Privatization of Alcohol Sales

“Alcohol consumption rises after ‘privatisation’”. Prevention File Fall:7-10 (1991).
Results of a study by A.C. Wagenaar showed that consumption of alcohol in Iowa and West Virginia increased once the sale of wine and spirits was turned over to private retailers. The implications of such an increase on public health are considered.

Anderson, P., Chisholm, D., and Fuhr, D. (2009), Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of policies and programmes to reduce the harm caused by alcohol, Lancet 373:2234-2246.

“Beer and wine in grocery stores : The implications”. The Journal(Addiction Research Foundation)
Research at the Addiction Research Foundation strongly indicates that the proposed sale of beer and wine in grocery stores would have an important negative impact on public health in Ontario. Findings on the effect of availability on patterns of consumption are briefly reviewed.

Centre for Addition and Mental Health, Retail Alcohol Monopolies and Regulation: Preserving the Public Interest (2004) , viewed 20 January 2010.

Fitzgerald, J.L and H.A. Mulford. “Alcohol availability, drinking contexts, and drinking problems: The Iowa experience”. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 54:320-325 (1993).
Before/after survey data were used to investigate the effects that a wine and spirits privatization induced increase in alcohol availability might have had on specific drinking-related troubles. State surveys representing the 18+ noninstitutionalized population of Iowa were conducted in 1985 prior to the wine privatization; in 1986 after wine but before spirits privatization; and in 1989 after wine and spirits sales had both been privatized. Despite substantial increases in off-premise sales outlets there was little or no change in the frequency of drinking or in the specific kinds of drinking related problems studied. 10 references.

Fitzgerald, J.L. and H.A. Mulford. “Privatization, price, and cross border liquor purchases” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 54:462-464 (1993).
Self-report survey data were used to investigate the effects of liquor sale privatization on cross-border liquor purchases. A state survey sample representing the Iowa 18+ noninstitutionalized population was interviewed in April 1989, 25 months after retail sales were privatized. Despite a privatization induced 6.1% increase in liquor prices there was little if any change in the self-reported amount of liquor purchased outside the state of Iowa. 10 references.

Giesbrecht, Norman. Proposed privatization of retail alcohol sales in Ontario: Health, social, economic and safety implications. Toronto: Addiction Research Foundation, 1995.
Focus is mainly on the public health consequences of the proposed privatization sales in Ontario. It is argued that alcohol should be treated differently from other consumer goods, in view of its destructive potential. Research in the area of privatization of alcohol sales indicates that privatization is likely to increase consumption and drinking-related problems. A number of concerns are raised related to staffing, liability, and environmental issues related to greater density of outlets. 65 references.

Holder, Harold D. and Alexander C. Wagenaar. “Effects of the elimination of a state monopoly on distilled spirits' retail sale: A time-series analysis of Iowa”. British Journal of Addiction 85:1615-1625 (1990).
In march 1987 all state retail stores in Iowa were closed and private establishments were licensed to sell distilled spirits. Interrupted time-series analyses identified a statistically significant 9.5% increase in spirits sales following the policy change. While there was a corresponding 13.7% decline in wine, and no change in beer sales, privatization of spirits retail sales yielded a net increase in total alcohol consumption in Iowa. No changes were found in spirit sales in states bordering Iowa. 27 references.

International Symposium on Alcohol Monopolies and Social and Health Issues. Toronto: Addiction research foundation, 1992.
The symposium builds on the principle that alcohol monopolies and social and health agencies an, and should, be policy partners rather than adversaries. Government agencies have the opportunity to work closely with the industry to formulate policies which can help reduce the adverse effects of alcohol-related problems while ensuring that responsible customers have access to a pleasurable leisure activity. Changing economic and social conditions both in North America and Western Europe are adding to the international debate. 16 presentations.

Kortteinen, Timo (ed.) State Monopolies and Alcohol Prevention: Report and Working Papers of a Collaborative International Study. Helsinki: The Social Research Institute of Alcohol Studies, 1989.
The report contains materials produced in the course of an international research project dealing with the potential contribution of state monopoly systems to the control of alcohol related problems. the information for the study was collected in the form of individual working papers on country profiles. Eight developing and 7 industrialized countries were included in the study.

"LCBO privatization in 9 months". Toronto: Toronto Star, July 13, 1995.
Privatization is a “priority” for Consumer Minister Norm Sterling, who expects to find a direction of action within a period of 6-9 months. An independent commission will be set up to look into how best to privatise the LCBO. Particular interest will be given to Alberta's experience with privatization.

Mulford, H.A., J.Ledolter and J.L. Fitzgerald. “Alcohol availability and consumption: Iowa sales data revisited”. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 53:487-494 (1992).
Recent changes in Iowa liquor control laws ended the 51-year-old state alcohol monopoly distribution, turning the sale of bottled wine and spirits over to the private sector. Time-series analyses of monthly sales trends contradict the findings of Wagenaar and Holder (1991), finding that privatization did not permanently increase Iowa spirits sales, and that sales soon declined to preintervention levels. 11 references.

