The Right Time and Place: A New Approach for Prioritizing Alcohol Enforcement and Prevention Efforts by Combining the Prevalence and the Success Rate for Minors Purchasing Alcohol Themselves.

OBJECTIVE: In the Netherlands, enforcement of the alcohol age limit is low and inconsistent because of limited resources. A solution is to optimize the efforts of enforcement officers by prioritizing ways in which they regulate commercial alcohol availability. This could increase compliance by sellers, curbing commercial availability. The objective of this study is to present the development of a commercial alcohol availability estimate (CAAE) for all vendor types selling alcohol and to propose a priority ranking. METHOD: A multi-method design was used, combining data (collected in 2015) from national studies reporting behavior of minors purchasing alcohol themselves and the success rate (noncompliance) of alcohol vendors (interviewing 510 minors by telephone and conducting 1,373 purchase attempts of alcohol by minors, respectively). Descriptive data and the development of the CAAE are presented. RESULTS: Compared with other vendor types (e.g., sports bars or supermarkets), bars/cafes/discos scored highest on the CAAE, indicating that 7.7% of 16- to 17-year-olds in the survey reported successfully purchasing their own alcohol at this vendor type. CONCLUSIONS: To control commercial alcohol availability efficiently for minors in the Netherlands, our estimates suggest that enforcement and prevention efforts should prioritize bars/cafes/discos. However, local authorities should also consider local circumstances and maintain a base amount of attention for all vendor types. Ultimately, the CAAE has the potential to improve enforcer capacity and efficiency in policing commercial alcohol regulation, and prevention workers could align their interventions or campaigns to high-ranked vendor types.

Tightening the Dutch coffee shop policy: Evaluation of the private club and the residence criterion.

BACKGROUND: The Dutch coffee shop policy was tightened in 2012. Two additional criteria that coffee shops must adhere to in order for them to be tolerated came into force: the private club and the residence criterion. Coffee shops were only permitted to give access to members and only residents of the Netherlands were permitted to become a member. This tightened policy sought to make coffee shops smaller and more controllable, to reduce the nuisance associated with coffee shops and to reduce the number of foreign visitors attracted by the coffee shops. Enforcement began in the southern provinces. The private club criterion was abolished at the end of 2012. METHODS: A sample of fourteen municipalities with coffee shops was drawn. Seven in the south were treated as an 'experimental group' and the others as 'comparison group'. A baseline assessment and follow-ups at six and 18 months were performed. A combination of methods was applied: interviews with local experts, surveys with neighbourhood residents, coffee shop visitors and cannabis users, and ethnographic field work. RESULTS: Drugs tourism to coffee shops swiftly declined in 2012. The coffee shops also lost a large portion of their local customers, since users did not want to register as a member. The illegal market expanded. Neighbourhood residents experienced a greater amount of nuisance caused by dealer activities. After abolishment of the private club criterion, residents of the Netherlands largely returned to the coffee shops. Drug tourists still remained largely absent. Neighbourhood residents experienced more nuisance from coffee shops again. Illegal cannabis sale was tempered. No effect on cannabis use was found. CONCLUSION: The quick and robust shifts in the users' market in reaction to the policy changes illustrate the power of policy, but also the limitations caused by the dynamic and resilient nature of the Dutch cannabis supply market.