Alcohol availability restriction policy and changes in consumer behavior in Lithuania in 2016-2019

Karpuškienė, Vita Article Alcohol availability restriction policy and changes in consumer behavior in Lithuania in 2016-2019 Ekonomika Provided in Cooperation with: Vilnius University Press Suggested Citation: Karpuškienė, Vita (2021) : Alcohol availability restriction policy and changes in consumer behavior in Lithuania in 2016-2019, Ekonomika, ISSN 2424-6166, Vilnius University Press, Vilnius, Vol. 100, Iss. 1, pp. 75-93, https://doi.org/10.15388/Ekon.2021.1.5 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/323091 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 75 Ekonomika ISSN 1392-1258 eISSN 2424-6166 2021, vol. 100(1), pp. 75–93 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/Ekon.2021.1.5 Alcohol Availability Restriction Policy and Changes in Consumer Behavior in Lithuania in 2016–2019 Vita Karpuškienė Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Vilnius University, Lithuania Email: [email protected] Abstract. To reduce alcohol consumption, in 2018 the Lithuanian Government introduced new restrictions on alcohol sales time, consumer age, and alcohol advertising. These restrictions apply to the entire population, regardless of alcohol consumption behavior. Such actions of the government were provoked by the scale of the problem; according to the data provided by the World Health Organization and the European Union Commission, Lithuania sits among the leading countries in alcohol consumption. The policies taken by the government to reduce alcohol consumption are described by many economists as paternalistic, as they reduce an individual’s freedom of decision. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the changes in alcohol consumption behavior after the regulatory measures entered into force and the public attitude towards these measures based on research results. This article presents the results of a study first conducted in December 2016 by the researchers of the Faculty of Economics of Vilnius University and the representatives of the Lithuanian Business Confederation*. The aim of the study was to distinguish the different groups of alcohol consumers and their alcohol consumption behavior and attitudes towards the alcohol restriction policies.** To achieve this aim, an analysis of scientific papers, a population survey, and statistical analysis methods were used. The authors conclude that alcohol restriction policies, met with a relatively favorable public attitude, may have adjusted levels of alcohol consumption and its patterns, but the increase in the number of young people among alcohol consumers is not in line with the expected policy outcomes. The measures adopted did not encourage respondents to give up alcohol in the longer term (12 months). Keywords: paternalism, standard unit of alcohol, low risk, binge drinking, severe drinking episodes. Received: 23/09/2020. Revised: 03/12/2020. Accepted: 18/01/2021 Copyright © 2021 Vita Karpuškienė. Published by Vilnius University Press This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Contents lists available at Vilnius University Press * The research is financed by Lithuanian business Confederation. ** The results of the 2016 study are presented in: Karpuškienė, V., Rastenienė, A., & Liepuonius, A. (2019). “Alkoholio vartojimo įpročiai, aplinka ir pasekmės Lietuvoje.” Socialinė Teorija, Empirija, Politika ir praktika, 18, 59–73. https://doi.org/10.15388/stepp.2019.4 ISSN 1392-1258 eISSN 2424-6166 Ekonomika. 2021, vol. 100(1) 76 Introduction Behavioral economics have provided new public policies and interpretations over the past thirty years. While in the past many economists recognized public policy as necessary to regulate or address “market failures” (supply of public goods, regulation of externalities, imperfection of information), nowadays it has become more important to emphasize the individual decision-making process. Paternalistic state policies designed to protect the society from harmful habits or social policies are used in many countries and receive much attention. Studied are devoted to find out both the paternalistic nature of these policies and the effectiveness of their use. The Lithuanian government pays a lot of attention to reducing alcohol consumption and pursues an active policy of cutting down alcohol accessibility. Since 1995, the government has been regulating alcohol trade by reducing alcohol advertising and availability. In the summer of 2017, the Seimas approved new amendments to the Law on Alcohol Control, which came into effect beginning with the year 2018 and stated that persons under the age of 20 will not be able to purchase, possess, or consume alcoholic beverages. The sales time for alcoholic beverages was also reduced on weekdays and Saturdays from 10 am to 8 pm, and on Sundays from 10 am to 3 pm; alcohol advertising was completely banned. The sale and consumption of alcohol was declared prohibited during sport events in the premises where they take place. In addition, from January 1, 2020, an outdoor alcohol retail establishment was only permitted within a 40-meter radius from a stationary catering establishment, whereas trade in pavilions and other non-stationary places and beaches was prohibited. According to the government, these provisions, which are based on restrictions and prohibitions, would be complemented by measures and initiatives aimed at changing consumer behavior and motivation. The new alcohol restrictions adopted are the measures most often recommended by international organizations for all countries. However, they may not be as effective in different countries and among different groups of consumers. The goal of the policy pursued by the Lithuanian Government, which can be judged from the