Ann Hope1. 1. Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: This paper examines the level of public support for alcohol control policies during a period of policy evolution in Ireland. DESIGN AND METHODS: A comparison of attitudes to alcohol policy at three points in time was undertaken. The first survey took place in 2002 and was repeated in 2006 and 2010 using a national quota sample of 1000 adults with face-to-face interviews. Policy areas examined were drunk-driving, price, availability and promotion. RESULTS: In 2002, the highest level of public support was for drink-driving countermeasures (84% favoured random breath testing) and measures to restrict alcohol promotions (67% favoured restrictions). Support for stricter measures on price and availability was lower. Trends showed a decline in support for tax increases and for early closing time, whereas support for fewer outlets (off-trade) increased. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: When public concerns (level of support) for stricter alcohol policies were seen to be meet, as occurred with price and hours through increased tax and reversal of opening hours, public concern/support declined. When concerns were not met, as with outlets, support continued to rise most likely influenced by greater number of off-trade outlets and cheaper alcohol. Support for liberal alcohol policies was low and the majority favoured the status quo on price and availability. Public support for policy is one element of the complexity of policymaking along with consensus building across government and management of vested interests, so that the policy outcome is seldom assured.
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: This paper examines the level of public support for alcohol control policies during a period of policy evolution in Ireland. DESIGN AND METHODS: A comparison of attitudes to alcohol policy at three points in time was undertaken. The first survey took place in 2002 and was repeated in 2006 and 2010 using a national quota sample of 1000 adults with face-to-face interviews. Policy areas examined were drunk-driving, price, availability and promotion. RESULTS: In 2002, the highest level of public support was for drink-driving countermeasures (84% favoured random breath testing) and measures to restrict alcohol promotions (67% favoured restrictions). Support for stricter measures on price and availability was lower. Trends showed a decline in support for tax increases and for early closing time, whereas support for fewer outlets (off-trade) increased. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: When public concerns (level of support) for stricter alcohol policies were seen to be meet, as occurred with price and hours through increased tax and reversal of opening hours, public concern/support declined. When concerns were not met, as with outlets, support continued to rise most likely influenced by greater number of off-trade outlets and cheaper alcohol. Support for liberal alcohol policies was low and the majority favoured the status quo on price and availability. Public support for policy is one element of the complexity of policymaking along with consensus building across government and management of vested interests, so that the policy outcome is seldom assured.
Authors: Ashini Weerasinghe; Nour Schoueri-Mychasiw; Kate Vallance; Tim Stockwell; David Hammond; Jonathan McGavock; Thomas K Greenfield; Catherine Paradis; Erin Hobin Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Anne C Grunseit; Eloise Howse; Erika Bohn-Goldbaum; Jo Mitchell; Adrian E Bauman Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Eloise Howse; Katherine Cullerton; Anne Grunseit; Erika Bohn-Goldbaum; Adrian Bauman; Becky Freeman Journal: Health Res Policy Syst Date: 2022-03-04
Authors: Sarah Bates; John Holmes; Lucy Gavens; Elena Gomes de Matos; Jessica Li; Bernadette Ward; Lucie Hooper; Simon Dixon; Penny Buykx Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-06-04 Impact factor: 3.295