The pluralist theory of Policy Network assumes that in modern government policy-making is split into different policy networks where groups influence decisions. The literature regarding the role of interest groups in EU decision-making argues, on the one hand, that interest groups influence decisions as they provide information and expert knowledge to the EU; on the other hand, it argues that potential influence by the interest groups is compromised by the EU's multi-level decision-making system. The question answered in this thesis is: Which interest group is the most influential in the EU's alcohol policy? And what does this mean for EU's alcohol policy?

The thesis focuses on the interaction between the EU Commission and two EU level interest groups with competing interests in the alcohol policy area between 1990 and 2005. They are: European Council for Alcohol Research Rehabilitation and Education (Eurocare), an umbrella organization of public health groups, and an organization funded by European alcohol producers, The Amsterdam Group (TAG), now known as the European Forum for Responsible Drinking (EFRD). TAG mainly advocates for alcohol policy continuity whereas Eurocare largely pushes for alcohol policy change. Four contentious alcohol policy issues are examined; alcohol advertising; alcohol taxation countermeasures against drinking and driving as well as the focus of alcohol policies. The result is then compared with the EU's decision outcome on those four alcohol policy issues. The study found that TAG was more influential in the European Union's alcohol policy as its interests coincide with institutionalized interests of the EU where employment and economic growth take precedence over public health considerations. It is concluded that public health considerations play a smaller role in EU's alcohol policy.