Alcohol outlets and community levels of interpersonal violence:
Spatial density, type of outlet, and seriousness of assault
William Alex Pridemore
Indiana University
Department of Criminal Justice
302 Sycamore Hall
Bloomington, Indiana 47405
812-856-2220
and
Tony H. Grubesic
Indiana University
Department of Geography
Student Building 120
Bloomington, Indiana 47405
812-855-7971
The authors shared equally in the creation of this manuscript. This research was partially supported by Indiana University’s Faculty Research Support Program and administered by the Office of the Vice Provost for Research. Both authors are members of the Research Group on Injuries, Violence, and Victimization at Indiana University.
Alcohol outlets and community levels of interpersonal violence:
Spatial density, type of outlet, and seriousness of assault
Abstract
This study examined the association between alcohol outlet density and assault density. This association recently has received increased attention in several other disciplines. Yet despite the renewed popularity in criminology of ecological explanations of the variation of crime rates, community characteristics like the density of alcohol outlets have received little attention in our discipline. Employing Cincinnati block groups as our units of analysis and controlling for several structural characteristics often found to be associated with violence rates, we estimated spatially lagged regression models to determine how the variation in spatial density of alcohol outlets was related to the variation in the spatial density of assaults. We took into account varying levels of harm by estimating separate models for simple and aggravated assaults. We also estimated separate models for off-premise outlets, bars, and restaurants to see if there were differences in this association by type of outlet. The results revealed a consistent positive and significant association between outlet density and assault density. This association held for overall, simple, and aggravated assaults, and for total outlet density and the density of each type of outlet. Further tests showed the outlet-violence association to be significantly stronger for off-premise outlets relative to the effects of bars and restaurants, and estimation of attributable fractions showed that off-premise outlets appear to be responsible for approximately one-quarter and one-third of simple and aggravated assaults, respectively. We contextualize these findings in the larger theoretical and empirical literature, suggest how they can be translated into actionable policy, and discuss the many ways criminologists could contribute to a better understanding of this phenomenon.
Introduction
This study examined the association between alcohol outlets and assault, focusing on the spatial density of each and on the effects of different types of outlets. While the alcohol-violence association has long been the subject of criminological research (Wolfgang, 1958), both older and more recent criminological studies tend to focus on individuals (Felson et al., 2008) or criminal events (Felson, Burchfield, & Teasdale, 2007; Pridemore & Eckhardt, 2008). With a few exceptions (e.g., Block & Block, 1995; Fagan, 1993; Nielsen & Martinez, 2003; Parker, 1995; Roncek & Maier, 1991), ecological studies of alcohol and violence are largely absent from the criminological literature. In recent years, however, such studies have increasingly appeared in the journals of other disciplines like epidemiology, public health, and geography (e.g., Britt et al., 2005; Gruenewald et al., 2006; Lipton & Gruenewald, 2002; Lipton et al., 2003: Livingston, 2008; Pridemore, 2004, 2002; Pridemore & Snowden, 2009; Zhu, Gorman, & Horel, 2004).
The near absence in the criminological literature of ecological studies of the alcohol-violence association, especially at the community-level, is intriguing given the reinvigoration of ecological theory and analysis over the last two decades. While these macro-level studies have focused considerable effort on better understanding how neighborhood characteristics and context influence crime, they have largely centered on testing hypotheses generated from social disorganization (Bursik, 1988; Sampson & Groves, 1989) and related theories like social cohesion (Nieuwbeerta et al., 2008), social capital (Rosenfeld, Messner, & Baumer, 2001), and collective efficacy (Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997). As a result, other neighborhood characteristics have received less attention. We believe that alcohol outlets, as a source of community-level variation in levels of interpersonal violence, deserve greater attention in the criminological literature. A higher density of outlets in an area means closer proximity and easier availability to an intoxicating substance for residents. Perhaps just as importantly, alcohol outlets provide a greater number of potentially deviant places. Convenience stores licensed to sell alcohol may be especially troublesome in this regard, as they often serve not only as sources of alcohol but also as local gathering places with little formal social control.