Ontario Public Health Association, Alcohol and Public Health: The Implications of Changes to Ontario’s Beverage Alcohol System [PDF], submission to the Ontario Beverage Alcohol System Review Panel, 25 February 2005.

Radford, tess. “Beyond privatization: Who's minding the store?”. News Action 6(2) insert (1995).
It is argued that since private enterprise has taken over retail sales of alcohol in many provinces, the control over conditions of sale once exerted by government appears to be slipping. A brief outline of alcohol sales policy in each province is included.

Retail Alcohol Monopolies: Preserving the Public Interest. Toronto: Research Addiction Foundation, 1993.
It is argued that alcohol is not just another consumer product as the sale and use of alcohol carry a heavy price in terms of public health. Alcohol availability is linked to a number of health problems, and therefore limiting availability and regulating prices can play an important role in reducing alcohol consumption and related harm. Government run stores can provide educational materials and train staff to challenge intoxicated and underage drinkers. effect on government revenue is also considered and several brief recommendations are made.

Room, R. (2002) Why Have a Retail Alcohol Monopoly?, Paper presented at an International Seminar on Alcohol Retail Monopolies, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, August 19-21, 2001.

Room, Robin. “Alcohol Monopolies and Public Health”. The Journal(Addiction Research Foundation) Dec 1992/Jan 1993: 13-15.
It is argued that state monopolization of the alcohol market is a potentially effective instrument for both public health purposes and to maximize the state's revenue from alcohol.

Room, Robin. "Alcohol monopolies in the U.S.: Challenges and opportunities". Journal of Public Health Policy Winter:509-530 (1987).
A treatment of the history of alcohol monopolies in the U.S. Initially the main point in choosing a monopoly over a licensing system was to discourage excessive consumption by removing private profit motive. In recent decades state monopolies have functioned more and more like regular sales oriented business, though it would appear that they have slowly begun to move back towards seeing themselves as having a role to play in the prevention of alcohol- related problems. Opportunities for research and action on the part of the state with regards to public health are considered. 65 references.

Single, Eric. "Ontario" in State Monopolies and Alcohol Prevention, Timo Kortteinen (ed.) pp.191-215. Helsinki: The Social Institute of Alcohol Studies, 1989.
Primarily a descriptive paper, beginning with the history of governmental monopoly on alcohol sales in Ontario. The essential feature of the current legislation is the division of authority between the LLBO and LCBO. The recent history of alcohol consumption, the nature and scope of alcohol problems, existing legislation and law enforcement, administration of the alcohol economy and the role of the state and non-state organizations are considered. Recent developments in alcohol policy and the recommendations of the Ontario Advisory Committee on Liquor Regulation are noted. 14 references.

The Role of Alcohol Monopolies. Skarpo: Report from a conference at Skarpo, Sweden, 1984.
A conference report on the changes in the regulation of alcohol sales and the mechanisms behind these developments, focusing specifically on the challenge to state owned monopolies of alcohol sales. Monopoly systems in the Nordic countries, Canada, and the U.S. are compared, followed by a discussion of the role of monopolies in providing information on alcoholic beverages, pricing policies, and the different regulations of alcohol sales and their effects. 8 parts.

“Tories nursing decision on liquor reform”. Toronto: Globe and Mail July 12, 1995.
The decision to privatize liquor sales is under consideration by Ontario's Progressive Conservative government, though it is expected that 6-8 months of consultation will pass before any decision is made to sell off the LCBO. This comes in the wake of consideration of Alberta's privatization of liquor sales in 1993 and the fallout from that venture.

Wagenaar, Alexander C. and Harold D. Holder. “A change form public to private sale of wine: Results from natural experiments in Iowa and West Virginia”. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 52(2): 162-173, (1991).
In recent years the states of Iowa and West Virginia eliminated state monopolies for retail sale of wine. The authors asses these policy changes on the alcoholic beverage market in each state. Privatization was associated with statistically significant increases in wine sales. Further, there was a net increase of absolute alcohol consumed in both states across all beverages associated with privatization. 24 references.

Wagenaar, Alexander C. and Harold D. Holder. “Changes in alcohol consumption resulting from the elimination of retail wine monopolies: Results from five U.S. states”. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 56: 566- 572 1995).
The authors studied the effects of privatizing wine sales in five U.S. states. Data on monthly sales of alcoholic beverages were collected for each of five states, for all states bordering the five states, and for the U.S. as a whole from 1968-1991. After controlling for nationwide and state specific trends, the authors found significant increases in wine sales after privatization. 23 references.

Please note: This bibliography was originally compiled in 1996 by Gabriella Dragos, Volunteer, ARF Library, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Library, 33 Russell St., Toronto, ON, M5S 2S1, Canada
Tel. (416) 595-6144