The Local Option

1. The Local Option An Alaskan policy to reduce alcohol-related harm in villages

2. My Project Objectives • Objectives: • to understand the greater success of the Local Option in some villages in reducing alcohol related harm • to report to village residents and state policymakers, so the findings may inform local and state decision making • Long term goal: to contribute to development of policies that will reduce alcohol-related harm in rural Alaska

3. Study Region Doyon / TCC Region

4. And Fourth Judicial District Fourth Judicial District extends to Yup’ik region in Western Alaska, allowing inclusion of some Yup’ik villages

5. Methods • Use of quantitative data • state and local crime reports, death reports, demographic info, etc. • Limitations: reported data ≠ number of incidents • Original qualitative research • Interviews in Fairbanks and in villages to understand peoples’ perceptions of conditions, successes, challenges, failures in their villages • Limitations: biases, personal attitudes; info is anecdotal • (perceptions reflect expectations; evaluative terminology is relative – good, bad, better, worse . . . )

6. Stage I – Exploratory Research in Fairbanks • Interview professionals who live in or visit villages regularly • Health care workers, police officers, magistrates, teachers, TCC contacts, chiefs • Develop hypotheses re: greater success in some villages • Select villages for case studies / secure invitations to villages • Seek funding for Stages II and III

7. Historic Time of regular contact with outsiders History of missionization Social and Health Village health aide? Active church org? Org. non-alcoholic events? Sobriety movement? Strong adult role models? Amount of social capital among residents Physical / demographic On or off road system Distance from hub Age dist. of residents Male-female ratio Avg. ed. level of adults Ethnic homogeneity Economic Level of public assist. % of males doing subsist. % males, females employed Potential Variables

8. Variables (cont.) • Political • Degree of community support behind Local Option (measured by vote count, active vigilance against bootlegging, efforts to rescind vote) • Presence of law enforcement • Presence of active tribal gov’t • Other community orgs. (relates to social capital issue)

9. Stage II – Case Studies • Travel to selected villages • Conduct interviews with village residents to learn their perspectives on • Alcohol problems • Trends • Explanations for current conditions • Frustrations

10. Measures of Success • Positive change as perceived by residents • Fewer alcohol-related disturbances • Improved school attendance and/or better academic performance (teacher perceptions) • Reduction in alcohol-related crimes • Reductions in reported child abuse and neglect • Reductions in accidents, suicides and other alcohol-related deaths

11. Stage III • Report back to villages on findings (ask for responses) • Report to AFN (ask for responses) • Report to legislature (ask for responses) • Publish findings

13. Progress • Identification of six villages of interest • Two road system villages • Two villages with community-owned stores • Two remote dry villages • Met with IRB officer • Developed interview questions, tested them with grad students

14. Progress (cont.) • Contacts and interviews: • Tribal court administrator at TCC • She’s interested incollaborating and could offer villages support through workshops on making the local option work better. • Director of VPSO program at TCC • Member of the ABC Board • Tribal leader in one target village • Plus other villagers there (background) • Magistrate in village with community store • Fairbanksan with strong ties to other village with community store • Pastor in non-study village near planned study village for background

15. Challenges • Developing relationships with villages • I’m an outsider • My bringing up the issue will raise tension in villages • Tension could result in revisiting L.O. status • Funding . . . • Chicken or egg question re: funding and village selection