Interested constituents: identifying groups to mobilize in community organizing efforts to strengthen alcohol control policies

Abstract

Background: Policy support research identifies demographic profiles of those who support policies, but community organizers aim to mobilize groups with an existing structure. Thus, identifying established groups that support alcohol policies may aid organizing efforts.Objective: This paper calculates prevalence and odds of policy support among three potential constituency groups (i.e., religious affiliation, persons harmed by others' drinking, and persons in recovery from alcohol) for three policies: alcohol tax increases, banning alcohol in corner stores, and universal coverage for alcohol treatment.Methods: Using the 2014-15 National Alcohol Survey (n = 3,444; 1,457 male, 1,987 female) and logistic regression, this study explores associations between constituency groups and policy support.Results: Support was higher for the individual-level strategy of alcohol treatment (80.8%) than raising taxes (27.5%) and banning sales in corner stores (52.2%). Support for taxes was higher among persons who valued religion highly (vs not; aOR = 1.46, p < .01), persons harmed by others' drinking (vs not; aOR = 1.71, p < .001), and persons in recovery (vs. not; aOR = 1.76, p = .02); Catholics had lower odds of support for taxes (vs no denomination; aOR = 0.63, p = .01). Persons who valued religion highly (aOR = 1.53, p < .001), Protestants (aOR = 1.63, p < .01), Catholics (aOR = 1.46, p = .03), and persons with other religious denominations (aOR = 2.17, p = .02) had higher odds of supporting bans in corner stores. Only those in recovery showed greater support for treatment (aOR = 3.20, p < .001).Conclusion: Overall, support was lower for population-wide approaches, but results revealed constituency groups that supported these policies. These groups may be allies to organizers who seek to reduce population-level alcohol consumption and harms.

Keywords: Public opinion; alcohol control; alcohol policy; community organizing; treatment access.

Figure 1.

Alcohol control policy support by constituency group, 2015 (n = 3,444). AUD alcohol use disorder; AHTO alcohol-related harms to othersThis figure displays three bar charts, with one chart for each alcohol policy (i.e., raising alcohol taxes, banning alcohol taxes in corner stores, and universal health insurance coverage for alcohol use disorder [AUD] treatment). In the left figure, support is higher among all three constituency groups (i.e., persons who have been harmed by others’ drinking [AHTO], persons in recovery from AUDs, and persons who value religion highly). In the middle figure, support is higher among those who value religion highly. In the right figure, support is higher among those in recovery from AUD treatment. *Di?erence is statistically significant at p < .05.