Implementation of alcohol minimum unit pricing (MUP): a qualitative study with small retailers

IF 1.5 4区 社会学 Q3 SUBSTANCE ABUSE Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy Pub Date : 2022-05-15 DOI:10.1080/09687637.2022.2075251
M. Stead, D. Eadie, R. Purves, Jennifer McKell, N. Critchlow, K. Angus, C. Angus, N. Fitzgerald
{"title":"Implementation of alcohol minimum unit pricing (MUP): a qualitative study with small retailers","authors":"M. Stead, D. Eadie, R. Purves, Jennifer McKell, N. Critchlow, K. Angus, C. Angus, N. Fitzgerald","doi":"10.1080/09687637.2022.2075251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Minimum unit pricing for alcohol (MUP) came into effect on 1st May 2018 in Scotland, raising the price of the cheapest shop-bought alcohol. Small retailers are a key source of alcohol for communities, often located in areas of high alcohol-related harm. We sought to examine their experiences of MUP implementation and impact. We conducted semi-structured interviews in-store with 20 small retailers in central Scotland at two time points: October – November 2017 (6–7 months pre-implementation); and October – November 2018 (5–6 months post-implementation). Prior to implementation, some retailers did not understand MUP, including how prices would link to product strength, or were concerned about anticipated implementation burden. Several expressed support for reducing ‘problem’ drinking or suggested that MUP would increase alcohol prices in supermarkets bringing them into line with small retailers. Despite initial concerns, small retailers reported minimal disruption following implementation of MUP, which was generally straightforward. Compliance was taken seriously and price calculations relatively manageable. Few/no negative reactions from customers were reported. Some felt that the measure enabled them to better compete with larger retailers/supermarkets. Concerns about MUP expressed by some trade bodies prior to implementation were largely not borne out in the experiences of small retailers.","PeriodicalId":11367,"journal":{"name":"Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy","volume":"69 1","pages":"453 - 460"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09687637.2022.2075251","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Minimum unit pricing for alcohol (MUP) came into effect on 1st May 2018 in Scotland, raising the price of the cheapest shop-bought alcohol. Small retailers are a key source of alcohol for communities, often located in areas of high alcohol-related harm. We sought to examine their experiences of MUP implementation and impact. We conducted semi-structured interviews in-store with 20 small retailers in central Scotland at two time points: October – November 2017 (6–7 months pre-implementation); and October – November 2018 (5–6 months post-implementation). Prior to implementation, some retailers did not understand MUP, including how prices would link to product strength, or were concerned about anticipated implementation burden. Several expressed support for reducing ‘problem’ drinking or suggested that MUP would increase alcohol prices in supermarkets bringing them into line with small retailers. Despite initial concerns, small retailers reported minimal disruption following implementation of MUP, which was generally straightforward. Compliance was taken seriously and price calculations relatively manageable. Few/no negative reactions from customers were reported. Some felt that the measure enabled them to better compete with larger retailers/supermarkets. Concerns about MUP expressed by some trade bodies prior to implementation were largely not borne out in the experiences of small retailers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
酒精最低单位定价(MUP)的实施:小型零售商的定性研究
酒精最低单位定价(MUP)于2018年5月1日在苏格兰生效,提高了最便宜的商店购买酒精的价格。小型零售商是社区的主要酒精来源,通常位于酒精相关危害高的地区。我们试图研究他们在MUP实施和影响方面的经验。我们在两个时间点对苏格兰中部的20家小型零售商进行了半结构化的店内访谈:2017年10月至11月(实施前6-7个月);2018年10月至11月(实施后5-6个月)。在实施之前,一些零售商不了解MUP,包括价格如何与产品强度挂钩,或者担心预期的实施负担。一些人表示支持减少“问题”饮酒,或者建议MUP提高超市的酒精价格,使其与小型零售商保持一致。尽管最初存在担忧,但小型零售商报告说,MUP实施后的干扰最小,这通常是直截了当的。合规得到了认真对待,价格计算也相对可控。几乎没有客户的负面反应。有些人认为这项措施使他们能够更好地与大型零售商/超级市场竞争。一些贸易机构在实施前对MUP表示的关切在小型零售商的经验中基本上没有得到证实。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
10.50%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Drugs: education, prevention & policy is a refereed journal which aims to provide a forum for communication and debate between policy makers, practitioners and researchers concerned with social and health policy responses to legal and illicit drug use and drug-related harm. The journal publishes multi-disciplinary research papers, commentaries and reviews on policy, prevention and harm reduction issues regarding the use and misuse of alcohol, tobacco and other drugs. It is journal policy to encourage submissions which reflect different cultural, historical and theoretical approaches to the development of policy and practice.
期刊最新文献
Neither laissez-faire nor prohibition: the khat regulation policy preferences of people who chew khat and local social service providers in Ethiopia From subcultural to mainstream? The evolving meaning of cannabis use among youth in a restrictive policy context Reviewing the anti-doping policy of India: Missing the wood for the trees? Just have this come from their prescription pad: the medicalization of safer supply from the perspectives of health planners in BC, Canada “Availability is the poor cousin of marketing and pricing”: qualitative study of stakeholders’ views on policy priorities around tobacco and alcohol availability
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1