Alcohol distribution reforms and school proximity to liquor sales outlets in New Brunswick.
Slaunwhite, Amanda K. ; McEachern, Julie ; Ronis, Scott T. 等
Alcohol distribution reforms and school proximity to liquor sales outlets in New Brunswick.
In the past decade, there has been a strategic shift towards
alcohol-related trade liberalization in both developed and developing
countries that has led to the deregulation of liquor control policies
and the development of pro-market practices in the alcohol sector. (1,2)
In the past two years, several Canadian provinces, such as New
Brunswick, Ontario and British Columbia, have expanded the distribution
of alcohol to allow the sale of wine and/ or beer in private agency and
grocery stores that are not owned or operated by the provincial liquor
corporation. (3-6)
Greater alcohol availability has been identified as a significant
public health concern because of the increased consumption and
associated alcohol-related harms that result from expanding the places
where liquor can be sold in the community. (7) Previous research has
found a strong relationship between liquor outlet proximity, alcohol
availability, and higher rates of consumption and alcohol-related harms,
such as premature mortality and risk of injury, among youth and adults.
(8-10) Youth have been found to be especially vulnerable to increased
alcohol availability as a result of early exposure to alcohol-related
marketing and the normalization of alcohol consumption, which are both
strong predictors of substance abuse problems in adulthood. (11-13)
Off-sales locations such as agency and grocery stores have been found to
be problematic because of poor controls over the sale of alcohol to
minors and the availability of large quantities of liquor that can be
freely consumed in the community. (14-16) Previous research has shown
that outlet density and proximity are important determinants of alcohol
consumption among young people. (8,17,18) This has been attributed to
underage youth obtaining alcohol from off-sales locations with less
stringent selling practices, and the demonstrated relationship between
outlet density and exposure to illicit drugs and violence.
(8,9,15,19,20)
Despite the known relationship between outlet density, proximity,
and alcohol-related harms, there has been limited research completed on
how recent changes to liquor policy will affect exposure to, and the
availability of, alcohol products in Canadian communities. New Brunswick
is an ideal case study to examine liquor policy reform measures and
access to alcohol products because of modifications to the distribution
of alcohol in recent years, and the high rates of alcohol abuse and
binge drinking among youth and adults. (21) The criminal justice,
societal, and health care costs associated with alcohol abuse in New
Brunswick are the highest in Canada, equalling $597 per resident. (22)
Among young people, 43.9% of students in Grade 12 reported binge
drinking in the previous month. (21)
In October 2016, the Province of New Brunswick began allowing the
sale of wine in selected grocery stores with the goals of improving
customer convenience and increasing the revenue generated through the
provincial liquor board (NBLiquor). (4,23) As in other Canadian
provinces, New Brunswick's alcohol retail system functions within a
governmental monopoly, and its operations are monitored by the Ministry
of Public Safety and the Solicitor General. (24) NB-Liquor monitors the
sale of alcohol to minors through "mystery shopper" tests in
conjunction with liquor inspectors and local law enforcement; however,
the findings and impact of this internal monitoring system are unclear.
(24) To date, an unknown number of grocery stores have been permitted to
sell wine in addition to the initial six pilot store sites. (25) Prior
to the sale of alcohol in grocery stores, only agency stores (N = 110)
were allowed to sell spirits, beer and wine in addition to the existing
NB-Liquor stores (N = 43). The purpose of this project was to evaluate
how these changes are distributed across urban and rural communities and
low- and high-income neighbourhoods. The objectives were to 1) estimate
the population living close to alcohol outlets before and after liquor
distribution reforms, 2) identify communities or regions that would be
more or less affected, and 3) determine whether expanding access to
alcohol products would reduce school proximity to retailers.
METHOD
Data sources
Data from Statistics Canada, Desktop Mapping Technologies Inc.
(DMTI), and geospatial publicly available data were linked and analyzed
using ArcGIS 10.1, SAS 9.3 and SPSS 23. (26,27) The latitude and
longitude of NB-Liquor and agency stores were obtained from the
NB-Liquor website. (28) The locations of kindergarten to grade 12
schools and grocery stores were sourced from the DMTI Enhanced Point of
Interest database. (29) Statistics Canada's PCCF+ (Postal Code
Conversion File) was used to obtain neighbourhood socio-economic status
and metropolitan influenced zone (MIZ) ranking of postal codes. (30)
Data on binge drinking by youth was sourced from the New Brunswick
Health Council's "My Community at a Glance"
Community Profiles. (31) The data were compiled and spatially
linked to Census Dissemination Areas (DAs) for geospatial analysis.
Data analysis
To estimate the population living within 499 m, 500-999 m and 1-5
km of a liquor sales outlet, buffers were created around each of the
geocoded data points using road network data. Statistics Canada's
Ecumene file was used to remove geographic areas with no residents from
the buffers to more accurately represent the distribution of the
population within each buffer. (32) The area of DAs was calculated in
metres squared. The population within the buffers was measured using a
tabulated intersection that estimated the proportion of the DAs
contained within the buffer. This process was repeated for each of the
buffers representing <499 m, 500-999 m, and 1-5 km of liquor store,
agency store and grocery store locations. The distance from schools to
liquor, agency and grocery stores was measured using road files that
were modelled by means of the network analysis tool in ArcGIS. The
proximity of schools to each type of store was measured in metres and
examined for urban and rural, and low-, middle and high-income DAs. The
chi-square test of association ([chi square]) was used to measure the
association between distance to schools, store type and urban-rural
status.