A secondary goal of the present paper is thus to stimulate greater interest among criminologists in the ecological association between alcohol and violence, and in doing so to reveal the advantages of employing a spatial analytical approach to the study of this phenomenon. Our analysis contributes to the existing literature in several ways. First, we take into account differing levels of harm by employing both simple and aggravated assaults as dependent variables. Second, we recognize that the strength of any association may vary based upon the type of alcohol outlet under consideration (i.e., off-premise, bar, restaurant). Third, we use block groups as our units of analysis, providing us with a lower level of aggregation and thus greater detail and less chance of aggregation bias than studies employing much larger units like ZIP codes, cities, and states. Fourth, we use a different and more spatially appropriate indicator of outlet density compared to many prior studies. Fifth, we include in our models several important socioeconomic and demographic variables that may confound the outlet-violence association, some of which are missing from prior studies. Sixth, we estimate spatially lagged regression models in order to control for spatial autocorrelation. Seventh, we estimate the attributable fraction (AF) for assault due to alcohol outlet density. The AF is the proportion of (in our case) assaults that would be avoided were the exposure (in our case, alcohol outlets) eliminated. Finally, we carry out our analyses on a different sample than those used previously, thus allowing us to examine the generalizeability of prior results. We stress that while there are reasons to believe that alcohol may exert important individual-level effects on violent behavior, our concern is with the spatial density of alcohol outlets within communities, and thus with how the variation in the density of alcohol outlets influences the variation among communities in their density of assaultive violence.
Literature Review
There are several reasons to suspect that the density of alcohol outlets may influence levels of community violence. We briefly review this literature here and then present findings from analyses of the relationship from other studies, nearly all of which have appeared in the journals of other disciplines.
The first reason to expect higher levels of crime and violence where alcohol outlets are concentrated is largely at the individual-level: greater availability of alcohol means more consumption by more people, which will lead to more disputes. This is a compositional argument, for the most part, not a structural one. Whether pharmacological or social, the disinhibiting effects of alcohol on aggression cannot be ignored, nor can the fact that biology and social context interact to affect the likelihood that alcohol consumption will lead to violence (Giancola, Saucier, & Gussler-Burkhardt, 2003; Miczek et al., 1992; Pihl, Lau, & Assaad, 1997). Studies of violent victims (e.g., Goodman et al., 1986) and offenders (e.g., Fendrich et al., 1995) have shown that a high percentage of both are under the influence of alcohol at the time of the violent event. Pernanen (1991) provides detailed potential conceptual frameworks and theoretical pathways for this type of relationship, and Parker and Rebhun (1995) outline how alcohol likely fits into several individual-level criminological theories in a way that will increase violence. As it relates to our study, it is generally accepted that greater alcohol availability in an area is associated with greater levels of consumption (Blose & Holder, 1987; Parker & Rebhun, 1995). Therefore, a compositional argument can be made about the association between alcohol outlet density and crime rates.
While this compositional argument should not be ignored, we are more interested in the ecological or spatial effects of the location and density of alcohol outlets on area violence rates. At the event and structural levels, ideas from selective disinhibition, routine activities, and social disorganization overlap in this regard. Just as social disorganization theory leads us to expect higher rates of crime in certain neighborhoods due to community characteristics, the same can be said for even smaller and specific locations within these neighborhoods that provide high-risk areas for crime and violence. Among others, these include street intersections, public transportation nodes, and alcohol outlets (Block & Block, 1995; Sherman et al., 1989; Stark, 1987). As evidence by Weisburd and his colleagues suggests (Braga et al., 1999; Weisburd et al., 2006), there is something unique about these spots, as focused efforts of crime control do not simply displace crime to other areas.
