Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 1/2012

01-01-2012 | Original Research Article

Tackling alcohol misuse

Purchasing patterns affected by minimum pricing for alcohol

Authors: Professor Anne Ludbrook, Dennis Petrie, Lynda McKenzie, Shelley Farrar

Published in: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy | Issue 1/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Alcohol consumption is associated with a range of health and social harms that increase with the level of consumption. Policy makers are interested in effective and cost-effective interventions to reduce alcohol consumption and associated harms. Economic theory and research evidence demonstrate that increasing price is effective at the population level. Price interventions that target heavier consumers of alcohol may be more effective at reducing alcohol-related harms with less impact on moderate consumers. Minimum pricing per unit of alcohol has been proposed on this basis but concerns have been expressed that ‘moderate drinkers of modest means’ will be unfairly penalized. If those on low incomes are disproportionately affected by a policy that removes very cheap alcohol from the market, the policy could be regressive. The effect on households’ budgets will depend on who currently purchases cheaper products and the extent to which the resulting changes in prices will impact on their demand for alcohol. This paper focuses on the first of these points.

Objective

This paper aims to identify patterns of purchasing of cheap off-trade alcohol products, focusing on income and the level of all alcohol purchased.

Method

Three years (2006–08) of UK household survey data were used. The Expenditure and Food Survey provides comprehensive 2-week data on household expenditure. Regression analyses were used to investigate the relationships between the purchase of cheap off-trade alcohol, household income levels and whether the household level of alcohol purchasing is categorized as moderate, hazardous or harmful, while controlling for other household and non-household characteristics. Predicted probabilities and quantities for cheap alcohol purchasing patterns were generated for all households.

Results

The descriptive statistics and regression analyses indicate that low-income households are not the predominant purchasers of any alcohol or even of cheap alcohol. Of those who do purchase off-trade alcohol, the lowest income households are the most likely to purchase cheap alcohol. However, when combined with the fact that the lowest income households are the least likely to purchase any off-trade alcohol, they have the lowest probability of purchasing cheap off-trade alcohol at the population level. Moderate purchasing households in all income quintiles are the group predicted as least likely to purchase cheap alcohol. The predicted average quantity of low-cost off-trade alcohol reveals similar patterns.

Conclusion

The results suggest that heavier household purchasers of alcohol are most likely to be affected by the introduction of a ‘minimum price per unit of alcohol’ policy. When we focus only on those households that purchase off-trade alcohol, lower income households are the most likely to be affected. However, minimum pricing in the UK is unlikely to be significantly regressive when the effects are considered for the whole population, including those households that do not purchase any off-trade alcohol. Minimum pricing will affect the minority of low-income households that purchase off-trade alcohol and, within this group, those most likely to be affected are households purchasing at a harmful level.
Footnotes
1
1 Off-trade alcohol refers to purchases from retail establishments for consumption off premises.
 
2
2 An enquiry into the UK grocery market found that alcohol was one of two product groups for which below-cost selling was most prevalent.[8]
 
3
3 A unit is 10 mL of pure alcohol.
 