Measures
Distance
We defined close proximity to liquor outlets as a distance up to
499 m or a six minute walk. This distance was selected because it has
been used in previous research that has examined school proximity to
other retailers, such as fast-food restaurants, that sell products
relevant to public health. (33,34)
Neighbourhood Socio-economic Status
Socio-economic status was measured at the DA level using the PCCF+
program that was created by Statistics Canada. (30) Two variables were
used to rank DAs into quintiles that summarized the "neighbourhood
income per person equivalent" based on the adjusted household
income and the low-income cut-off used in the 2006 Census. (30) The
first measure of socio-economic status is described by Statistics Canada
as QAIPPE. This scale ranks DAs on the basis of income distribution
within the local Census Metropolitan Area (CMA). In contrast, the second
measure (QNIPPE) ranks DAs using the national distribution of income
quintiles from across Canada, which provides a method to compare
communities irrespective of local trends in neighbourhood socioeconomic
status by province or region. (30)
Metropolitan Influenced Zones
Urban, suburban, and rural communities were identified using the
Statistics Canada MIZ scale, which is used to define suburban, rural and
remote places outside of CMAs (urban areas with a population over 100
000 that have 50 000 persons living in the core area) and Census
Agglomerations (CAs) (population of 10 000). (30) The MIZ scale is based
on the proportion of the population in a census subdivision that
commutes to a nearby CMA or CA.
Schools
All public and private kindergarten to grade 12 schools listed in
the DMTI Enhanced Points of Interest database were included in the study
(N = 378).
Store Types Liquor
NB-Liquor stores are stand-alone stores operated by the provincial
New Brunswick Liquor Corporation and staffed by unionized employees of
NB-Liquor. (28)
Agency
Agency stores are convenience stores, gas stations and other small
businesses that sell a selection of NB-Liquor products. (35) Agency
stores typically sell between $350,000 and $3,000,000 worth of alcohol
products annually alongside a selection of grocery, automobile and other
items. (35)
Grocery
Grocery stores predominantly sell produce, meat and other
food-related products. In New Brunswick, most grocery stores are owned
and operated by Cooperatives (N = 18), Sobeys (N = 13), Superstore (N =
14), Foodland (N = 5), Price Chopper (N = 4) and Save Easy (N = 9).
Binge Drinking
Alcohol use among youth was measured as "5 or more drinks at
one time, at least once a month in the past 12 months" for young
people in grades 9-12. (31) These data were collected in 2009 by the
Government of New Brunswick as part of the Department of Healthy and
Inclusive Communities, Student Wellness Survey. (36)
RESULTS
Alcohol availability and retail expansion
A total of 153 NB-Liquor (N = 43) and agency stores (N = 110)
selling alcohol products were identified once geocoded locations had
been merged with ecological data from the PCCF+. (30) The locations of
liquor outlets by store type are displayed in Figure 1. Permitting the
sale of alcohol in all grocery stores throughout the province would
increase the number of alcohol outlets by 84.4%, from 153 to 282. Table
1 summarizes the proportion and count of stores by community
characteristics. The highest proportion of NB-Liquor (62.79%, N = 27)
and agency stores (47.27%, N = 52) were located in urban areas. Allowing
the sale of alcohol in all existing grocery stores would increase the
overall number of retail outlets in urban areas from 79 to 141 stores.
In suburban areas, an additional 40 liquor outlets would be established,
and the number of stores would double in rural communities from 26
points of sale to 53.
The local measure of neighbourhood socio-economic status (QAIPPE)
ranked 46.1% (N = 130) of stores as located in low-income areas. In
contrast, the national indicator (QNIPPE) ranked 78.72% (N = 222) of
stores as being in low-income areas. Both measures of neighbourhood
socio-economic status indicated that most existing NB-Liquor (QAIPPE:
41.86%, N = 18; QNIPPE: 72.09%, N = 31) and agency stores (QAIPPE:
47.27%, N = 52; QNIPPE: 77.27%, N = 85) were located in low-income
communities. Using the national scale of neighbourhood socioeconomic
status (QNIPPE), allowing grocery stores to sell alcohol would increase
the number of outlets by 91.38% in low-income communities from 116 to
222, compared with a 54.29% increase in middle-income areas from 35
outlets to 54.
Population proximity to liquor outlets
The populations residing within 499 m, 500-999 m, and 1-5 km of
agency, NB-Liquor and grocery stores are described in Table 2 and
displayed in Figure 2. Expanding liquor sales to grocery stores would
increase the population that lives within 5 km of an outlet from 386 686
to 412 982, representing 54.98% of the total population of the province.
The largest increase would occur in the population residing within 0-499
m of a liquor sales outlet (either agency, NB-Liquor or grocery store):
by 97.49%, from 19 886 to 39 273 residents, if all grocery stores became
liquor sales outlets. In contrast, the population living within 500-999
m of a liquor outlet would grow by 66.99% from 52 755 to 88 094, and the
number of residents within 1-5 km of a liquor outlet would increase from
341 479 to 386 686.
Distance to schools
There were 30 existing agency (N = 19) and NB-Liquor stores (N =
11) identified that were located within 499 m of a school (Table 3).