Both bars and off-premise outlets serve as a place where motivated offenders and potential victims converge (Cohen & Felson, 1979), especially young males who are already at higher risk for both offending and victimization. These outlets also provide permissive settings where norms are ambiguous or even supportive of deviant behavior, especially in the context of relaxed inhibitions that can occur when drinking. Similarly, unkempt areas in and around off-premise alcohol outlets can be a sign that anti-social behavior is condoned in the area, if not acceptable. Many view these places as time-out periods or moral holidays where the normal rules governing interpersonal behavior are weakened (Collins, 2008; MacAndrew & Edgerton, 1969). According to Parker and Rebhun (1995), these weakened normative constraints can interact with consumption level to overcome active constraint over one’s behavior, thereby resulting in selective disinhibition and increasing the likelihood of deviant and even violent behavior (see also Pernanen, 1991). The context itself may be enough to overcome any constraint in the absence of alcohol, but alcohol’s disinhibiting effect can increase the risk. Thus the greater the concentration of outlets, the greater the likelihood of places where norms governing everyday behavior might be relaxed.
The empirical literature from other disciplines has established bars and clubs as high-risk drinking settings (Macdonald et al., 2005; Stockwell et al., 1993), and off-premise outlets can also be sources of disorder. Of course all alcohol outlets are not the same, and careful research on bars has shown that a wide range of characteristics can affect significantly the variation in the amount and seriousness of aggression (Graham, Bernards, et al., 2006; Graham, Tremblay et al., 2006; Graham et al., 2005; Quigley et al., 2003). Aside from the characteristics mentioned above, the areas immediately surrounding bars are often places where patrons and others hang out (and increasingly go to smoke, given the popularity of anti-smoking laws), and social control can be especially problematic when several bars in the same area close down at the same time for the night. Similarly, many off-premise outlets are not simply places where people go to buy alcohol and then leave to take it home with them. Especially in urban areas these outlets are often convenience stores where people congregate for social interaction. The convenience stores themselves or the places immediately surrounding them might even serve as a de facto tavern of sort (Block & Block, 1995).
While it may be that the concentration of alcohol outlets in an area is partially the result of socially disorganized neighborhoods, these outlets can themselves contribute to disorganization and decreased social cohesion. Problematic bars and off-premise outlets can create disorder and reduce collective efficacy in parts of neighborhoods. Just as a larger community might be stigmatized, so might a smaller part of it, including very specific areas and establishments. According to Stark (1987), we can expect more lenient law enforcement in these types of places, which can in turn make them more attractive for those drawn to crime and deviance. For all these reasons, community-level variation in the location and density of alcohol outlets can be expected to be associated with the variation in violence rates among these communities.
Early studies of the association between alcohol outlet density and violence provided inconsistent results. Two studies by Gorman and colleagues (Gorman, Labouvie et al., 1998; Gorman, Speer et al., 1998), for example, found no association with assault or domestic violence in New Jersey. Block and Block (1995) also found no relationship in Chicago, leading them to conclude that “[t]he high levels of crime at these locations reflect the crime levels of the surrounding neighborhood more than they reflect a concentration of tavern and liquor store crime” (p. 174). In a follow up to the New Jersey studies, however, researchers focused on a single city (Newark) and did find the expected association (Speer et al., 1998). Several other studies since that time have shown an association between outlet density and violence. For example, using block group data from Washington, D.C., Roman et al. (2008) found that on-premise outlets were significantly associated with assaults. Although they did not find a relationship between off-premise outlets and violence, they did find an association between disorderly conduct and both types of outlets. An examination of census tract data in Austin and San Antonio by Zhu et al. (2004) found an association between total outlet density and a wide range of violent crimes. An analysis by Britt et al. (2005) of Minneapolis neighborhoods also revealed an association between total outlet density and several violent crimes. In a longitudinal study employing postal codes in Melbourne, Australia, and estimating fixed effects models, Livingston (2008) found an association between changes in outlet density and changes in assault levels. Finally, in one of the very few recent analyses appearing in a criminology journal, Nielsen and Martinez (2003) found an association between total outlet rate and aggravated assault using census tracts in Miami.
Summary of hypotheses
In our study, we tested the following hypotheses.
H1 The density of all alcohol outlets and of each type of outlet (i.e., off-premise, bar,
restaurant) will be positively associated with the density of total assaults.
H2 The positive effect of outlet density on assault density will be stronger for off-
premise outlets relative to bars and restaurants.