquesopens up space for change in their practices. For example, Ralf enacted power overthe dominating alcohol promotion techniques by involving his business to the FebFastevent:

Ralf (M-40): On the business side rather than personally I did because I’m abusinessman ... and it was also an impetus for us to do some media around itwithin the trade media. So we did a bunch of media releases through theprimary trade media... basically to use an Australian expression – I think it’sglobal on the wagon. We were not drinking and everyone we brought business toforgo a glass of red on a Friday or whatever and donate to the cause. So weraised a few hundred dollars which was nice. We’re happy to do more and havea better result next year.

Whilst Ralf ’s participation in an alcohol-free month is linked to his personalexperience with alcohol, it is also linked to his negative view on the power ofalcohol promotion to ‘damage very talented young people’ and his desire to enacta counter discourse. In the excerpt below, Sophie explains how participating in onemonth of alcohol abstinence opens up space for reflexivity and, in turn empowers herto think differently ‘about the choices you make in regard to alcohol and how oftenyou’re drinking’.

Sophie (F-56): I guess a lot of people like sort of say it is a good challenge, andit changes how you think about – well, it actually makes you think about whatyou’re drinking and when, which a lot of people don’t think about, and that it’s areally good cause. I guess I’m just more aware of more stories in the mediaabout kids and what they’re drinking and the kind of damage that can be causedby excessive drinking when people are still quite young … And having done


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

FebFast I think I sort of find actually thinking about the choices you make inregard to alcohol and how often you’re drinking.

Modalities of interpretive schemes

Interpretive schemes are linked to the institutional order of signification, which refersto our informants’ webs of semantic codes, mutual meanings and sharedunderstandings of how, when, where and with whom to consume alcohol.Orlikowski and Robey (1991, p. 148) refer to this as ‘a shared stock of knowledgethat humans draw on to interpret behaviour and events, hence achieving meaningfulinteraction’. We identify the interpretive schemes of social grouping and positionalstatus, which intersect between institutional orders of signification and individualactions of communication.

Social grouping

Our informants’ narratives support that drinking is a social act (Douglas, 1987).Whilst previous studies note that alcohol is a powerful facilitator of social relations(Griffin et al., 2009a; Heath, 2000; Lee et al., 2006; Lyons & Williott, 2008;Montemurro & McClure, 2005; Pettigrew, 2002; Szmigin et al., 2011; Weitzmanet al., 2003), our informants were highly critical of the collective identification andsense of communal consciousness in drinking practices. For example, Sophie explainsfinding the linkage between socialising, collective identification and a ‘big drinkingsession’ being ‘less and less attractive’:

Sophie (F-56): This group of friends are probably quite heavy drinkers,especially a couple of the men, well one or two are probably alcoholics. Yes,when we get together with them, it does tend to become quite a big drinkingsession... Usually they come around here on Christmas morning, that’s been theroutine over the last 15 years or so. We would start drinking about eleveno’clock in the morning which, I must admit, I’m finding less and less attractivebecause as the day goes on, you just feel like you want to lie down and go tosleep. New Year we usually get together with them and that usually becomesquite a big session.

Clear to Sophie is her collective identification with her group of drinking friends,as expressed by her participation in heavy drinking sessions to which she is notalways keen to participate in. Later in her narrative, Sophie confessed searching todistance herself from her ‘drinking friends’ and gradually finding friends who do notdrink. Importantly, just as alcohol consumption enables group affiliation, Sophie – aswell as our other informants – discusses that non-alcohol consumption opens updoors to new social interactions. Many of our informants discussed alcoholabstinence in conjunction with going to the gym with friends/partners or startingnew activities that do not involve alcohol consumption. In the excerpt below, Cathieexplains her participation in an alcohol-free month in terms of a commitment madetoward her friends and toward the organisation FebFast.

Cathie (F-28): So the first year I started we went in a group of friends. Therewas a group of us. I think there were about four of us that did it in the end. Oneof them was my best friend. We all said why don’t we give it a go and see what


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

we think... So I think by committing – even committing to the FebFast team, Imean they don’t know me and I don’t know them, but I sort of feel like I’mmaking a commitment to do it. Plus I can tell people that I’m doing it. Becauseit’s so well known now, in fact this year just gone if I went out to a pub andpeople would say what would you like to drink and I’d just say mineral water orwhatever and they’d say are you doing FebFast? So it was actually easier thanjust trying to do it on your own whenever you decided to do it.

For Cathie, alcohol abstinence enhances her personal relations with friends who‘support one another and we would remind each other to not drink and be strong’.The relevance of inclusion and exclusion in our informants’ narratives draws onunderstandings that one’s identity is constituted through the symbolic meanings thatarise in consumption, as well as, in non-consumption practices. Importantly, ourFebFast participants emphasised how alcohol abstinence, hence non-consumption,communicates meanings that enable group affiliation and enhance personal ties. Inaddition to social grouping, our informants also noted how through alcoholconsumption, as well as its non-consumption, they can communicate positionalstatus.