Permitting the sale of alcohol in grocery stores would result in an
additional 35 liquor sales outlets being located within 499 m of
schools. Urban areas had the highest proportion of stores located within
499 m of a school (28.92%, N = 35), followed by rural communities
(26.67%, N = 12). Low-income neighbourhoods, as measured using the
QNIPPE and QAIPPE socioeconomic scales, had the greatest number of
stores that were within 499 m of a school (QAIPPE: N = 35, QNIPPE: N =
58).
A summary of liquor outlet proximities to schools by health region
is contained within Table 4, and a map of health regions and the
location of liquor outlets within 499 m of schools is provided in Figure
3. Zone 3 (Fredericton/River Valley Area) had the greatest number of
liquor outlets (with and without the introduction of grocery stores)
within 499 m of schools (agency and NB-Liquor stores N = 9; total N =
16) followed by Zone 1 (Moncton/South-East Area; agency and NB-Liquor
stores N = 6; total N = 13), and Zone 2 (Fundy Shore/Saint John Area;
agency and NB-Liquor stores N = 5; total N = 12). As shown in Figure 3,
rural areas had substantially fewer liquor outlets within 499 m of a
school; however, these regions would have large increases relative to
their existing liquor outlets if all grocery stores were permitted to
sell alcohol products. For example, the number of liquor outlets within
499 m of a school would double in Zone 6 (Bathurst/Acadian Peninsula
Area) from 4 to 8, and it would triple in Zone 7 (Miramichi Area) from 1
to 4. Although no direct causation can be established between outlet
proximity and youth binge drinking in this study, the rural health
regions that would experience some of the greatest growth in alcohol
outlets are regions that have some of the highest rates of youth binge
drinking in the province (e.g., Restigouche, Bathurst, and the Acadian
Peninsula area, see Table 4).
DISCUSSION
Population proximity to liquor outlets
Allowing grocery stores to sell liquor products would increase the
proportion of the population that resides within 5 km of an outlet by
9.47%, from 377 264 to 412 982, whereas there would be a 97.49% increase
in the population living within 0-499 m of a liquor outlet, from 19 886
to 39 273. These findings suggest that selling liquor products in
grocery stores would potentially affect the density of liquor outlets in
neighbourhoods that are already well served as opposed to expanding into
areas with poor access to alcohol products. Existing research has
consistently found that greater access to alcohol leads to increased
levels of alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harms, such as
interpersonal violence, injury, and the development of alcohol-related
physical and mental health problems. (5,37-40) Research focusing on the
introduction of alcohol retail into grocery stores has found increased
levels of consumption of the liquor products stocked within the grocery
store setting. (41) Other studies support these findings, adding that
not only does selling alcohol within grocery stores increase alcohol
consumption but that the highest increases can occur in female and rural
populations. (42) Research from other Canadian provinces, such as
British Columbia, has identified increases in alcohol-related risk
outcomes and alcohol-attributable mortality following the expansion of
alcohol retail outlets. (5,6) Communities with greater access to alcohol
have also been shown to generally have higher rates of violent crime and
growth in the number of hospital visits for stress, anxiety and
depression. (43-46)
Neighbourhood socio-economic status
While levels of alcohol consumption tend to be somewhat uniform
across a population, individuals of lower socio-economic status tend to
experience greater levels of alcohol-related harm than individuals of a
higher socio-economic status. (47) Exacerbating this issue is the
finding that communities with a lower socio-economic status tend to have
higher levels of alcohol outlet density and thus greater access to
alcohol than those of higher socio-economic status. (44) Furthermore,
outlet proximity to schools has been identified in previous research as
a risk factor for youth alcohol consumption. (43) In this study, we
found that low-income communities have a higher proportion of outlets
located near schools, and opening new points of liquor sales in these
communities would disproportionately negatively affect youth living
there. Overall, regional alcohol policies are a primary determining
factor for local levels of alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harm;
therefore, strong alcohol control systems can help to mitigate
inequitable alcohol-related health impacts across socio-economic groups.
(48) Alcohol monopolies represent one of the most effective mechanisms
for regulating alcohol in a responsible manner to minimize harm to the
public. (37,48) Government-run alcohol monopolies have the potential to
regulate alcohol as a controlled substance, as opposed to a regular
commodity comparable with subsistence items, such as food, commonly
found in grocery store settings. Monopolies offer an opportunity for the
government to regulate access, availability, and alcohol marketing in
order to encourage responsible consumption and reduce alcohol-related
harms, such as drinking and driving, and the sale of liquor products to
minors. (5,37)
Youth exposure to alcohol products
Allowing the sale of alcohol in grocery stores would more than
double the number of liquor outlets within 499 m of schools, from 30 to
65. This would expand youth exposure to alcohol products and contribute
to the normalization of alcohol consumption through product placement in
grocery stores that are frequented by youth with and without their
parents. Research demonstrates that alcohol marketing in childhood
lowers the age that youth begin drinking and increases the amount of
alcohol consumed. (49-53) Permitting alcohol retail within grocery
stores increases youth exposure to alcohol marketing (including product
labeling), which has been found to be an effective method of increasing
youth alcohol consumption. (54) Not only does exposure to in-store
alcohol marketing pose a risk factor for children and youth but the real
and perceived availability of alcohol within the community also
influences alcohol consumption by minors. (55,56) In the New Brunswick
grocery store sites, alcohol products have been co-located with soda
drinks, as well as candy, produce and other non-drug commodities. In
this context, it is important to consider the historic and strategic
convergence of the soda pop and alcohol markets over time as they target
the youth market in an attempt to build brand loyalty at an early age.
