Scientification of politics or politicisation of science? Parliamentary committee hearings on the Finnish alcohol policy reforms in 1994 and 2017 as epistemic work

The study examined how alcohol policy stakeholders use research evidence to influence legislation and how the role of evidence and scientific expertise has changed over the past three decades in parliamentary alcohol policy consultations in Finland. The data consisted of parliamentary committee hearings on the comprehensive Alcohol Act reforms of 1994 and 2017. The analysis focused on the statements made by experts representing corporate interests, non-governmental organisations and research. The findings indicate the growing importance of science in the ways alcohol policies are influenced during the final stages of the law-making process. Researchers are being heard more frequently, and referencing research evidence has become a significant part of the epistemic work by which various stakeholders in the alcohol policy domain attempt to influence decision-makers. However, the scientification of policy debate does not necessarily indicate an increasing authority of science in determining policy outcomes. The demand for evidence appears to signal a shift in discourse rather than a change in the practice of parliamentary decision-making. Moreover, the consolidation of the ideal of evidence-based policymaking seems to be accompanied by shifting ways in which scientific experts are used – trending towards a legitimising function and an interest-based orientation.