Positional status

Whilst alcohol consumption is commonly discussed as exhibitor of positional status,where alcohol brands and lifestyle pursuits are used to shape identity and status inrelation to others, our study notes that alcohol abstinence enabled our informants tolikewise communicate their positional status to others, thereby gaining access toparticular social groups and signifying to others one’s positional status. Forexample, aware of the dangers of heavy alcohol consumption, Neal often goes outwith his friends and deliberately drinks less or nothing in order to monitor hisfriends’ drinking behaviours and drive them home if necessary. In the excerptbelow, Neal explains this refusal to consume alcohol in terms of being a ‘rolemodel’ to his friends:

Neal (M-41): I don’t know, maybe to be a role model a little bit. Because I knowthat the soccer culture is very high on alcohol and I probably began to see somenegative examples of that, especially over the last five years or so ... Probably itmade me think we probably need to be a bit more mature about how we drinkalcohol. And certainly a break away from that culture is probably a goodopportunity to re-evaluate and have a think about it. And because I think I’vebeen there for long enough, I’m comfortable in my own skin and my own self. Idon’t need to be seen as getting drunk every night to maintain my position.Probably as well by not drinking as much or by being the responsible one I’vebeen the one to say I should know that’s enough.

Neal’s reflexivity on the negative effects of alcohol consumption enables him toexpress positional status through the practice of alcohol abstinence. Instead offeeling left out when not drinking, Neal uses his abstinence to construct his identityas a ‘role model’ to others. In a similar manner, informants invoked the ‘hero’identity in discussing their success in participating in a month of alcoholabstinence, positioning themselves as ‘strong’ (Chloe) and ‘committed’ (Cathie) to‘win the challenge’ (Naomi). This was reinforced by their peers assertions that you


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

‘could never do that’ due to the social challenges presented by abstinence. Forexample, Kelly describes below her strength in resisting alcohol consumption.

Kelly (F-44): I’ve never liked being pressured to drink. I remember once, when Iwas younger, I ordered a tomato juice and somebody put vodka in it. I just gotreally angry. I don’t want a bloody Mary. I just want a tomato juice. I like tomatojuice. I don’t like people – probably when somebody pressurises you, you’remore saying no. It probably makes you stronger. Like chocolate isn’t it. They saywith people on diets, other people are always saying, just have a biscuit orwhatever.

In her narrative, Kelly prides herself on participating in a month of alcoholabstinence. She also considers her friends who enrol in FebFast as a group ofstrong-minded individuals. For Kelly, participating in alcohol abstinence symbolisesstrength and independence.

Modalities of norms

The systems of norms are linked to the institutional order of legitimation, whichproduces a moral order. Giddens refers to this system as ‘‘the actualization of rightsand enactment of obligations’ (Giddens, 1976, p. 86). Our analysis supports previousalcohol studies on the legitimising roles that rituals and traditions play in alcoholconsumption practices (Heath, 2000; Lee et al., 2006; Montemurro & McClure,2005; Pettigrew, 2002). Importantly, our findings show that individuals not only userituals and traditions to appropriate the rights to alcohol consumption, but alsoconstruct through new rituals and traditions to assert their rights to alcoholabstinence.

Rituals

Individuals incorporate alcohol consumption within ritualised practices, a ‘type ofexpressive, symbolic activity constructed of multiple behaviours that occur in afixed, episodic sequence, and that tend to be repeated over time’ (Rook, 1985,p. 252). For example, after work each day Kelly used to enjoy ‘a glass of wine, havecrisps and chat’; when cooking Ralf routinely poured ‘a glass of wine’; Joannedrank wine whilst eating dinner with her husband each night; Neal had a beer ortwo each ‘weekend after soccer’; Naomi regularly binge drank when going to ‘livebands or music festivals’; and Chloe would drink every Friday night with friends.Whilst our informants described breaking these ritualised alcohol consumptionpractices during FebFast as difficult, they nevertheless were able to maintain theircommitment to a month of alcohol abstinence. The literature on ritual explains therole of rituals in the development of ‘ideas and beliefs through which individualsboth perceive events and evaluate their own and others’ behaviour’ (StanfieldTetreault & Kleine, 1990, p. 36), and thus make it difficult to not participate. Inovercoming these difficulties, our informants developed personal strategies to eitherimitate the ritualised practice of alcohol consumption or invent new rituals. Forexample, Sophie imitated alcohol consumption rituals by carefully preparing‘mocktails’ in ‘pretty glasses’ and incorporating pieces of fruit, syrups and cordialsinto soda water. In doing so, Sophie enacted ritualised practices during alcoholabstinence. The enactment of alcohol abstinence through rituals legitimises its


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

practice during social gatherings. As Sophie explains, she used these ‘pretty glasses’whilst having dinner or discussions with friends who were drinking alcohol. Denisedescribes below purchasing non-alcoholic wines and other alternatives whenattending social gatherings.