(57-59) From a public health perspective, placing alcohol products in
grocery stores also increases community exposure to end-of-aisle,
point-of-purchase, and entryway displays of liquor products that have
been found to be effective mechanisms to increase alcohol purchases.
(60)
Limitations
There are a number of limitations to consider when interpreting the
results of this study. The approach used to estimate the population
within each buffered DA assumes that the population is evenly
distributed across the area, which is unlikely. We attempted to reduce
this limitation by applying Ecumene boundaries to the buffered areas to
exclude land within each DA that was not inhabited. The retail store
data used for this study were sourced in May 2016 and it is possible
that stores have opened or closed during this period.
CONCLUSION_
The results of this study demonstrate the impact of recent and
proposed changes to alcohol distribution on access to liquor products,
and the proximity of points of sale relative to schools in urban and
rural, and low-, middle- and high-income communities in New Brunswick.
Expanding the sale of alcohol to all grocery stores will predominantly
affect low-income neighbourhoods and increase youth exposure to alcohol
products in low-income socioeconomic areas that have the greatest number
of schools within 499 m of a liquor outlet. The findings of this study
show the importance of considering social, economic and health
inequities in the context of formulating responsible alcohol control
policies that minimize alcohol-related harms.
doi: 10.17269/CJPH.108.6132
Acknowledgements: AKS extends her thanks to Todd Wuolle for his
technical assistance extracting the coordinates of the NB-Liquor and
agency store sites. AKS acknowledges the support provided by the New
Brunswick Health Research Foundation (NBHRF) and the Canadian Institutes
of Health Research (CIHR)Strategy for Patient Oriented Research-Maritime
SPOR SUPPORT Unit (MSSU) Post-Doctoral Fellowship award. This project
was completed as part of the CIHR-funded Community-Based Primary Health
Care Team Grant "Barriers and Facilitators in Access to Child/Youth
Mental Health Services: A Mixed Methods, Inter-sectorial Study in
Atlantic Canada". CIHR, the MSSU and NBHRF had no role in the
design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis and
interpretation of the data; preparation, review or approval of the
manuscript.
REFERENCES
(1.) Moodie R, Stuckler D, Monteiro C, Sheron N, Neal B,
Thamarangsi T, et al. Profits and pandemics: Prevention of harmful
effects of tobacco, alcohol, and ultra-processed food and drink
industries. Lancet 2013; 381(9867):670-79. PMID: 23410611. doi:
10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62089-3.
(2.) WHO. Global Status Report on Alcohol and Health. Geneva,
Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2014:1-100. Available at:
entity/substance_abuse/ publications/global_alcohol_report/en/index.html
(Accessed January 4, 2017).
(3.) CBC News. Ontario's cancer agency warns about possible
risks as grocery stores begin stocking wine--CBC.ca Metro Morning. CBC,
Toronto, ON, 2016. Available at:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/programs/
metromorning/cancer-risks-grocery-store-wine-1.3825911 (Accessed January
3, 2017).
(4.) CBC News. NB Liquor may expand wine in grocery stores pilot
project New Brunswick--CBC News. CBC News 2014. Available at:
http://www.cbc. ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-liquor-may-expand-wine-in-grocerystores-pilot- project-1.2715450 (Accessed January 3, 2017).
(5.) Stockwell T, Zhao J, Macdonald S, Vallance K, Gruenewald P,
Ponicki W, et al. Impact on alcohol-related mortality of a rapid rise in
the density of private liquor outlets in British Columbia: A local area
multi-level analysis. Addiction 2011; 106(4):768-76. PMID: 21244541.
doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010. 03331.x.
(6.) Stockwell T, Zhao J, MacDonald S, Pakula B, Gruenewald P,
Holder H. Changes in per capita alcohol sales during the partial
privatization of British Columbia's retail alcohol monopoly
2003-2008: A multi-level local area analysis. Addiction 2009;
104(11):1827-36. PMID: 19681801. doi: 10.1111/ j.1360-0443.2009.02658.x.
(7.) Bryden A, Roberts B, McKee M, Petticrew M. A systematic review
of the influence on alcohol use of community level availability and
marketing of alcohol. Health Place 2012; 18(2):349-57. PMID: 22154843.
doi: 10.1016/ j.healthplace.2011.11.003.
(8.) Chen M-J, Grube JW, Gruenewald PJ. Community alcohol outlet
density and underage drinking. Addiction 2010; 105(2):270-78. PMID:
20078485. doi: 10. 1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02772.x.
(9.) Chen M-J, Gruenewald PJ, Remer LG. Does alcohol outlet density
affect youth access to alcohol? J Adolesc Health 2009; 44(6):582-89.
PMID: 19465323. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.10.136.
(10.) Treno AJ, Grube JW, Martin SE. Alcohol availability as a
predictor of youth drinking and driving: A hierarchical analysis of
survey and archival data. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2003; 27(5):835-40. PMID:
12766629. doi: 10.1097/ 01.ALC.0000067979.85714.22.
(11.) Bonomo YA, Bowes G, Coffey C, Carlin JB, Patton GC. Teenage
drinking and the onset of alcohol dependence: A cohort study over seven
years. Addiction 2004; 99(12):1520-28. PMID: 15585043. doi:
10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004. 00846.x.