range of measures and the declared goal, is to reduce the amount of alcohol consumption in Lithuania. This article aims to evaluate the changes in alcohol consumption behavior after the entry into force of regulatory measures and the public attitude towards these measures based on the results of a study conducted in the years 2016–2019 by researchers from the Faculty of Economics of Vilnius University and representatives of the Lithuanian Business Confederation. This paper focuses aims the following objectives: to analyze the research published by scholars evaluating the effectiveness of paternalistic policy and to identify changes in alcohol consumption habits and behavior based on the results of surveys conducted in Lithuania in 2016–2019. As it was mentioned in a paper previously written by the authors (Karpuškienė, Rastenienė, Liepuonius, 2019), the results of the population survey do not allow for a reliable Vita Karpuškienė. Alcohol Availability Restriction Policy and Changes in Consumer Behavior in Lithuania in 2016–2019 77 estimation of alcohol consumption but can be used to analyze the change of frequency and habits of alcohol consumption in certain groups of the citizens. These indicators will allow us to draw the conclusions about changes in alcohol consumption behavior. Several methods were used in the article: analysis of scientific articles, population survey, and statistical analysis methods. 1. Evaluation of the effectiveness of paternalistic policies The study performed in 2017 by the Free Market Institute (Nutritional Paternalism, 2017) examined the impact of imposed taxation on unhealthy foods (sugar, salt, carbonated beverages, fatty foods) and made a conclusion that “[t]he policy of nutritional paternalism had a limited impact and did not produce the expected results [and] rather caused additional negative consequences.” As the examined tax policy cases are aimed at combating obesity-promoting foods, it is concluded that the ultimate goal was either not achieved or had little effect based on the measures used. In 2019, the study conducted by the Free Market Institute examined the current Lithuanian policy on its regulation of beverages, tobacco, and nutrition. The authors concluded that “strict paternalistic policies have a limited impact but can have a variety of negative consequences, so implementation should be very responsible – new regulations need to be assessed on the basis of thorough examination of the regulations in force” (Increasingly Tighter Paternalistic Control, 2019). However, at the beginning of the study, the authors made it clear that they do not aim to assess the impact of policies but rather recommend that cutting down on alcohol and tobacco control could reduce the negative consequences, as well as educating the population and cultivating a culture of responsible consumption. This view is also shared by Friedman (2013). In the abovementioned publications, paternalistic policies aimed at influencing the decisions of individuals are presented as an ineffective tool. To assess the effectiveness of paternalistic politics, it is important to clearly define their purpose, as many scholars argue (John, 2018; Anker, 2016; Clarke, 2008; Thomas & Buckmaster, 2010, etc.) John (2018) claims that (regarding the issue of alcohol taxation) it is not possible to divide individuals into “responsible” and “irresponsible” users because such descriptions are inaccurate. Clarke (2008) argues that paternalistic policies for restricting alcohol consumption should aim at reaching the individuals who drink heavily or are most affected by their drinking habits (e.g., the young drinkers or those suffering from addiction). Anker (2016) emphasizes that clear goals that can be measured should be set to prove that policies have become the cause of behavior change. According to Friedman (2013), public support and its tolerance for state intervention in the process of individual autonomous decision-making are very important for achieving the goal of a paternalistic policy. His paper analyzes the reasons why paternalistic measures applied to reduce obesity in the U.S. were ineffective. Disagreeing with Friedman’s interpretation of the public’s negative attitude towards the law on obesity regulations on whether they meet the needs of the population to protect them from obesity or whether ISSN 1392-1258 eISSN 2424-6166 Ekonomika. 2021, vol. 100(1) 78 these regulations are paternalistic, Parmet (2014) supports the idea that effectiveness depends on the public’s attitudes towards the politicies. In trying to assess the impact of paternalistic politics, one faces the problem of how to assess their impact on an individual’s decision-making process. Therefore, most studies atempting to assess the results of paternalistic policies use methods of surveys and statistical analysis. Thomas & Buckmaster (2010) observe that paternalistic measures should be effective in the present and increase an individual’s ability to make appropriate decisions in the future on their own (Thomas & Buckmaster, 2010). Talking about the indicators (evidence) that would allow the impact of the policy to be assessed, they state that one of such paternalistic policies to have proved its efficacy is the tobacco control policy, which has clearly demonstrated, at least in terms of health indicators, that it is effective; its benefits outweigh the potential harm to an individual’s right to make an independent decision. For other paternalism policies, the issue of harm and benefit is crucial. Based on Andrew Leigh (2009) argues that assessing the effectiveness of policies would be worthwhile using the following methods of hierarchy, as presented below. 1. Systematic reviews of several randomized sample surveys. 2. High-quality, randomized sample surveys. 