Denise (F-62): There’s a non-alcoholic wine around that you can buy. I bought acouple of bottles of that at times so just if – you know, like if I had people fordinner and sometimes it’s easier if you’ve got something that looks like wineand people aren’t asking you a question and you don’t have to explain yourselfall the time. I also bought Claytons. It’s a herby sort of drink and you mix thatwith soda water and mineral water and looks a little bit like maybe a Pimm’s orsomething, that type of colour, Coke, just plain water, mineral water and thenon-alcoholic wines.

Similarly, other informants described using wine glasses to drink soft beverages andpurchasing colourful and expensive juices during the month of February. During hisinterview, Ralf explains that by developing non-alcoholic ritualised practices such as‘drinking sparkling water, mineral water with a splash of lemon or lime’, he hasgained control over his personal alcohol not only when he is alone at home but alsoduring social gatherings.

Ralf (M-40): If someone says a drink it immediately implies alcohol. I’m thinkingwater – I’m no longer feeling like I need alcohol then.

The inscription of alcohol abstinence in ritualised practices represents a means forour informants to sanction the dominant Australian drinking culture. In addition, ourinformants developed new rituals located outside of alcohol consumption. Forexample, Kelly explains ‘when I was doing FebFast, not only was I not drinking,but I wasn’t eating the crisps as well.’ Instead of going home after work and beingtempted to follow the ritual of ‘crisps and wine’, Kelly committed to going on walksor to the gym with her husband. Similarly, Elodie developed the new rituals ofdrinking ‘soda water in a wineglass’ and ‘walking the dog’ to keep herself ‘busyaround that sort of 6:00 to 7:00 pm’ whilst Naomi stopped smoking and startedgoing to the gym. Another strategy was to eliminate certain social rituals thatinvolved the consumption of alcohol such as going out with ‘drinking friends’(Denise). For example, Naomi describes the necessity to forgo smoking during hermonth of alcohol abstinence:

Naomi (F-24): I didn’t stop smoking straight away and at first, like in the firstweek, was actually surprised by how much I wanted to drink. I was like, oh. Istill don’t know – I’ve thought about it a bit – like whether it was because Icouldn’t drink or because I’m so used to it being a routine. I’m not sure whichway that went. So it was kind of like cranky on the weekends and tired. Then thesecond week, I stopped smoking and that was really stressful and full-on. But itwas cool.

Whilst Naomi describes the elimination of a personal ritual, Chloe describesbelow the careful elimination of the socially bound rituals of ‘night out withfriends’.

Chloe (F-39): ‘This sort of two alcohol free nights a week a bit for me is likekeeping me in check. I don’t think I’d be an alcoholic, but I think it’s a way


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

of me saying I have got control over this and I’m going to make it happen. AsI said, some people think it’s easy, but sometimes when you go out sevennights just with different – there’ll be a work function on, a birthday party anda dinner. So I actually have to plan out sometimes what night I’m not goingto drink.’

During the interview, Chloe described a clear change in her self-concept. Whilst sheused to accept alcohol consumption as part of her family history, daily routine andidentity, participating in a month of alcohol abstinence highlighted the possibility ofstaying in ‘control’ of alcohol consumption. Since FebFast, Chloe has enacted thiscontrol by developing the rituals of alcohol-free days. The elimination of alcoholconsumption rituals and the development of alcohol-free rituals enable Chloe andour informants to express their right to resist alcohol consumption in both thepersonal and social spheres.

Traditions

In the narratives, it is clear that alcohol is embedded in Australian traditions, makingits consumption not only a right of consumption but also a social obligation. For ourinformants, ‘everyone is drinking’ (Lea) and Australia has ‘a fairly big drinkingculture’ (Sally). For Naomi, ‘Australians are heavy drinkers and it’s really built intoour culture’ and for Neal, Australia has a ‘drinking culture’. These findings supportthe evidence of alcohol embedded in Australian tradition (Fry, 2010), wherebyalcohol consumption is experienced as social obligation. The social obligation toparticipate in alcohol consumption is clear in our informants’ description of‘rounds’ during which purchasing and consuming alcohol as a group is embeddedin moral codes and norms of conduct. Interestingly, whilst alcohol consumption isinscribed in the Australian tradition of rounds, this does not prohibit the possibility ofresisting drinking during rounds. For example, Neal explains below consciouslygoing out during drinking nights and refusing to drink alcohol.

Neal (M-41): So every Friday after work everyone from work goes down to thepub and I showed up every weekend and said I’m not drinking. I actually made apoint of still buying rounds. So I’d be in a round and they’d go what do you want?A lemon lime and bitters or I’d have lemonade. But you just bought a round ofbeers? That’s alright. I think I used that as leverage to get the guilt... to againshow myself, as well as show others, that you don’t need to always drink to havea good time.