(12.) McCreanor T, Barnes HM, Kaiwai H, Borell S, Gregory A.
Creating intoxigenic environments: Marketing alcohol to young people in
Aotearoa New Zealand. Soc Sci Med 2008; 67(6):938-46. PMID: 18619720.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed. 2008.05.027.
(13.) Gordon R, Harris F, Marie Mackintosh A, Moodie C. Assessing
the cumulative impact of alcohol marketing on young people's
drinking: Cross-sectional data findings. Addict Res Theory 2011;
19(1):66-75. doi: 10.3109/16066351 003597142.
(14.) Milam AJ, Furr-Holden CDM, Harrell P, Ialongo N, Leaf PJ.
Off-premise alcohol outlets and substance use in young and emerging
adults. Subst Use Misuse 2014; 49(1-2):22-29. PMID: 23909579. doi:
10.3109/10826084.2013. 817426.
(15.) Paschall MJ, Grube JW, Black C, Flewelling RL, Ringwalt CL,
Biglan A. Alcohol outlet characteristics and alcohol sales to youth:
Results of alcohol purchase surveys in 45 Oregon communities. Prev Sci
2007; 8(2):153-59. PMID: 17243019. doi: 10.1007/s11121-006-0063-0.
(16.) Halonen JI, Kivimaki M, Virtanen M, Pentti J, Subramanian SV,
Kawachi I, et al. Proximity of off-premise alcohol outlets and heavy
alcohol consumption: A cohort study. Drug Alcohol Depend 2013;
132(1):295-300. PMID: 23499055. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.02.022.
(17.) Rowland B, Toumbourou JW, Satyen L, Tooley G, Hall J,
Livingston M, et al. Associations between alcohol outlet densities and
adolescent alcohol consumption: A study in Australian students. Addict
Behav 2014; 39(1): 282-88. PMID: 24183302. doi:
10.1016/j.addbeh.2013.10.001.
(18.) Young R, Macdonald L, Ellaway A. Associations between
proximity and density of local alcohol outlets and alcohol use among
Scottish adolescents. Health Place 2013; 19(100):124-30. PMID: 23220375.
doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace. 2012.10.004.
(19.) Gosselt JF, van Hoof JJ, de Jong MDT, Prinsen S. Mystery
shopping and alcohol sales: Do supermarkets and liquor stores sell
alcohol to underage customers? J Adolesc Health 2007; 41(3):302-8. PMID:
17707301. doi: 10.1016/ j.jadohealth.2007.04.007.
(20.) Freisthler B, Johnson-Motoyama M, Kepple NJ. Inadequate child
supervision: The role of alcohol outlet density, parent drinking
behaviors, and social support. Child Youth ServRev 2014; 43:75-84. PMID:
25061256. doi: 10.1016/ j.childyouth.2014.05.002.
(21.) Officer of the Chief Medical Officer of Health. New Brunswick
health indicators: Alcohol and health. Fredericton 2015. Available at:
http://www2. gnb.ca/content/dam/gnb/Departments/h-s/pdf/en/Publications/Health IndicatorsAlcoholMay2015.pdf (Accessed January 6, 2017).
(22.) Rehm J, Baliunas D, Brochu S, Fischer B, Gnam W, Patra J, et
al. The Costs of Substance Abuse in Canada 2002. Ottawa, ON: Canadian
Centre on Substance Abuse, 2006. Available at:
http://www.alcsmart.ipin.edu.pl/files/cb02a_ final_csac.pdf (Accessed
January 4, 2017).
(23.) Karissa Donkin SF. NB Liquor finds support for wine in
grocery stores--New Brunswick--CBC News. CBC News 2016. Available at:
http://www.cbc.ca/ news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-liquor-wine-sales-grocery-stores-1.3551851 (Accessed January 3, 2017).
(24.) Asbridge M, Pauley C. Reducing Alcohol-Related Harms and
Costs in New Brunswick: A Provincial Summary Report. Department of
Community Health and Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS,
2013.
(25.) CBC News. NB Liquor may expand wine in grocery stores--New
Brunswick CBC News. CBC News 2016. Available at:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newbrunswick/
nb-liquor-grocery-store-wine-expand-1.3765593 (Accessed January 3,
2017).
(26.) IBM. IBM SPSS 23 for Windows. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp., 2015.
(27.) ESRI. ArcGIS Desktop 10.1. Redlands, CA: ESRI, 2012.
(28.) Alcool NB Liquor. Available at:
http://www.nbliquor.com/Home/Stores (Accessed January 4, 2017).
(29.) DMTI Spatial. Enhanced Points of Interest (EPOI) User Manual
v2013_3, 2010. Available at: www.dmtispatial.com (Accessed January 4,
2017).
(30.) Statistics Canada. Postal CodeOM Conversion File Plus (PCCF+)
Version 6A, Reference Guide. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada, 2013.
Catalogue No. 82-F0086XDB.
(31.) New Brunswick Health Council. "My Community at a
Glance" Community Profiles New Brunswick Health Council. Moncton,
NB: New Brunswick Health Council. Available at:
https://www.nbhc.ca/community-profiles#.WGx8y 3cZO9Y (Accessed January
4, 2017).
(32.) Statistics Canada. Population Ecumene Census Division
Cartographic Boundary File, Reference Guide Standards of Service to the
Public. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada, 2006.
