Occasionally this job throws up a few interesting studies my way, and I thought that I’d share one with you. I’m preparing a document for a hearing on a liquor licensing application, and was trawling the literature looking for information on the correlation between outlet density and community outcomes (negative and positive).
So the case study that I’ve been looking at involves Rodney King, angry youths and a burning sensation that one might feel downstairs after a top night out. I know what you are thinking, “what are you talking about, you stupid, stupid man?”
Well, after the 1992 riots in Los Angeles that emerged from the verdict in the trial of the police officers charged with assaulting Rodney King, it was found that many liquor stores were looted and burned out. In fact, liquor outlets tended to be specifically targeted, and copped over and above the average when it came to rough treatment.
For many local community groups this presented an opportunity to achieve something that they’d wanted to do for some time; reduce the number and density of shops where you could buy and take away alcohol.
In the wake of the riots (and the subsequent community campaign to prevent liquor outlets from opening, 270 alcohol outlets surrendered their licenses. This provided an unusually unambiguous natural experiment for losers like me who are keen on research in the public policy field, with a well-defined ‘intervention’ (before and after), and a substantial reduction in outlets.
Accordingly, using data at the census tract level, Cohen, Ghosh-Dastidar, Scribner, Miu, Scott, Paul Robinson, Farley, Bluthenthal and Brown-Taylor (team effort here) investigated the impact that this reduction in outlets had on rates of gonorrhoea. The study attempted to differentiate between alcohol outlets as a causal factor (through alcohol consumption and risky behaviour) and as a marker of social disorganisation.
The results of this study showed a significant impact, suggesting that outlets play a significant role in the spread of gonorrhoea, even when social disorganisation was controlled for. Now, although confounding effects related to social disorganisation were controlled for, it is of course possible that some unmeasured (or immeasurable) features of the 1992 unrest and subsequent reconstruction were responsible for the stark reduction in rates of gonorrhoea rates. But that said, this study provides some of the strongest evidence that reducing the number of alcohol outlets in a community will reduce the incidence of sexually transmitted disease.
Ain't that a thing?
If you are so inclined, you can take a peek at the abstract here: Cohen et. al. (2006), “Alcohol outlets, gonorrhea, and the Los Angeles civil unrest: a longitudinal analysis”, Social Science and Medicine, 62, 12, June, pp 3062-71.
So the case study that I’ve been looking at involves Rodney King, angry youths and a burning sensation that one might feel downstairs after a top night out. I know what you are thinking, “what are you talking about, you stupid, stupid man?”
Well, after the 1992 riots in Los Angeles that emerged from the verdict in the trial of the police officers charged with assaulting Rodney King, it was found that many liquor stores were looted and burned out. In fact, liquor outlets tended to be specifically targeted, and copped over and above the average when it came to rough treatment.
For many local community groups this presented an opportunity to achieve something that they’d wanted to do for some time; reduce the number and density of shops where you could buy and take away alcohol.
In the wake of the riots (and the subsequent community campaign to prevent liquor outlets from opening, 270 alcohol outlets surrendered their licenses. This provided an unusually unambiguous natural experiment for losers like me who are keen on research in the public policy field, with a well-defined ‘intervention’ (before and after), and a substantial reduction in outlets.
Accordingly, using data at the census tract level, Cohen, Ghosh-Dastidar, Scribner, Miu, Scott, Paul Robinson, Farley, Bluthenthal and Brown-Taylor (team effort here) investigated the impact that this reduction in outlets had on rates of gonorrhoea. The study attempted to differentiate between alcohol outlets as a causal factor (through alcohol consumption and risky behaviour) and as a marker of social disorganisation.
The results of this study showed a significant impact, suggesting that outlets play a significant role in the spread of gonorrhoea, even when social disorganisation was controlled for. Now, although confounding effects related to social disorganisation were controlled for, it is of course possible that some unmeasured (or immeasurable) features of the 1992 unrest and subsequent reconstruction were responsible for the stark reduction in rates of gonorrhoea rates. But that said, this study provides some of the strongest evidence that reducing the number of alcohol outlets in a community will reduce the incidence of sexually transmitted disease.
Ain't that a thing?
If you are so inclined, you can take a peek at the abstract here: Cohen et. al. (2006), “Alcohol outlets, gonorrhea, and the Los Angeles civil unrest: a longitudinal analysis”, Social Science and Medicine, 62, 12, June, pp 3062-71.
Comments
Uselaine, I'd heard that too. When things turn ugly, anyone different often becomes a target. Riots in Fiji, the Solomon Islands and Indonesia all saw Chinese and Indian shopkeepers targeted in the past few years too.
Magiceye, indeed they can. They can also be a very useful tool when used appropriately!
Sam, the interesting thing about this study is how it presented an opportunity to collect comparable data at a level not often seen. Thus, the researchers could compare previously like suburbs and track and account for differences with clarity.
Over and over, the correlation between outlet density and levels of STDs presented itself, even factoring in the myriad of factors.