Is Restricting Sales of Malt Liquor Beverages Effective in Reducing Crime in Urban Areas?

Abstract

We evaluated the effects of outlet and small area level malt liquor policies on crime in 10 U.S. cities and hypothesized that more restrictive malt liquor policies would be associated with greater reductions in crime. Method: We used a pooled time-series study design (i.e., panel regression) with comparison areas to test our hypothesis. Quarterly crime rates in targeted areas were compared 3 years before and after policy adoption. Four crime outcomes were analyzed: Selected Part II crimes, assaults, vandalism/property damage, and disorderly conduct. Both the presence and absence of a malt liquor policy (yes, no) and degree of restrictiveness of the malt liquor policy were assessed using a newly created measure of malt liquor policy restrictiveness developed by the investigators. Results were analyzed using a series of linear mixed models. Results: Adoption of malt liquor policies was not associated with Part II selected crimes. For individual crimes (e.g., assaults, vandalism, disorderly conduct), we found mixed results as more restrictive malt liquor policies were significantly associated with decreases as well as increases in crime. In general, the evaluated policies were considered to be not highly restrictive. Conclusions: Our fi ndings suggest that malt liquor policies at the outlet or small area level alone may not be sufficient to reduce crime associated with malt liquor use. Policies that are more restrictive or cover larger areas than assessed in the current study may be required to have an independent effect on crime outcomes.

The Effectiveness of Alcohol Impact Areas in Reducing Crime in Washington Neighborhoods

“…Our findings suggest that AIAs may be one of a number of tools local officials may use to reduce alcohol‐related crime in specific areas of a city, especially less‐serious crimes. In contrast to previous studies (Barajas et al, 2011; Collins et al, 2007; Jones‐Webb, et al, 2018; McKee et al, 2017; Vilamovska et al, 2009), our results also suggest that restrictions of malt liquor sales in AIAs may also be helpful in reducing more‐serious alcohol‐related crime, such as aggravated assault. Indeed, assaults (aggravated + simple) decreased in all 3 AIAs following mandatory restrictions on malt liquor sales.…”

“…AIAs in Washington were designed to reduce alcohol problems related to chronic public inebriation, and public inebriation is typically associated with street or less-serious crimes, such as panhandling, public urination, litter, and broken glass. Previous studies have also shown that malt liquor restrictions were associated with decreases in less-serious crime (Barajas et al, 2011;Calvert et al, 2020;Collins et al, 2007;Jones-Webb et al, 2018;McKee et al, 2017;Vilamovska et al, 2009). In contrast to these studies, our study found that AIAs were associated with decreases in more-serious Part I crime as well in the Tacoma AIA.…”

“…Some studies have found that malt liquor policies are associated with decreases in certain types of crimes, particularly less‐serious crimes (Barajas et al, 2011; Calvert et al, 2020; Collins et al, 2007; Jones‐Webb et al, 2018; McKee et al, 2017; Vliamovska et al, 2009). For example, Jones‐Webb and colleagues (2018) using a pooled time series design found that restrictions on malt liquor sales (e.g., certain brands, single bottle sales, alcohol content) were significantly associated with decreases in assaults in neighborhoods surrounding off‐premise outlets across 10 cities. Other studies have reported that malt liquor policies are associated with decreases as well as increases in crime (Barajas et al, 2011; Calvert et al, 2020; Jones‐Webb et al, 2018; McKee et al, 2017).…”

“…For example, Jones‐Webb and colleagues (2018) using a pooled time series design found that restrictions on malt liquor sales (e.g., certain brands, single bottle sales, alcohol content) were significantly associated with decreases in assaults in neighborhoods surrounding off‐premise outlets across 10 cities. Other studies have reported that malt liquor policies are associated with decreases as well as increases in crime (Barajas et al, 2011; Calvert et al, 2020; Jones‐Webb et al, 2018; McKee et al, 2017). Using time series analyses, Barajas and colleagues (2011) evaluated the effectiveness of restrictions on single‐container malt liquor sales in reducing crime around off‐premise alcohol outlets in Minneapolis over a 2‐year period.…”

“…We evaluated the effectiveness of AIAs in reducing crime in neighborhoods around off‐premise alcohol outlets in 3 AIAs in Spokane and Tacoma, Washington. Based on previous studies, we hypothesized that mandatory adoption of AIAs would be significantly associated with decreases in crime, especially less‐serious crime (Barajas et al, 2011; Calvert et al, 2020; Jones‐Webb et al, 2018; McKee et al, 2017). Results from our study may be useful to local officials and policymakers in Washington and other states contemplating whether to adopt, maintain, or expand AIAs to other cities.…”