200 likes | 374 Views
How to evaluate the effectiveness of alcohol advertising regulations?. Wim van Dalen & Avalon de Bruijn; 2011. FASE – Focus on Alcohol Safe Environments. Alcohol and the workplace To reduces the harm done by alcohol to the economy German Centre for Addiction Issues (DHS).
E N D
How to evaluate the effectiveness of alcohol advertising regulations? Wim van Dalen & Avalon de Bruijn; 2011
FASE – Focus on Alcohol Safe Environments Alcohol and the workplace To reduces the harm done by alcohol to the economy German Centre for Addiction Issues (DHS) Safe drinking environments To create safer drinking environments LJMU (Liverpool John Moores University) Alcohol marketing regulations To reduce the harmful influences of alcohol marketing on youngsters Dutch institute for alcohol policy (STAP)
Project process (1) literature study Results of literature searches in search engines n=7,634 Results of literature searches on relevant websites n=38 Search in reference lists of articles n=28 Excluded/duplicates after checking title and abstract n=7,412 Close reading n=288 Not available N=19 Relevant for inclusion in text n=110 Publication in peer reviewed journal n=55 Publication by scholar not in peer reviewed journal n=23 Publication by government organization n=14 Publication by non-economic NGO n=9 Publication by economic operator n=9
Project process (1) literature study Aim: To provide a tool to examine the alcohol marketing regulation’s potential effectiveness. The expected influence on drinking behaviour of children and adolescents is crucial here. Inventory on alcohol marketing regulations in 23 EU countries following the framework Selection of case studies as examples for effective alcohol marketing regulations in Denmark, Italy, Poland, UK, the Netherlands and Norway
FASE project delivered Evidence based criteria to evaluate alcohol marketing regulations:
How does this relate to alcohol marketing policies in Europe?
We know which elements are essential to include in alcohol advertising regulations, but to which extent do we evaluate existing alcohol marketing regulations within this framework?
Conclusions: It is feasible to evaluate existing regulations with evidence-based criteria; There is a broad variety in strength of content/volume restrictions and strength of existing regulations in Europe; SR has more content restrictions; Legislation has more volume restrictions;
Volume exposure of young people to alcohol advertising on TV • Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands • 3 channels most watched by young people (13-17 years old) • May and October 2010 • Delivered by Nielsen Media
Current regulations • Time restrictions • Italy (restrictions from 16.00-19.00h) • Netherlands (completely banned from 06.00-21.00h) • Product restrictions • Bulgaria (spirits on TV restricted) • 30% threshold – max. 30% of the audience can exist of minors • SR in Netherlands (25%) • Since November 2010 Bulgaria (30%) • since 15 October 2010 Denmark (30%) • Monitored by EFRD in Europe
Exposure to alcohol marketing (1) *Number of time á person from this age group saw án advertisement
Exposure to alcohol marketing (2) Average numbers: number of exposures / number of persons in age group *Young people aged 13-17 in Germany see at least 1,5 commercials a day (3 channels, two months)
30% threshold, protecting youngsters? • Adopted from US were 30% of population is <21 years old • In EU-27 17,9% is below 18 years old (Eurostat, 2010) • Exposure of 30% -> overexposing minors!
More protective proportional standard -> taking into account at risk group (1) • At risk group: 13-17 • At risk for starting to drink • More aware of alcohol advertising than < 13 year olds • More exposure to alcohol advertising • Exposed to 2/3 of all advertising seen by minors • (Jernigan & Ross, 2010) -> truly protective proportional standard would be 5,5% (EU-27) • 5,5% of EU-27 population is aged 13-17 (Eurostat, 2010) • Should be adjusted to country population • Supported by: health organisations, scientists and state attorneys (US): CAMY (2005), Jernigan & Ross (2010), National Research Council (2004), Institute of medicine (2004), Federal Trade Committee (2006).
Recommendations 1. Proportional standard • prevents overexposure • Should consider at risk population (13-17 year olds) • EU-27 -> 5,5% of audience 2. Time ban • Prevents exposure of large numbers of young people • Easy to monitor • At least 06.00 - 23.00h recommended