Search

Background: Price-based policies are effective alcohol harm minimisation policy options. This paper examines public support for price-based policies based on patterns of consumption and expenditure, to determine if the extent to which an individual may be affected by a policy influences their support.Methods: The current study included 1,684 Australian residents (59.8% male, Mage 43.8 [SD=16.7]). Respondents who purchased and consumed alcohol in the past six months were asked about their support for potential changes in a series of price-based policies.Results: Increasing price was less likely to be supported than either implementing a minimum price or a tax-increase earmarked to pay for alcohol harms. Increasing price and taxing drinkers were more likely to be supported by older people and women. We found no relationship between income or perceived impact of price increases on purchasing and level of support.Conclusion: Contrary to the idea that public support might be partly influenced by ability to pay for alcohol, support for a minimum unit price was not related to price paid per drink or income, only amount consumed. Thus, heavier drinkers may be inherently unlikely to support price-based policies even when these policies would have little impact on their actual purchasing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction and Aims: Public support for restrictions on late night trading of licensed venues increased substantially between 2001 and 2013, a period with very few policy interventions in Australia. In early 2014 a set of high profile restrictions were introduced in Sydney, New South Wales. In this study, we examine whether these 2014 policy interventions affected public support for late trading restrictions.Design and Methods: We use data from the National Drug Strategy Household Survey, focussing especially on the 2013 (n = 23 521) and 2016 (n = 23 425) waves. A series of regression models with interaction terms between socio-demographic variable and year were used to examine how trends in support for late trading policies varied between different population groups.Results: Support for late trading restrictions fell substantially between 2013 and 2016-from 2.58 to 2.35 on a 0-4 point scale. In particular, support fell more in New South Wales than in other jurisdictions. Among New South Wales residents, support fell more for middle-aged and older respondents and more for drinkers than non-drinkers.Discussion and Conclusion: Support for late trading restrictions fell sharply, especially among those affected in New South Wales. Advocates for public health-oriented alcohol policy restrictions need to pay attention to public support in the aftermath of policy 'wins'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Issues: Australian jurisdictions have introduced lockouts to prevent alcohol-related violence. Lockouts prohibit patrons from entering licensed premises after a designated time while allowing sale and consumption of alcohol to continue. Their purposes include managing the movement of intoxicated patrons, and preventing violence and disorder by dispersing times that patrons leave premises. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of lockouts in preventing alcohol-related harm.Approach: We systematically searched electronic databases and reference lists and asked authors to identify relevant studies published to 1 June 2017. We deemed studies eligible if they evaluated lockouts, and if outcome measures included: assault, emergency department attendances, alcohol-related disorders or drink-driving offences. Two reviewers independently extracted data.Key Findings: After screening 244 records, we identified five studies from electronic databases, two from reference lists search and one from a Google search (N = 8). Two studies showed a decline in assaults; a third study showed reductions occurred only inside licensed premises; two studies showed an increase in assaults; and three studies showed no association. The studies had significant design and other limitations.Implications: Lockouts have been implemented across Australian jurisdictions as a strategy to prevent alcohol-related harm, despite limited evidence. In this systematic review, we synthesised findings from studies that evaluated lockouts as stand-alone interventions, to help clarify debate on their utility as a harm prevention strategy.Conclusion: There is not good evidence that lockouts prevent alcohol-related harm, in contrast to what is known about stopping the sale of alcohol earlier, for which there is evidence of effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence-based policies encouraging healthy behaviours are often strongly opposed by well-funded industry groups. As public support is crucial for policy change, public health advocates need to be equipped with strategies to offset the impact of anti-policy messages. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of theory-based public health advocacy messages in generating public support for sugary drink/alcohol policies (increased taxes; sport sponsorship bans) and improving resistance to subsequent anti-policy messages typical of the sugary drink/alcohol industry.Methods: We conducted a two-wave randomised online experiment assigning Australian adults to one of four health policies (sugary drink tax; sugary drink industry sports sponsorship ban; alcohol tax; alcohol industry sports sponsorship ban). Within each health policy, we randomised participants to one of five message conditions: (i) non-advocacy based message about the size and seriousness of the relevant health issue (control); (ii) standard pro-policy arguments alone; (iii) standard pro-policy arguments combined with an inoculation message (forewarning and directly refuting anti-policy arguments from the opposition); (iv) standard pro-policy arguments combined with a narrative message (a short, personal story about an individual's experience of the health issue); or (v) standard pro-policy arguments combined with a composite inoculation and narrative message. At time 1, we exposed participants (n = 6000) to their randomly assigned message. Around two weeks later, we re-contacted participants (n = 3285) and exposed them to an anti-policy message described as being from a representative of the sugary drink/alcohol industry. Generalised linear models tested for differences between conditions in policy support and anti-industry beliefs at both time points.Results: Only the standard argument plus narrative message increased policy support relative to control at time 1. The standard argument plus narrative and standard argument plus inoculation messages were effective at increasing resistance to the persuasive impact of anti-policy messages relative to control at time 2.Conclusions: Dissemination of advocacy messages using inoculation or narrative components can help strengthen public resistance to subsequent anti-policy messages from industry groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]