(33.) Kipke MD, Iverson E, Moore D, Booker C, Ruelas V, Peters AL,
et al. Food and park environments: Neighborhood-level risks for
childhood obesity in east Los Angeles. J Adolesc Health 2007;
40(4):325-33. PMID: 17367725. doi: 10. 1016/j.jadohealth.2006.10.021.
(34.) van der Horst K, Timperio A, Crawford D, Roberts R, Brug J,
Oenema A. The school food environment: Associations with adolescent soft
drink and snack consumption. Am J Prev Med 2008; 35(3):217-23. PMID:
18617354. doi: 10. 1016/j.amepre.2008.05.022.
(35.) New Brunswick Liquor Corporation. Policy for agency store
program. Fredericton, NB: New Brunswick Liquor Corporation, 2014.
Available at: http://www.nbliquor.com/documents/Agency-Store-Program.pdf
(Accessed January 4, 2017).
(36.) New Brunswick Health Council. Appendix H3: Specific indicator
sources. Moncton, NB: New Brunswick Health Council, 2014. Available at:
https:// www.nbhc.ca/sites/default/files/documents/appendix_h3-specific_indicator_ sources-nbhc.pdf (Accessed January 4, 2017).
(37.) Babor TF, Caetano R, Casswell S, Edwards G, Giesbrecht N,
Graham K, et al. Alcohol: No Ordinary Commodity: Research and Public
Policy. Vol 9780199551. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2010. doi:
10.1093/acprof:oso/ 9780199551149.001.0001.
(38.) Paschall MJ, Grube JW, Kypri K. Alcohol control policies and
alcohol consumption by youth: A multi-national study. Addiction 2009;
104(11): 1849-55. PMID: 19832785. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02698.x.
(39.) Popova S, Giesbrecht N, Bekmuradov D, Patra J. Hours and days
of sale and density of alcohol outlets: Impacts on alcohol consumption
and damage: A systematic review. Alcohol Alcohol 2009; 44(5):500-16.
PMID: 19734159. doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agp054.
(40.) Xuan Z, Blanchette JG, Nelson TF, Nguyen TH, Hadland SE,
Oussayef NL, et al. Youth drinking in the United States: Relationships
with alcohol policies and adult drinking. Pediatrics 2015; 136(1):18-27.
PMID: 26034246. doi: 10. 1542/peds.2015-0537.
(41.) Wagenaar AC, Langley JD. Alcohol licensing system changes and
alcohol consumption: Introduction of wine into New Zealand grocery
stores. Addiction 1995; 90(6):773-83. PMID: 7633294. doi:
10.1046/j.1360-0443. 1995.9067734.x.
(42.) Room R. The Effects of Nordic Alcohol Policies. NAD
Publication No. 42. Helsinki, Finland: Nordic Council for Alcohol and
Drug Research, 2002:180 p.
(43.) Campbell CA, Hahn RA, Elder R, Brewer R, Chattopadhyay S,
Fielding J, et al. The effectiveness of limiting alcohol outlet density
as a means of reducing excessive alcohol consumption and alcohol-related
harms. Am J Prev Med 2009; 37(6):556-69. PMID: 19944925. doi:
10.1016/j.amepre.2009.09.028.
(44.) Pereira G, Wood L, Foster S, Haggar F. Access to alcohol
outlets, alcohol consumption and mental health. PLoS ONE 2013; 8(1):
e53461. PMID: 23341943. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053461.
(45.) Fitterer JL, Nelson TA, Stockwell T. A review of existing
studies reporting the negative effects of alcohol access and positive
effects of alcohol control policies on interpersonal violence. Front
Public Health 2015; 3:253. PMID: 26636055. doi:
10.3389/fpubh.2015.00253.
(46.) White GF, Gainey RR, Triplett RA. Alcohol outlets and
neighborhood crime: A longitudinal analysis. Crime Delinq 2015;
61(6):851-72. doi: 10.1177/ 0011128712466386.
(47.) Loring B. Alcohol and Inequities: Guidance for Addressing
Inequities in Alcohol-Related Harm. Copenhagen, Denmark: World Health
Organization, 2014.
(48.) Gruenewald PJ. Regulating availability: How access to alcohol
affects drinking and problems in youth and adults. Alcohol Res Health
2011; 34(2):248-56. PMID: 22330225.
(49.) Anderson P, De Bruijn A, Angus K, Gordon R, Hastings G.
Impact of alcohol advertising and media exposure on adolescent alcohol
use: A systematic review of longitudinal studies. Alcohol Alcohol 2009;
44(3):229-43. PMID: 19144976. doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agn115.
(50.) Collins RL, Ellickson PL, McCaffrey D, Hambarsoomians K.
Early adolescent exposure to alcohol advertising and its relationship to
underage drinking. J Adolesc Health 2007; 40(6):527-34. PMID: 17531759.
doi: 10.1016/ j.jadohealth.2007.01.002.
(51.) Gordon R, Mackintosh AM, Moodie C. The impact of alcohol
marketing on youth drinking behaviour: A two-stage cohort study. Alcohol
Alcohol 2010; 45(5):470-80. PMID: 20739441. doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agq047.
(52.) Smith A, Foxcroft R. The effect of alcohol advertising,
marketing and portrayal on drinking behaviour in young people:
Systematic review of prospective cohort studies. BMC Public Health 2009;
9:51. PMID: 19200352. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-9-51.
