A new report from Public Health Scotland has found strong evidence that alcohol marketing increases consumption and contributes to harm, particularly among children and young people.
The review shows that alcohol advertising is pervasive – appearing in sport, on public transport, in retail settings, and online – and that exposure is linked to greater intentions to drink, higher consumption, and more harmful drinking.
The report states that:
Alcohol marketing and advertising is pervasive and persuasive, and frequent exposure to it drives alcohol consumption and related harms, including among children and young people.
Contrary to industry claims that marketing is only about brand choice, the evidence demonstrates that it drives overall consumption, recruits new drinkers, and targets heavy drinkers.
The report also highlights that voluntary self-regulation is ineffective. Restrictions on alcohol marketing, by contrast, are shown to reduce exposure, consumption and harm – especially when they are comprehensive rather than partial.
With Scotland experiencing high levels of alcohol harm, the findings provide a clear evidence base for stronger action to limit the reach and appeal of alcohol marketing, in line with World Health Organization recommendations.
Alison Douglas, chief executive of Alcohol Focus Scotland said:
Children and young people have the right to a childhood free from alcohol marketing. The Scottish Government has stated time and again that they remain committed to protecting children and young people from alcohol marketing, but they are way behind the curve when it comes to action when compared to other European countries including Ireland. We have the evidence; it’s time to act.
Dr Alastair MacGilchrist OBE, Chair of Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems, said:
The evidence is clear: alcohol marketing increases consumption. We have long known the alcohol industry would not spend billions on marketing if it did not result in increased consumption – and increased profits for them.
The review concludes that voluntary self-regulation by the industry is not working. The evidence supports a complete ban; however it is reasonable to assume that since more marketing results in higher sales and consumption, any reduction in marketing will lead to lower sales and therefore less harm.