Shortly after the end of the year published in the journal BMC Public Health, a new scientific study of the health effects of public alcohol monopolies, this time by The alcohol monopolies. The study led by Tim Stockwell from Canada, and Tanya Chikritzhs, from Australia, was conducted by a group of internationally active alkoholforskare where we were.
The study compared two methods to calculate the effects of privatized retail. Both proved to give very similar results which strengthens the confidence in the calculations. The aim was to estimate how the consumption of alcohol, alcohol-related mortality, morbidity, assaults and drunken driving would be affected by a transition to one of two options: a system of licensed private alkoholbutiker or a system with sales in the retail sector.
such An increase of the consumption of alcohol is estimated to lead to around 1400 more deaths per year. Among other things, estimated an increase of alkoholorsakade deaths from cancer by 29 percent. The number of alkoholorsakade days at the hospital are expected to increase by 32.5 per cent, at an increased cost of 972 million. In addition, estimated assaults increase by 34% and rattfyllerierna with 58 per cent.
the Systembolaget can be seen as an intelligent balance between individual freedom and the need to limit the risk of alcohol-related harm.
the Study is one in a series of research studies that clarify the impact of public health with a state-owned detaljhandelsmonopol. The question is whether Systembolaget’s alcohol monopolies have such positive health effects in Sweden that they justify a departure from the market economy and free competition. Our study speaks for it. It also did a review of the united states Center for Disease Control, CDC, of the 17 scientific studies of privatization of alcohol monopolies. The CDC study showed that alcohol consumption increased by 44% on average. For example, increased sales of wine by 50% when the monopoly was abolished in West Virginia in 1981, with 150 per cent in Idaho in 1971 and 10 percent in New Hampshire in 1978.
Also in Sweden we have the experience of privatizing the sales of medium beer and strong beer. Between 1965 and 1977 were sold of medium beer in grocery stores. The sale was very large, and the total alcohol consumption increased by 11 per cent. Young people were especially affected, and when mellanölet moved in at the Systembolaget in 1977 reduced the number of serious alcohol poisonings among the young people greatly, as well as traffic accidents where young people were involved.
the number of outlets, the number of hours that the stores are open, age verification, marketing, and pricing. At privatisation, strong commercial forces to change all of these, and we can expect greater availability in the form of more stores, longer hours, lower minimum prices and the increased marketing, leading to increased consumption. By international historical comparisons, we calculated how each of these factors would be affected by a privatisation in Sweden.
It is sometimes claimed that effective regulation of the provincial can be achieved within the framework of the private companies. At this point, however, is the research unambiguous. Increased competition in the alcohol leads inexorably to increased alcohol consumption and increased damage.
Of the many causes of the disease, violence, accidents and social tragedies. The greater the consumption of alcohol is in society, the greater will be the damage. Competition, profit, and advertising to increases sales and thus consumption and damage.
Especially important is to limit access to alcohol among young people, who are more sensitive to alcohol, both medically and socially. It has also been shown that young people who begin drinking early are at increased risk for a number of diseases later in life, as well as the increased risk of alcohol dependence.
minimum Age of 20 years is therefore important. Systembolaget has an effective age verification and the control purchase which allows young people just above 20 years make in the stores indicates that the store staff request proof of id in over 95% of cases. However, it has been shown time and time again that food trade has a lack of control of the 18-year limit for beer, which is not surprising for stores who work during the competition. This is also a strong argument for Systembolaget’s monopoly.
There is a reason to more actively control the alkoholpriserna so that they at least follow in the purchasing power. In addition, we recommend that the government introduce a system of minimum prices for alcohol, in the same way as occurred in Scotland and who are about to be introduced in Ireland. With minimum prices is limited, in particular the harm done by alcohol among the socio-economically vulnerable groups. You should also be aware that all forms of increased competition in the alcohol have a negative effect on public health by driving down minimum prices.
It is also extremely important to protect the alcohol monopoly against the seemingly innocent reforms that farm sales and internet sales. The problem with sales is that it is contrary to the EU right through to favour Swedish products.
draft sakpolitisk agreement between the social democrats, the Centre party, the Liberals and the green Party the green appears to be both worrisome and unnecessary since the previous two state investigations found that the farm does not comply with Systembolaget’s monopoly. Mail order / internet sales of alcohol from abroad, with the help of the internet, is now conducted in detaljhandelsliknande forms and with the support of advertising and marketing. Also this is in contravention of EU law. The legislation must be strengthened with provisions prohibiting the promotion or intermediation of the sale of alcoholic beverages from abroad and include all the merchants, even the foreign.
A state alcohol monopolies is, of course, a challenge to the conventional market economy model in which alcohol is perceived as a commodity like any other. However, the knowledge about alkoholbrukets risks for both those who drink that for people in their environment has now become very extensive. Also the knowledge about the countermeasures that work is now considerably larger.
, a term coined by ekonomipristagaren 2017, Richard Thaler, and that means action to increase human welfare with little or no restrictions in their freedom of action. In summary, the Monopoly is seen as an intelligent balance between individual freedom and the need to limit the risk of alcohol-related harm.