FebFast represents a contextual situation during which Neal expresses the right toresist the unspoken social obligation to drink alcohol during the tradition of rounds.In a similar manner, although Sally observes the unspoken social obligation andcommitment to drinking alcohol – ‘you’re expected to have a reason why you’renot drinking’ – she recounted how FebFast offered her an explanatory basis for herabstinence that encouraged her to ‘keep going’ and persevere in her commitment to amonth of alcohol abstinence. Clear to the narratives is that participating in FebFastallowed informants to contest the meanings of alcohol consumption applied andconstructed around Australian traditions. The social logic of FebFast as a fund-raisingevent was also used by informants to enact and legitimate alcohol abstinence duringsuch traditions. For example, Chloe describes how she contests the inscription of


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

alcohol consumption into traditional celebrations through practices of alcoholabstinence and donation:

Chloe (F-39): The first year I did probably the most fundraising I’ve done. Ithink because it was a bit of a novelty. A lot of people at work who I didn’t thinkwould want to donate were very interested in donating. I think there are certainpeople that will donate every year. My aunty always knows that I’m doing it andshe’ll give a donation. The other thing we have in February is the familyChristmas barbecue happens in February. We used to have it in Decemberbut no one could ever get there. So that happens in February. So I usually goand they know that I’m not drinking so everyone donates there. I thinksometimes sort of some regulars. I think I would usually just ask people andif they didn’t want to donate that would be the end of it. Sometimes, like thisyear with people trying to get me to drink at the pub, they’d say I could neverdo that and I’d say well then you can make a donation. So I tried to get peopleengaged in that way, if they weren’t going to give up alcohol they could give adonation to help the cause.

Chloe’s excerpt clearly illustrates the possibility for individuals, through their FebFastparticipation, to legitimate alcohol abstinence by inscribing the non-consumption ofalcohol and donation to Australian traditions. By acting as a legitimising tool, ourinformants were able to use FebFast as a way of sanctioning the peer pressure todrink and justify alcohol abstinence whilst still participating in traditions. Forexample, Armand highlights how alcohol abstinence is gradually becoming anacceptable practice in social circles:

Armand (M-41): I found it a bit boring trying to explain it [alcohol abstinence]each time after a while. But now there’s no problem, and a lot more people aredoing FebFast or doing other like things where they have a rest off the booze.

Armand further explains below how such gradual social acceptance is linked to hisongoing participation in FebFast:

Armand (M-41): I think we’ll keep doing FebFast. We weren’t proselytisingFebFast, but often in February people would be having barbeques, ‘Would youhave a drink?’ No, you’re having soft drink or water, and that in a sensereinforced the abstinence because we were in the second year and possibly inthe third year you were quite comfortable with the fact you weren’t drinking. It’sa bit hard when you’ve drunk really all your adult life, and then you say tosomeone who expects you to have a beer, ‘No, I’m not drinking at the moment’.Now people don’t bother asking.

By beginning to recurringly associate the month of February with a time ofabstinence, our informants are contributing to the gradual emergence of a newtradition, which helps to foster the legitimation of alcohol abstinence in socialinteractions.

Implications and conclusions

By analysing the narratives of informants who participated in one month of alcoholabstinence using Giddens’ structuration lens, this study contributes to the integration


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

of dowsntream, upstream and midstream social marketing perspectives by providinga framework (Figure 1) that shows systemic interactions between institutional ordersand individual actions. The framework conceptualises upstream influences asinstitutional orders of domination and midstream influences as institutional ordersof legitimation and signification. Individual actions are framed as power,communication and sanction. The interactive space between institutional ordersand individual actions are identified as modalities of resources, interpretive schemesand norms.

By developing the social marketing system of interaction framework, wecontribute to the fields of social marketing in three ways. First, our frameworkhelps theoretically situate upstream and midstream influences on behaviour.Upstream influences identified in studies on the dominating institutions ofcommercial marketing (Hastings & Saren, 2003), alcohol marketing (Hastingset al., 2006) and alcohol advertising (Goldberg, 1995) and their effects on thedevelopment of a drinking culture (Fry, 2010; Szmigin et al., 2011), are in directrelation to asymmetric resources of marketplace offerings and promotionaltechniques and represent the institutional order of domination. Midstreaminfluences discussed in studies where alcohol consumption enables groupaffiliation, friendship, collective identity and communal bonding (Griffin et al.,2009a, 2009b), reflect the institutional order of signification. Finally, alcoholstudies that identify alcohol embedded rituals and traditions (Heath, 2000; Leeet al., 2006; Montemurro & McClure, 2005; Pettigrew, 2002) are situated at theinstitutional order of legitimation. Importantly, institutional orders ofdomination, signification and legitimation are connected and interact in acoevolving system.

Second, our framework provides insights on the modalities through which (1) theinstitutional order of alcohol consumption is currently produced and maintainedand (2) individuals enact alcohol consumption and alcohol abstinence in socialinteractions. We identify the modalities of resources, which represent marketplaceofferings and promotional techniques, the modalities of interpretive schemes, whichdenote social grouping and positional status, and the modalities of norms enactedthrough rituals and traditions. In considering these modalities, we articulate theconnection between the level of individual focus, discussed in downstream socialmarketing, and the level of institutional focus, emphasised in upstream/midstreamsocial marketing. Analysing these ‘coupling elements’ facilitates a conception ofsocial marketing as a system of interaction, which incorporates the institutionalorders of signification, domination and legitimation and individual actions ofcommunication, power and sanctions. It is through these modalities thatinstitutional orders are reproduced and maintained, and equally that individualscan enact change.