(53.) Snyder LB, Milici FF, Slater M, Sun H, Strizhakova Y. Effects
of alcohol advertising exposure on drinking among youth. Arch Pediatr
Adolesc Med 2006; 160(1):18-24. PMID: 16389206. doi:
10.1001/archpedi.160.1.18.
(54.) Hurtz SQ, Henriksen L, Wang Y, Feighery EC, Fortmenn SP. The
relationship between exposure to alcohol advertising in stores, owning
alcohol promotional items, and adolescent alcohol use. Alcohol Alcohol
2007; 42(2):143-49. PMID: 17218364. doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agl119.
(55.) Grier SA, Kumanyika S. Targeted marketing and public health.
Annu Rev Public Health 2010; 31:349-69. PMID: 20070196. doi:
10.1146/annurev.publhealth. 012809.103607.
(56.) Stanley LR, Henry KL, Swaim RC. Physical, social, and
perceived availabilities of alcohol and last month alcohol use in rural
and small urban communities. J Youth Adolesc 2011; 40(9):1203-14. PMID:
20532969. doi: 10.1007/s10964010- 9556-z.
(57.) Mosher JF, Johnsson D. Flavored alcoholic beverages: An
international marketing campaign that targets youth. J Public Health
Policy 2005; 26(3):326-42. PMID: 16167560. doi:
10.1057/palgrave.jphp.3200037.
(58.) Mosher JF. Joe camel in a bottle: Diageo, the Smirnoff brand,
and the transformation of the youth alcohol market. Am J Public Health
2012; 102(1):56-63. PMID: 22095339. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300387.
(59.) Sargent J. Alcohol marketing and underage drinking: Time to
get real. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2014; 38(12):2886. PMID: 25581644. doi:
10.1111/acer.12584.
(60.) Nakamura R, Pechey R, Suhrcke M, Jebb SA, Marteau TM. Sales
impact of displaying alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages in
end-of-aisle locations: An observational study. Soc Sci Med 2014;
108:68-73. PMID: 24632050. doi: 10. 1016/j.socscimed.2014.02.032.
Received: February 20, 2017
Accepted: July 7, 2017
Amanda K. Slaunwhite, PhD, [1,2] Julie McEachern, MSc, [3] Scott T.
Ronis, PhD, [4] Paul A. Peters, PhD [5]
Author Affiliations
[1.] Institute for Circumpolar Health Studies, University of Alaska
Anchorage, Anchorage, USA
[2.] Centre for Addictions Research of British Columbia, Victoria,
BC
[3.] School of Social and Political Science, Global Public Health
Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
[4.] Department of Psychology, University of New Brunswick,
Fredericton, NB
[5.] Department of Health Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON
Correspondence: Amanda Slaunwhite, PhD, Institute for Circumpolar
Health Studies, University of Alaska Anchorage, 3211 Providence Drive,
Anchorage, AK 99508, USA, Tel: 907-786-6585, E-mail:
aslaunwhite@alaska.edu
Conflict of Interest: None to declare.
Caption: Figure 1. Liquor sales outlets by store type
Caption: Figure 2. Proximity to liquor, agency, and grocery stores
by urban, rural, and suburban area
Caption: Figure 3. Liquor outlets within 499 m of schools by store
type, community characteristics, and health region. * Health Regions: 1)
Moncton; 2) Saint John; 3) Fredericton; 4) Edmundston; 5) Campbellton;
6) Bathurst; and 7) Miramichi
Table 1. Community characteristics by store type
Liquor store type, proportion (number)
NB-Liquor store Agency store
Metropolitan influence zone
Urban 62.79 (27) 47.27 (52)
Suburban 20.93 (9) 35.45 (39)
Rural 16.28 (7) 17.27 (19)
Neighbourhood socio-economic status
QAIPPE
Low 41.86 (18) 47.27 (52)
Middle 41.86 (18) 29.09 (43)
High 16.28 (7) 13.64 (15)
QNIPPE
Low 72.09 (31) 77.27 (85)
Middle 25.58 (11) 21.87 (24)
High 2.32 (1) 0.91 (1)
Mean distance to 1133.4 (23.76, 4501.9 (92.21,
school (minimum, 3690.15) 39 522.06)
maximum) *
Mean distance to 1688.1 (6.79, 10 874.0 (3.77,
another liquor outlet 10 361.71) 42 770.31)
(minimum, maximum) *
Liquor store type, proportion (number)
Grocery store
Metropolitan influence
Urban 48.06 (62)
Suburban 31.08 (40)
Rural 20.93 (27)
Neighbourhood socio-economic status
QAIPPE
Low 46.51 (60)
Middle 41.86 (54)
High 11.63 (15)
QNIPPE
Low 82.17 (106)
Middle 14.72 (19)
High 3.10 (4)
Mean distance to 2607.1 (68.18,
school (minimum, 28 146.77)
maximum) *
Mean distance to 2768.6 (3.79,
another liquor outlet 30 816.08)
(minimum, maximum) *
Distance is measured in metres using the New Brunswick
Road Network files.