4
4 These results are available on request from the corresponding author.
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Anderson P, Chisholm D, Fuhr DC. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of policies and programmes to reduce the harm caused by alcohol. Lancet 2009; 373(9682): 2234–46PubMedCrossRef Anderson P, Chisholm D, Fuhr DC. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of policies and programmes to reduce the harm caused by alcohol. Lancet 2009; 373(9682): 2234–46PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Chisholm D, Rehm J, van Ommeren M, et al. Reducing the global burden of hazardous alcohol use: a comparative cost effectiveness analysis. J Stud Alcohol 2004; 65: 782–93PubMed Chisholm D, Rehm J, van Ommeren M, et al. Reducing the global burden of hazardous alcohol use: a comparative cost effectiveness analysis. J Stud Alcohol 2004; 65: 782–93PubMed
5.
go back to reference Wagenaar AC, Salois MJ, Komro KA. Effects of beverage alcohol price and tax levels on drinking: a meta-analysis of 1003 estimates from 112 studies. Addiction 2009; 104:179–10PubMedCrossRef Wagenaar AC, Salois MJ, Komro KA. Effects of beverage alcohol price and tax levels on drinking: a meta-analysis of 1003 estimates from 112 studies. Addiction 2009; 104:179–10PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Elder RW, Lawrence B, Ferguson A, et al. The effectiveness of tax policy interventions for reducing excessive alcohol consumption and related harms. Am J Prev Med 2010; 38(2): 217–29PubMedCrossRef Elder RW, Lawrence B, Ferguson A, et al. The effectiveness of tax policy interventions for reducing excessive alcohol consumption and related harms. Am J Prev Med 2010; 38(2): 217–29PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Wagenaar AC, Tobler AL, Komro KA. Effects of alcohol tax and price policies on morbidity and mortality: a systematic review. Am J Public Health 2010; 100(11): 2270–8PubMedCrossRef Wagenaar AC, Tobler AL, Komro KA. Effects of alcohol tax and price policies on morbidity and mortality: a systematic review. Am J Public Health 2010; 100(11): 2270–8PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Byrnes JM, Cobiac LJ, Doran CM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of volumetric alcohol taxation in Australia. Med J Australia 2010; 192(8): 439–44PubMed Byrnes JM, Cobiac LJ, Doran CM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of volumetric alcohol taxation in Australia. Med J Australia 2010; 192(8): 439–44PubMed
10.
go back to reference Chaloupka FJ, Grossman M, Saffer H. The effects of price on alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems. Alcohol Res Health 2002; 26: 22–34PubMed Chaloupka FJ, Grossman M, Saffer H. The effects of price on alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems. Alcohol Res Health 2002; 26: 22–34PubMed
11.
go back to reference Young DJ, Bielinska-Kwapisz A. Alcohol consumption, beverage prices and measurement error. J Stud Alcohol 2003; 64(2): 235–8PubMed Young DJ, Bielinska-Kwapisz A. Alcohol consumption, beverage prices and measurement error. J Stud Alcohol 2003; 64(2): 235–8PubMed
12.
go back to reference Gruenewald PJ, Ponicki WR, Holder HD, et al. Alcohol prices, beverage quality, and the demand for alcohol: quality substitutions and price elasticities. Alcoholism Clin Exp Res 2006; 30(1): 96–105CrossRef Gruenewald PJ, Ponicki WR, Holder HD, et al. Alcohol prices, beverage quality, and the demand for alcohol: quality substitutions and price elasticities. Alcoholism Clin Exp Res 2006; 30(1): 96–105CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Purshouse RC, Meier PS, Brennan A, et al. Estimated effect of alcohol pricing policies on health and health economic outcomes in England: an epidemiological model. Lancet 2010; 375: 1355–64PubMedCrossRef Purshouse RC, Meier PS, Brennan A, et al. Estimated effect of alcohol pricing policies on health and health economic outcomes in England: an epidemiological model. Lancet 2010; 375: 1355–64PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Greenfield TK, Rogers JD. Who drinks most of the alcohol in the US? The policy implications. J Stud Alcohol 1999; 60(1): 78–89PubMed Greenfield TK, Rogers JD. Who drinks most of the alcohol in the US? The policy implications. J Stud Alcohol 1999; 60(1): 78–89PubMed
20.
go back to reference Office for National Statistics and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Expenditure and Food Survey, 2006. 3rd edition. Colchester: UK Data Archive July 2009. SN: 5986 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.esds.ac.uk/government/efs/ [Accessed 2010 Feb 1] Office for National Statistics and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Expenditure and Food Survey, 2006. 3rd edition. Colchester: UK Data Archive July 2009. SN: 5986 [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​esds.​ac.​uk/​government/​efs/​ [Accessed 2010 Feb 1]
21.
22.
24.
go back to reference Mäkelä P, Paljärvi T. Do consequences of a given pattern of drinking vary by socioeconomic status? A mortality and hospitalisation follow-up for alcohol-related causes of the Finnish Drinking Habits Surveys. J Epidemiol Community Health 2008; 62: 728–33PubMedCrossRef Mäkelä P, Paljärvi T. Do consequences of a given pattern of drinking vary by socioeconomic status? A mortality and hospitalisation follow-up for alcohol-related causes of the Finnish Drinking Habits Surveys. J Epidemiol Community Health 2008; 62: 728–33PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Huckle T, Quan R, Casswell S. Socio-economic status predicts drinking patterns but not alcohol-related consequences independently. Addiction 2010; 105: 1192–202PubMedCrossRef Huckle T, Quan R, Casswell S. Socio-economic status predicts drinking patterns but not alcohol-related consequences independently. Addiction 2010; 105: 1192–202PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Herttua K, Mäkelä P, Martikainen P. Changes in alcohol-related mortality and its socioeconomic differences after a large reduction in alcohol prices: a natural experiment based on register data. Am J Epidemiol 2008; 168(10): 1110–8PubMedCrossRef Herttua K, Mäkelä P, Martikainen P. Changes in alcohol-related mortality and its socioeconomic differences after a large reduction in alcohol prices: a natural experiment based on register data. Am J Epidemiol 2008; 168(10): 1110–8PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Mahajan S. Concentration ratios for business by industry in 2004. Econ Trends 2006; 635:25–47 Mahajan S. Concentration ratios for business by industry in 2004. Econ Trends 2006; 635:25–47
29.
go back to reference Keeler TE, Hu T-W, Barnett PG, et al. Do cigarette producers discriminate by state? An empirical analysis of local cigarette pricing and taxation. J Health Econ 1996; 15: 499–512PubMedCrossRef Keeler TE, Hu T-W, Barnett PG, et al. Do cigarette producers discriminate by state? An empirical analysis of local cigarette pricing and taxation. J Health Econ 1996; 15: 499–512PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Kunreuther H. Why the poor may pay more for food: theoretical and empirical evidence. J Bus 1973; 46(3): 368–83CrossRef Kunreuther H. Why the poor may pay more for food: theoretical and empirical evidence. J Bus 1973; 46(3): 368–83CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Longford NT, Ely M, Hardy R, et al. Handling missing data in diaries of alcohol consumption. J Royal Stat Soc A 2000; 163(3): 381–402 Longford NT, Ely M, Hardy R, et al. Handling missing data in diaries of alcohol consumption. J Royal Stat Soc A 2000; 163(3): 381–402
Metadata
Title
Tackling alcohol misuse
Purchasing patterns affected by minimum pricing for alcohol
Authors
Professor Anne Ludbrook
Dennis Petrie
Lynda McKenzie
Shelley Farrar
Publication date
01-01-2012
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy / Issue 1/2012
Print ISSN: 1175-5652
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1896
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/11594840-000000000-00000

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 1/2012 Go to the issue