Third, our framework conceptualises individuals beyond the narrow confines ofindividual responsibility and rationality by illustrating how actions are guided bythree interrelated institutional orders and cannot be decoupled from thisinstitutional structuring. Simultaneously, our framework shows that individuals arenot puppets of institutional orders but instead have to power to act via threesources of action – power, communication and sanctions (see Figure 1). First,individuals’ reflexive understandings of asymmetric marketplace offerings andpromotional techniques provide sources of empowered action that identify andresist institutions of domination, such as the alcohol industry and its excessive


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

promotion and distribution of alcohol. The power of individuals to purchase non-alcohol beverages or to attend establishments that do not serve alcohol maypotentially lead to the development of new offerings such as alcohol-free publicspaces and restrictions on alcohol promotions. As Moos and Dear’s (1986, p. 248)study supports, concerned ‘individuals can attract the attention of politicians,bureaucrats, interest groups, influential individuals and other agents to variousproblems and concerns’. We also note that FebFast provided a reflexive spaceby promoting an alcohol free month. Thus, in order to engage individuals in aprocess of reflexivity, government as well as non-profit organisations may need toprovide new spaces for reflexivity on issues of social change. Second, throughcommunicative actions, individuals frame mutual meanings and sharedunderstandings about alcohol. By communicating their participation in alcoholabstinence during social interactions, individuals were able to ascribe socialgrouping and positional status to the practice of alcohol non-consumption. Bychallenging the interpretive schemes traditionally linked to the consumption ofalcohol, new structures of meaning can potentially be created. With this in mind,social marketers should develop communication theories, which identify certaintypes of communicative acts that render individual actions meaningful to others.Third, through actions of sanction, individuals were able to challenge the ritualsand traditions associated with alcohol consumption. By beginning to recurringlyassociate the month of February with a time of abstinence, our informants arecontributing to the gradual emergence of a new tradition, which contributes to thelegitimation of alcohol abstinence in social interactions. Moreover, by developingnew rituals around alcohol abstinence, our informants were able to resist, albeittemporally, the dominant drinking culture. This offers important insights to socialmarketers who can communicate these ‘positive’ actions to target audiences as away of inciting empowered behaviour change.

In this way, our framework offers social marketers a means of conceiving socialmarketing as a dynamic system of interaction, whereby modalities intersectbetween ‘upstream/midstream’ institutional orders and ‘downstream’ individualactions. In identifying the modalities mediating individual actions andinstitutional orders, we call for social marketers to examine the modalities ofinterpretive schemes, resources and norms in other contexts of detrimental healthbehaviour, such as cigarettes, fast food or drugs. For example, are the sixmodalities identified in this study pertinent to other practices? Do smokers usetraditions to appropriate the rights to cigarette consumption? Is drugconsumption marked by ritualised practices? Investigating the modalities ofdetrimental health behaviour is, we believe, a critical path forward in beginningto further unravel the social marketing puzzle, namely, ‘why people who areaware of the risks still continue to engage in detrimental health behaviour’(Berger & Rand, 2008, p. 508). Importantly, because modalities intersectbetween institutions and human actions, and because actions may not alwaysinvolve awareness or conscious choice (Barley & Tolbert, 1997), understandingmodalities necessitates studying individuals who stand outside of the socialpractice being studied. Being outside of the social practice, individuals breakaway from the ‘repetition of routinised patterns of behaviour’ and thus becomereflexive and knowledgeable (Busco, 2009, p. 254). The difficulty in distancingindividuals from the dialectical nature of the relationship between institutionsand practices alludes to ‘the paradox of embedded agency’ (Battilana, 2006). To


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

overcome this paradox and gain access to individuals who are both knowledgeableand reflexive, one must separate indicators of institution and practice (Barley &Tolbert, 1997). With this in mind, we call for studies on individuals whotemporally distanced themselves from consumption practices. For example,social marketing can conceptualise new ways to enact pro-environmentaland sustainable consumption practices by studying individuals who participatein temporary anti-consumption events such as non-shopping year or buynothing day.

This study aimed to understand the modalities through which institutionalorders of alcohol and individual actions (consumption and non-consumptionof alcohol) intersect and, therefore, did not analyse per se the relationshipsand interactions between the relevant actors involved in the development andmaintenance of a short-term abstinence programme: agency delivering theintervention, funding body, target audience and relevant stakeholders groups.Yet, we should stress that the not-for-profit organisation FebFast, with itspromotion of a month of alcohol abstinence, is progressively gaining popularityin Australia (Cherrier & Gurrieri, 2012; Hillgrove & Lisa, 2012). Assessing theeffectiveness of FebFast against the benchmark criteria of a ‘genuine’ socialmarketing initiative (Andreasen, 2002; French et al., 2010) could help betterunderstand and further develop the essential ingredients to successfulinterventions. Furthermore, we invite social marketers to develop the scoopingphase and implement their formative research using our theoretically informedframework. The institutional orders of domination, legitimation and significationoffer a tool to analyse and situate the key institutional barriers to behaviouralchange. In a similar way, the realm of action described as power, communicationand sanctions can help frame the possible strategies to empower a target audiencein enacting behavioural change.

