The relationship between alcohol outlets and crime is not an artefact of retail geography

Abstract

Background and Aims: In previous research, the spatial distribution of alcohol outlets has been shown to be related to the spatial distribution of crime. However, the spatial distribution of alcohol outlets is also related to the spatial distribution of other retail (and non-retail) activities. We measured whether a residual relationship between alcohol outlets and crime remains statistically significant after controlling for retail density.Design and setting: A cross-sectional analysis of area unit data for Hamilton, New Zealand. Measurements:We constructed index measures of retail density using principal component analysis, based on counts of retail outlets (non-alcohol outlets alone and all outlets in total). We estimated the relationship between outlets and police calls-for-service using negative binomial regression, controlling for social deprivation, population and demographics. In our primary analysis, we employed a two-stage process that first accounted for the correlation between calls-for-service and retail density in a negative binomial regression model, then tested for correlation between alcohol outlet counts and the first-stage residuals. Findings:The spatial distributions of retail outlets of all types were highly correlated with each other, and all types of retail outlets (alcohol and non-alcohol) were correlated with crime, after controlling for social deprivation, population and demographics. After controlling for index measures of retail density and other controls, statistically significant semipartial correlations remained with counts of alcohol outlets of all types. For example, in our preferred specification, which controlled for non-alcohol retail density in the first stage, an additional off-licence alcohol outlet was associated with 97.34 (95% confidence interval = 36.66-158.0) additional police calls-for service.Conclusions: There is a positive relationship between the spatial distribution of alcohol outlets and the spatial distribution of crime that appears to persist even after controlling for non-alcohol retail density. The relationship between alcohol outlets and crime is not simply an artefact of retail geography.

Micro‐temporal analyses of crime related to alcohol outlets: A comparison of outcomes over weekday, weekend, daytime and nighttime hours

“…DUIs and assaults occurred more often in areas with more bars or pubs on weekend nights. These results inform previous findings showing that DUI and assaults occur more often in neighbourhood areas with more bars, pubs or taverns [14,46] independent of correlates related to other retail activities or roadway characteristics [46,47]; incidents of these crimes appear specifically greater on days and at times when use and sales of alcohol through these outlets appear more frequent. Moderate evidence supported differences in IPV by day and time.…”

“…Second, the infrequency of some crime types, like IPV, drug market crimes and DUI, may mitigate power in the assessment of outlet effects. Third, limits on available data by which to control confounding precludes control for inherently spatially distributed routine activities related to crime (e.g., foot and roadway traffic) and police enforcement patterns (see [47,51]). And, fourth, a tight focus on temporal sequencing of relationships between outlet numbers, densities and crime remains essential for the development of causal models.…”

Improving alcohol health literacy and reducing alcohol consumption: recommendations for Germany

“…Other (quasi-) experimental studies further show that alcohol consumption increases when the number of days on which alcoholic beverages can be sold is expanded [ 56 ]. In addition to temporal restrictions, there is solid evidence that a higher density of alcohol outlets is linked to higher crime rates [ 57 ].…”

Alcohol licensing legislation and licensing system in South‐West Nigeria: Implications to regulate physical availability of alcohol

“…None of the liquor licence bylaws contained regulations on controlling physical availability of alcohol and outlet density a risk factor for high AOD, heavy episodic drinking, alcohol-related harm [9] and crime [33,34]. A participant stated that 'as a LGC if as many as possible can sell alcohol what's our own business, ours is to generate money from them'.…”