Search

Objective: In the Netherlands, enforcement of the alcohol age limit is low and inconsistent because of limited resources. A solution is to optimize the efforts of enforcement officers by prioritizing ways in which they regulate commercial alcohol availability. This could increase compliance by sellers, curbing commercial availability. The objective of this study is to present the development of a commercial alcohol availability estimate (CAAE) for all vendor types selling alcohol and to propose a priority ranking.Method: A multi-method design was used, combining data (collected in 2015) from national studies reporting behavior of minors purchasing alcohol themselves and the success rate (noncompliance) of alcohol vendors (interviewing 510 minors by telephone and conducting 1,373 purchase attempts of alcohol by minors, respectively). Descriptive data and the development of the CAAE are presented.Results: Compared with other vendor types (e.g., sports bars or supermarkets), bars/cafes/discos scored highest on the CAAE, indicating that 7.7% of 16- to 17-year-olds in the survey reported successfully purchasing their own alcohol at this vendor type.Conclusions: To control commercial alcohol availability efficiently for minors in the Netherlands, our estimates suggest that enforcement and prevention efforts should prioritize bars/cafes/discos. However, local authorities should also consider local circumstances and maintain a base amount of attention for all vendor types. Ultimately, the CAAE has the potential to improve enforcer capacity and efficiency in policing commercial alcohol regulation, and prevention workers could align their interventions or campaigns to high-ranked vendor types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: There are few cost-effectiveness analyses that model alcohol outlet zoning policies. This study determines the potential decreases in homicides, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and victim and criminal justice costs associated with four policy options that would reduce the alcohol outlet access in Baltimore.Method: This cost-effectiveness analysis used associations between on-premise (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.41), off-premise (IRR = 1.76), and combined on- and off-premise outlet density (IRR = 1.07) and homicide in Baltimore. We determined the potential change in the level of homicide that could occur with changes in the density of alcohol outlets, assuming that 50% of the association was causal.Results: Reducing alcohol outlet density in Baltimore City by one quintile was associated with decreases of 51 homicides per year, $63.7 million, and 764 DALYs. Removing liquor stores in residential zones was associated with 22 fewer homicides, which would cost $27.5 million and lead to 391 DALYs. Removing bars/taverns operating as liquor stores was associated with a decrease of one homicide, $1.2 million, and 17 DALYs. Removing both the liquor stores in residential zones and the bars/taverns operating as liquor stores was associated with 23 fewer homicides, which translated to $28.7 million and 409 DALYs.Conclusions: For preventing homicides, the strategy of removing liquor stores in residential zones was preferred because it was associated with substantial reductions in homicides without closing unacceptably high numbers of outlets. It is possible that policies that close the bars/taverns operating as liquor stores would be associated with decreases in other types of violent crime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We evaluated the effects of outlet and small area level malt liquor policies on crime in 10 U.S. cities and hypothesized that more restrictive malt liquor policies would be associated with greater reductions in crime.Method: We used a pooled time-series study design (i.e., panel regression) with comparison areas to test our hypothesis. Quarterly crime rates in targeted areas were compared 3 years before and after policy adoption. Four crime outcomes were analyzed: Selected Part II crimes, assaults, vandalism/property damage, and disorderly conduct. Both the presence and absence of a malt liquor policy (yes, no) and degree of restrictiveness of the malt liquor policy were assessed using a newly created measure of malt liquor policy restrictiveness developed by the investigators. Results were analyzed using a series of linear mixed models.Results: Adoption of malt liquor policies was not associated with Part II selected crimes. For individual crimes (e.g., assaults, vandalism, disorderly conduct), we found mixed results as more restrictive malt liquor policies were significantly associated with decreases as well as increases in crime. In general, the evaluated policies were considered to be not highly restrictive.Conclusions: Our findings suggest that malt liquor policies at the outlet or small area level alone may not be sufficient to reduce crime associated with malt liquor use. Policies that are more restrictive or cover larger areas than assessed in the current study may be required to have an independent effect on crime outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In the United States, excessive alcohol consumption is responsible for 88,000 deaths annually and cost $249 billion, or $2.05 per drink, in 2010. Specific excise taxes, the predominant form of alcohol taxation in the United States, are based on the volume of alcohol sold rather than a percentage of price and can thus degrade over time because of inflation. The objective of this study was to describe changes in inflation-adjusted state alcohol excise taxes on a beverage-specific basis.Method: State-level data on specific excise taxes were obtained from the Alcohol Policy Information System and the Tax Foundation. Excise tax rates were converted into the tax per standard U.S. drink (14 g of ethanol) for beer, wine, and distilled spirits, and converted into 2015 dollars using annual Consumer Price Index data.Results: Across U.S. states, the average state alcohol excise tax per drink in 2015 was $0.03 for beer, $0.05 for distilled spirits, and $0.03 for wine. From 1991 to 2015, the average inflation-adjusted (in 2015 dollars) state alcohol excise tax rate declined 30% for beer, 32% for distilled spirits, and 27% for wine. Percentage declines in state excise taxes since their inception were more than twice as large as those from 1991 to 2015.Conclusions: In 2015, average state specific excise taxes were $0.05 or less per standard drink across all beverage types and have experienced substantial inflation-adjusted declines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Building on the extensive research literature demonstrating that increasing alcohol prices reduces excessive alcohol consumption and related harms, this article presents the results of a 50-state review of local authority to tax alcohol in the United States.Method: Between 2013 and 2015, legal databases and government websites were reviewed to collect and analyze relevant statutes, ordinances, and case law. Results reflect laws in effect as of January 1, 2015.Results: Nineteen states allow local alcohol taxation, although 15 of those have one or more major restrictions on local authority to tax. The types of major restrictions are (a) restrictions on the type of beverage and alcohol content that can be taxed, (b) caps on local alcohol taxes, (c) restrictions on the type of retailer where taxes can be imposed, (d) restrictions on jurisdictions within the state that can levy taxes, and (e) requirements for how tax revenue can be spent.Conclusions: The number and severity of restrictions on local authority to tax alcohol vary across states. Previous research has shown that increases in alcohol taxes can lead to reduced excessive alcohol consumption, which provides public health and economic benefits. Taxes can also provide funds to support local prevention and treatment services. Local alcohol taxes therefore present an important policy opportunity, both in states that restrict local authority and in states where local authority exists but is underused. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Prior studies suggest that Black and Hispanic minority populations are exposed to greater concentrations of alcohol outlets, potentially contributing to health disparities between these populations and the White majority. We tested the alternative hypothesis that urban economic systems cause outlets to concentrate in low-income areas and, controlling for these effects, lower demand among minority populations leads to fewer outlets.Method: Market potential for alcohol sales, a surrogate for demand, was estimated from survey and census data across census block groups for 50 California cities. Hierarchical Bayesian conditional autoregressive Poisson models then estimated relationships between observed geographic distributions of outlets and the market potential for alcohol, income, population size, and racial and ethnic composition.Results: Market potentials were significantly smaller among lower income Black, Hispanic, and Asian populations. Block groups with greater market potential and lower income had greater concentrations of outlets. When we controlled for these effects, the racial and ethnic group composition of block groups was mostly unrelated to outlet concentrations.Conclusions: Health disparities related to exposure to alcohol outlets are primarily driven by distributions of income and population density across neighborhoods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]