In addition to providing a framework that integrates dowsntream, upstream andmidstream social marketing perspectives, our findings contribute to the long-standing discussion on the relationship and interplay between agency/structuretaking place in consumer culture theory (CCT) (Arnould & Thompson, 2005).First, we support the CCT argument that agency–structure interplay occurs at theorganisation of everyday life and note consumers’ power to resist marketplacemythology and enact change (Arnould & Thompson, 2005). CCT studies onconsumers’ practices of resistance against the marketplace conceptualiseconsumers as creative interpretive agents (Arnould & Thompson, 2005). Ourstudy highlights that consumers’ reflexivity on dominant consumerist norms islinked to a separation from normalised acts of life. Thus, to the currenttheoretical debates over whether consumers can resist the influences exertedby marketplace ideology, we point to consumers’ temporal separation fromconsumption practices as a pathway to reflexivity and resistance. Second, ourframework conceptualises the normalised, institutionalised way of life underinstitutional orders of domination, signification and legitimation and self-realising consumers under actions of power, communication and sanction. Wethus provide a lens to further examine marketplace ideology and consumers’creativity. Finally, our findings on the modalities through which institutions/individual actions interact – resources, interpretative scheme and norms –

provide insights on the mutuality, interconnectiveness and negotiation occurringat the organisation of daily life through market-mediated practices, as well as


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

through non-market-mediated practices. We thus emphasise the role that resistanceto consumption plays in the construction of marketplace ideology and call forfurther research on the absence of the material in the construction of meaningfullives.

References

Andreasen, A. R. (1994). Social marketing: Its definition and domain. Journal of Public Policyand Marketing, 13, 108–114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/30000176

Andreasen, A. R. (1997). Prescriptions for theory-driven social marketing research: A responseto Goldberg’s alarms. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 6, 189–196. doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp0602_04

Andreasen, A. R. (2002). Marketing social marketing in the social change marketplace. Journalof Public Policy and Marketing, 21, 3–13. doi.org/10.1509/jppm.21.1.3.17602

Andreason, A. R. (2003). The life trajectory of social marketing: Some implications. MarketingTheory, 3, 293–303. doi:10.1177/147059310333004

Andreasen, A. R. (2006). Social marketing in the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: SagePublication.

Arnould, E. J., & Thompson, C. J. (2005). ‘Consumer culture theory (CCT): Twenty years ofresearch.’ Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 868–873. doi:10.1086/426626

Barley, S. R., & Tolbert, P. S. (1997). Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the linksbetween action and institutions. Organizational Studies, 18, 93–117. doi:10.1177/017084069701800106

Battilana, J. (2006). Agency and institutions: The enabling role of individuals’ social position.Organization, 13, 653–676. doi:10.1177/1350508406067008

Berger, J., & Rand, L. (2008). Shifting signals to health: Using identity signaling to reduce riskyhealth behaviors. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 509–518. doi:10.1086/587632

Busco, C. (2009). Giddens’ structuration theory and its implications for managementaccounting research. Journal of Management and Governance, 13, 249–260. doi:10.1007/s10997-008-9081-6

Cain, C. (2009). Personal stories: Identity acquisition and self-understanding in alcoholicsanonymous. Journal of the Society for Psychological Anthropology, 19, 210–253.doi:10.1525/eth.1991.19.2.02a00040

Castoriadis, C. (1997). Power, Politics, Autonomy. In A. Honneth, T. McCarthy, C. Offe andA. Weellmer (Eds.), Cultural-political interventions in the unfinished project ofenlightenment (pp. 269–296). Boston: Massachussetts Institute of Technology.

Chapman, S., & Liberman, J. (2005). Ensuring smokers are adequately informed: Reflectionson consumer rights, manufacturer responsibility, and policy implications. Tobacco Control,14, 8–13. doi:10.1136/tc.2005.012591

Cherrier, H. (2006). Consumer identity and moral obligations in non-plastic bag consumption:A dialectical perspective. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30, 515–523.doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2006.00531.x

Cherrier, H. (2012). Using projective techniques to consider the societal dimension of healthypractices: An exploratory study. Health Marketing Quarterly, 29, 82–95. doi:10.1080/07359683.2012.652580

Cherrier, H., & Gurrieri, L. (2012). Anticonsumption choices performed in a drinkingculture: Normative struggles and repairs. Journal of Macromarketing, 33(3), 232–244.doi:10.1177/0276146712467805

Craib, I. (1992). Anthony Giddens. London: Routledge.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30000176

Dann, S. (2010). Redefining social marketing with contemporary commercial marketingdefinitions. Journal of Business Research, 63, 147–153. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.02.013

Demers, A., Kairouz, S., Adlaf, A. M., Glickman, L., Newton-Taylor, B., & Marchand, A.(2002). Multilevel analysis of situational drinking among Canadian undergraduates. SocialScience and Medicine, 48, 1221–1235.

