Law and Policy

Public and educational policies and legislation designed to prevent alcohol abuse are evaluated here on the basis of scientific research evidence.

See Also

People have different ideas about what kind of laws and policies might reduce alcohol abuse. The prohibitionists said we should eliminate all alcohol beverages, but that didn't -- and won't -- work. Prohibition actually leads to even more problems, such as the growth of organized crime, increased disrespect for law, unregulated and dangerous beverages, increased violence, the loss of tax revenue, corruption of law enforcement and other public officials, increases in binge drinking, and many other serious problems.

Because of the clear failure of prohibition, today's prohibitionists and other reduction-of-consumption advocates now typically call for a variety of laws and other measures to reduce rather than completely prohibit consumption. They tend to believe that:

These beliefs lead reduction-of-consumptionists (often called neo-prohibitionists, neo-drys, or neo-Victorians) to call for such measures as:

Many reduction-of-consumption policies and proposals are currently very popular, but what does research tell us?

Limiting or prohibiting advertising of alcohol beverages: This is one of the most extensively studied issues and the evidence regarding it is very clear: There is virtually no evidence that advertising has any significant impact on consumption levels. Significantly, it has "no impact on either experimentation with alcohol or abuse of it," according to a recent definitive review of worldwide evidence and supported by other reviews of the research. On the other hand, there is evidence that advertising can increase a brand's market share, a finding consistent with the experience and actions of advertisers. [see Alcohol Advertising]

Increasing taxes on alcohol beverages: Wouldn't increasing the cost of alcohol beverages reduce the consumption and, thereby, their abuse? This reasonable question is based on two assumptions: (1) that higher alcohol prices will reduce demand and (2) that reducing consumption will reduce abuse.

The evidence suggests that rapid price increases tend to have a temporary affect on reducing the purchase of alcohol, primarily among moderate drinkers. But, price is only one of numerous factors affecting the consumption of alcohol beverages. For example, problem drinkers tend not to let cost deter them while a third of the population (abstainers) wouldn't drink if alcohol beverages were free. Other research evidence indicates that overall consumption levels in a population are not related to abuse. This fact is relevant to the following proposals.

Limiting or reducing the number of sales outlets and limiting the days or hours during which alcohol beverages can be sold: Numerous studies, including analyses of behavior following actual changes in state and provincial laws, fail to find any evidence supporting these proposals. In fact, some investigators have found that the tougher the controls over availability, the greater the alcohol abuse. For example, where taverns and other on-premise outlets are fewer and more geographically dispersed, the incidence of driving while intoxicated tends to be higher. Others have found that lower availability is associated with less frequent but very heavy drinking and other problems.