Table 2. Population estimates by distance to NB-Liquor, agency,
and grocery stores
Distance * NB-Liquor store Agency
[less than or equal to] 499 m 12 912 7002
500-999 m 37 361 18 862
1-5 km 268 856 180 596
Total ([dagger]) 306 218 206 462
Distance * NB-Liquor or agency store
[less than or equal to] 499 m 19 886 ([dagger])
500-999 m 52 755 ([dagger])
1-5 km 341 479 ([dagger])
Total ([dagger]) 377 264 ([double dagger])
Distance * Grocery store
[less than or equal to] 499 m 27 412
500-999 m 56 025
1-5 km 264 516
Total ([dagger]) 347 958
Distance * Proportion and number of the
provincial population within
distance of a NB-Liquor,
agency, or grocery store
[less than or equal to] 499 m 5.23% (39,273) ([dagger])
500-999 m 11.72% (88,094) ([dagger])
1-5 km 51.48% (386,686) ([dagger])
Total ([dagger]) 54.98% (412,982) ([double dagger])
* Distance is measured in metres using the New Brunswick road network
files.
([dagger]) Totals exceed 100% because of distance bands overlapping
between one or more locations by store type.
([double dagger]) Final population estimates with dissolved distance
bands to eliminate overlapping boundaries between stores.
Table 3. Distance to school by store type and community
characteristics
Distance to school
[less than or equal to] 499 m 500-999 m
Store type (proportion, N) * [chi square] = 25.041, df : = 6,
p = 0.001
Liquor store 16.92 (11) 18.33 (11)
Agency store 29.23 (19) 28.33 (17)
Grocery store 53.85 (35) 53.33 (32)
Metropolitan influence zone* [chi square] = 9.662, df = 6, p = 0.140
Urban 53.85 (35) 56.67 (34)
Suburban 27.69 (18) 18.33 (11)
Rural 18.46 (12) 25.00 (15)
QAIPPE * ([dagger])
Low 53.85 (35) 60.00 (36)
Middle 33.85 (22) 35.00 (21)
High 12.31 (8) 5.00 (3)
QNIPPE * ([dagger])
Low 89.23 (58) 81.67 (49)
Middle 9.23 (6) 16.67 (10)
High 1.54 (1) 1.67 (1)
Distance to school
1-5 km
Store type (proportion, N) * [chi square] = 25.041, df : = 6,
p = 0.001
Liquor store 18.91 (21)
Agency store 38.74 (43)
Grocery store 42.34 (47)
Metropolitan influence zone* [chi square] = 9.662, df = 6, p = 0.140
Urban 46.85 (52)
Suburban 36.94 (41)
Rural 16.22 (18)
QAIPPE * ([dagger])
Low 33.33 (37)
Middle 49.55 (55)
High 17.12 (19)
QNIPPE * ([dagger])
Low 67.57 (75)
Middle 28.83 (32)
High 3.6 (4)
* About 46 stores were located more than 5 km away from schools.
([dagger]) [chi square] was not conducted as one or more cells
had a count of less than five.
Table 4. Distance to school by health region and store type
Health region
Zone 1-- Zone 2--
Moncton/ Fundy Shore/
South-East Saint John
Area Area
Youth binge drinking mean 5 51.8 (39, 59) 42.7 (17, 59)
(minimum, maximum)
[less than or equal to] 499 m
to school (Proportion, N)
Liquor store 15.4 (2) 16.7 (2)
Agency store 30.8 (4) 25.0 (3)
Grocery store 53.8 (7) 58.3 (7)
Total 20 (13) 18.5 (12)
500-999 m to school (Proportion, N)
Liquor store 21.4 (3) 36.4 (4)
Agency store 14.3 (2) 27.3 (3)
Grocery store 64.3 (9) 36.4 (4)
Total 23.3 (14) 18.3 (11)
Health region
Zone 3-- Zone 4--
Fredericton/ Madawaska/
River Valley North West
Area Area
Youth binge drinking mean 5 49.2 (17, 68) 57.0 (40, 68)
(minimum, maximum)
[less than or equal to] 499 m
to school (Proportion, N)
Liquor store 18.8 (3) 11.1 (1)
Agency store 37.5 (6) 22.2 (2)
Grocery store 43.8 (7) 66.7 (6)
Total 24.6 (16) 13.8 (9)
500-999 m to school (Proportion, N)
Liquor store 0(0) 0 (0)
Agency store 36.4 (4) 66.7 (4)
Grocery store 63.6 (7) 33.33 (2)
Total 18.3 (11) 10(6)
Health region
Zone 5-- Zone 6--
Restigouche Bathurst/
Area Acadian
Peninsula Area
Youth binge drinking mean 5 59.0 (53, 68) 58.2 (53, 68)
(minimum, maximum)
[less than or equal to] 499 m
to school (Proportion, N)
Liquor store 33.3 (1) 12.5 (1)
Agency store 33.3 (1) 37.5 (3)
Grocery store 33.3 (1) 50.0 (4)
Total 4.6 (3) 12.3 (8)
500-999 m to school (Proportion, N)
Liquor store 0 (0) 27.3 (3)
Agency store 0 (0) 18.2 (2)
Grocery store 100 (2) 54.5 (6)
Total 3.3 (2) 18.3 (11)
Health region
Zone 7--
Miramichi
Area
Youth binge drinking mean 5 56.4 (50, 67)
(minimum, maximum)
[less than or equal to] 499 m
to school (Proportion, N)
Liquor store 25.0 (1)
Agency store 0 (0)
Grocery store 75.0 (3)
Total 6.1 (4)
500-999 m to school (Proportion, N)
Liquor store 20 (1)
Agency store 40 (2)
Grocery store 40 (2)
Total 8.3 (5)
COPYRIGHT 2017 Canadian Public Health Association
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2017 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.