Douglas, M. (1987). A distinctive anthropological perspective. In M. Douglas (Ed.), Constructivedrinking: Perspectives on drink from anthropology (pp. 3–15). Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

French, J., Blair-Stevens, C., McVey, D., & Merritt, R. (2010). Social marketing and publichealth: Theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Friedland, R.,&Alford, R.R. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutionalcontradictions. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism inorganizational analysis (pp. 232–263). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Fry, M.-L. (2010). Countering consumption in a culture of intoxication. Journal of MarketingManagement, 26, 1279–1294. doi:10.1080/0267257X.2010.522530

Giddens, A. (1976). New rules of sociological method. London: Basic Books.Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure and contradiction in

social analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration.

Berkeley: University of California Press.Goldberg, M. E. (1995). Social marketing: Are we fiddling while Rome burns? Journal of

Consumer Psychology, 4, 347–370. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0404_03

Gordon, R., Harris, F., MacKintosh, A. M., & Moodie, C. (2011). Assessing the cumulativeimpact of alcohol marketing on young people’s drinking: Cross-sectional datafindings. Addiction Research and Theory and Society, 19, 66–75. doi:10.3109/16066351003597142

Grekin, E. R., Sher, K. J., & Krull, J. L. (2007). College spring break and alcohol use: Effects ofspring break activity. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 68, 681–688.

Grier, S., & Bryant, C. A. (2005). Social marketing in public health. Annual Review of PublicHealth, 26, 319–339. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.26.021304.144610

Griffin, C., Bengry-Howell, A., Hackley, C., Mistral, W., & Szmigin, I. (2009a). The allure ofbelonging: Young people’s drinking practices and collective identification. In M. Wetherell(Ed.), Identity in the 21st century: New trends in new times. London: Palgrave.

Griffin, C., Bengry-Howell, A., Hackley, C., Mistral, W., & Szmigin, I. (2009b). ‘Every time Ido it I absolutely annihilate myself ’: Loss of (Self-)consciousness and loss of memory inyoung people’s drinking narratives.’ Sociology, 43, 457–476. doi:10.1177/0038038509103201

Hastings, G., Anderson, S., Cooke, E., & Gordon, R. (2006). Alcohol marketing and youngpeople’s drinking: A review of the research. Journal of Public Health Policy, 26, 296–311.doi:10.1057/palgrave.jphp.3200039

Hastings, G., & Saren, M. (2003). The critical contribution of social marketing: Theory andapplication. Marketing Theory, 3, 305–322. doi:10.1177/147059310333005

Heath, D. B. (2000). Drinking occasions: Comparative perspectives on alcohol and culture.London: Routledge.

Hillgrove, T., & Lisa, T. (2012). Evaluation of the impact of febfast participation (VicHealth).Carlton: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.

Hoek, J., & Jones, S. C. (2011). Regulation, public health and social marketing: A behaviourchange trinity. Journal of Social Marketing, 1, 32–44. doi:10.1108/20426761111104419

Holder, H. D. (2003). Alcohol and the community: A systems approach to prevention.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.02.013


http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0404_03

http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0404_03

Hotho, S. (2008). Professional identity – product of structure, product of choice. Journal ofOrganizational Change, 21, 721–742. doi:10.1108/09534810810915745

Jochelson, K. (2006). Nanny or steward? The role of government in public health. PublicHealth, 120, 1149–1155. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2006.10.009

Jones, S. C., & Donovan, R. J. (2002). Self-regulation of alcohol advertising: Is it working forAustralia? Journal of Public Affairs, 2, 153–165. doi:10.1002/pa.105

Kotler, P., & Zaltman, G. (1971). Social marketing: An approach to planned social change.Journal of Marketing, 35, 3–12. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1249783

Lagarde, F. (2012). Insightful social marketing Leadership. Social Marketing Quarterly, 18, 77–81. doi:10.1177/1524500412438178

Lee, C. M., Maggs, J. L., & Rankin, L. A. (2006). Spring break trips as a risk factor for heavyalcohol use among first-year college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 67, 911–916.

Lee, N. R., & Kotler, P. (2011). Social marketing: Influencing behaviors for good. London: Sagepublication.

Lyons, A. C., & Williott, S. A. (2008). Alcohol consumption, gender identities and women’schanging social positions. Sex Roles, 59, 694–712.

Montemurro, B., & McClure, B. (2005). Changing gender norms for alcohol consumption:Social drinking and lowered inhibitions at bachelorette parties. Sex Roles, 52, 279–288.doi:10.1007/s11199-005-2672-7

Moos, A., & Dear, M. J. (1986). Structuration theory in urban analysis: 1. Theoreticalexegesis. Environment and Planning, 18, 231–252. doi:10.1068/a180231

Murray, J. B., & Ozanne, J. L. (1991). The critical imagination: emancipatory interests inconsumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 129–142. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2489550

Orlikowski, W. J., & Robey, D. (1991). Information technology and the structuring oforganizations. Information Systems Research, 2, 143–169. doi:10.1287/isre.2.2.143

Peattie, K., & Peattie, S. (2009). Social marketing: A pathway to consumption reduction?Journal of Business Research, 62, 260–268. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.033

Perkins, W. H., & Berkowitz, A. D. (1986). Perceiving the community norms of alcohol useamong students: Some research implications for campus alcohol education programming.The International Journal of the Addictions, 21, 961–976.

Pettigrew, S. (2002). A grounded theory of beer consumption in Australia. Qualitative MarketResearch: An International Journal, 5, 112–122. doi:10.1108/13522750210423814

Pozzebon, M., & Pinsonneault, A. (2005). Challenges in conducting empirical work usingstructuration theory: Learning from IT research. Organization Studies, 26, 1353–1376. doi:10.1177/0170840605054621

Rao, H., Monin, P., & Durand, R. (2003). Institutional change in Toque Ville: Nouvelle cuisineas an identity movement in French gastronomy. American Journal of Sociology, 108,795–843. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/367917

Rimal, R. N., & Real, K. (2003). Understanding the influence of perceived norms onbehaviors. Communication Theory, 13, 184–203. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2003.tb00288.x

Rolfe, A., Orford, J., & Dalton, S. (2009). Women, alcohol and femininity: A discourse analysisof women heavy drinkers’ accounts. Journal of Health Psychology, 14, 326–335.doi:10.1177/1359105308100217

Rook, D. W. (1985). The ritual dimension of consumer behavior. Journal of ConsumerResearch, 12, 251–264. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/254372

Rothschild, M. L. (1999). Carrots, sticks, and promises: A conceptual framework for themanagement of public health and social issue behaviors. Journal of Marketing, 63, 24–37.Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1251972


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14






http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/367917



Seiders, K., & Petty, R. (2004). Obesity and the role of food marketing: A policy analysis ofissues and remedies. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 23, 153–169. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/30000757

Shankar, A., Cherrier, H., & Canniford, R. (2006). Consumer empowerment: A Foucauldianinterpretation. European Journal of Marketing, 40, 1013–1030. doi:10.1108/03090560610680989

Smith, L. A., & Foxcroft, D. R. (2009). The effect of alcohol advertising, marketing andportrayal on drinking behaviour in young people: Systematic review of prospective cohortstudies. BMC Public Health, 9, 1–11. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-9-51

Stanfield Tetreault, M. A., & Kleine, I. I. I. R. E. (1990). Ritual, ritualized behavior, and habit:Refinements and extensions of the consumption ritual construct. Advances in ConsumerResearch, 17, 31–38.

Szmigin, I., Bengry-Howell, A., Griffin, C., Hackley, C., & Mistral, W. (2011). Socialmarketing, individual responsibility and the ‘culture of intoxication’. European Journal ofMarketing, 45, 759–779. doi:10.1108/03090561111120028

Szmigin, I., Griffin, C., & Hackley, C. (2008). Re-framing ‘Binge Drinking as CalculatedHedonism – empirical evidence from the UK.’ International Journal of Drugs Policy, 19,359–366. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2007.08.009

Thompson, C. J., Locander, W. B., & Pollio, H. R. (1989). Putting consumer experience backinto consumer research: The philosophy and method of existential-phenomenology. Journalof Consumer Research, 16, 133–147. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2489313

Wallack, L., Dorfman, L., Jernigan, D., & Themba, M. (1993). Media advocacy and publichealth: Power for prevention. London: Sage Publication.

Weis, W., & Arnesen, D. W. (2007). When the forces of industry conflict with the publichealth: A free market malignancy. Academy of Health Care Management Journal, 3, 81–94.

Weitzman, E. R., Nelson, T. F., & Wechsler, H. (2003). Taking up binge drinking in college:The influences of person, social group, and environment. Journal of Adolescent Health, 32,26–35. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1054-139X(02)00457-3

Willmott, H. (1981). The structuring of organizational structure: A note. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 470–474.

Wolburg, J. M. (2005). Misplaced marketing: How responsible are ‘responsible’ drinkingcampaigns for preventing alcohol abuse? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22, 176–177.doi:10.1108/07363760510605281

About the authors

Helene Cherrier, who obtained her PhD from the University of Arkansas, is a senior lecturer atGriffith University. Her research interests embrace market system dynamics; dispossession; lifechanges; body transformation; appropriation and reconfiguration of consumer meanings,symbols, and usage; and the role of material presence and absence in identity construction.

Corresponding author: Hélène Cherrier, Griffith Business School, Building N63, Room2.09, Nathan campus, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan QLD 4111, Australia.

T +61 7 3735 7304E [email protected]

Lauren Gurrieri is a lecturer in the Department of Marketing, Tourism and Social Impact atSwinburne University. Her research interests include consumer identity construction,embodiment, consumer activism and visual consumption. Examples of her work can befound in the Journal of Marketing Management, Journal of Macromarketing and QualitativeMarket Research: An International Journal.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Swin

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tec

hnol

ogy]

at 0

3:06

04

Sept

embe

r 20

14


http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2007.08.009


http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1054-139X(02)00457-3

framing social marketing as a system of interaction: a neo-institutional approach to alcohol...

Documents