3. Systematic reviews of natural experiments before and after policy. 4. Natural experiments utilizing differences-in-differences and regression methods. 5. Before – after studies. 6. Expert opinions and theoretical assumptions. One of the problems in using this hierarchy of studies is the availability of reliable data. This is emphasized by Anker (2016), linking the policy objective and the possibility of assessing its impact (the mentioned paper analyzes an article on the effectiveness of the Australian plain tobacco packaging measures). The author emphasizes that the following two aspects are necessary: causal efficacy and avoidance of negative side effects. Empirical or inferred data can be used to demonstrate causal efficacy. Empirical data obtained by individuals themselves or their relatives assessing changes in smoking habits or randomized controlled research encounter the issues of reliability. Concerning the findings, Anker believes in research outcomes made by other sciences (social psychology and healthy behavior), albeit they also possess reliability issues. Clarke (2008) presents an economic approach to evaluating state interventions to reduce alcohol consumption. From an economic point of view, Clarke classifies measures according to the causes (market failures: imperfect information, lack of self-control, external costs) related to alcohol problems and proposes measures accordingly (restriction of advertising, adequate interpretation of the negative effects of alcohol consumption, etc.; helping the individual to understand, acknowledge the problem; limit sales time and age of buyers; taxes to offset the external costs of alcohol consumption). The abovesaid proves that the effectiveness of such measures should also be assessed on the basis of indicators that reflect the size of the problem, which again encounters the problem of data reliability (specifically in how should the improvement of self-control be assessed). Vita Karpuškienė. Alcohol Availability Restriction Policy and Changes in Consumer Behavior in Lithuania in 2016–2019 79 And yet, the authors of numerous papers assessing changes in alcohol (and other addictive substance) consumption habits associated with one or another state intervention factor (Rehm, 2014; Arm et al., 2018; Livingston et al., 2018; Toumbourou et al., 2018; Raitasalo et al., 2018) base their research on population surveys. 2. Reaserch method The Law on Alcohol Control of the Republic of Lithuania states the following goal: “To reduce the general consumption of alcohol, its availability, especially for minors, alcohol abuse, its damage to health and the economy, to establish the legal bases for granting the right to produce, sell, import, import and export alcohol products regulated by this Law to economic entities.” (Law on Alcohol, 2020). The declared aim is very broad and encompasses all citizens, although by emphasizing minors it also touches upon many other aspects. Although the indicators of the purpose of the law can be largely measurable, they depend on the understanding about the damage that alcohol abuse has on public health and the economy. Without pretending to assess all indicators, we focus our research on the attitudes of the population towards policy measures and changes in their alcohol consumption behavior. This decision is driven by the statement of Thomas & Buckmaster (2010) that intervention policies should increase an individual’s ability to make appropriate decisions in the future independently and, thereby, to ensure a sustainable policy outcome. For this purpose, as it was mentioned by most authors, the survey method is used. Researchers from the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration of Vilnius University, together with representatives of the Lithuanian Business Confederation, conducted four annual surveys examining alcohol consumption habits in Lithuania. The first study was conducted in 2016. For this study, a questionnaire on alcohol consumption habits was developed and a survey was conducted. In 2018, with the adoption of additional alcohol control measures, the initial questionnaire was supplemented with questions that reveal respondents’ attitudes and behavioral changes due to the introduction of these measures. All four surveys were conducted by the joint Lithuanian-British public opinion and market research company Baltijos Tyrimai. All surveys are representative national surveys of the Lithuanian population based on the questionnaire of the population’s alcohol consumption habits and environment. The number of respondents in all surveys exceeded 1100. During the survey conducted from November to December 2019, 1104 Lithuanian residents were interviewed at 122 polling places. The results of the study reflect the behavior and attitudes of the Lithuanian population aged 15 and over; they can be assessed in different sections, according to gender, age, education, and type of settlement. The error of the results for a sample of this size usually deviates by 3%. Selection of respondents: random route according to the birthday rule. Survey method: personal interview at the respondent’s home. ISSN 1392-1258 eISSN 2424-6166 Ekonomika. 2021, vol. 100(1) 80 Table 1. Number of survey respondents 2016 2017 2018 2019 Number of respondents 1101 1120 1012 1104 The studies examined the following aspects of alcohol consumption behavior as presented below. 1. Types, frequency, and quantities of beverages consumed. To ensure the accuracy of the information, the frequency of consumption was assessed by asking questions about consumption in the last 12 months, and when analyzing the amounts of alcohol consumed, the questions were formulated about the amounts of alcohol consumed in the last week before the survey. 2. Consumption environment and participants. 3. Opinion on the introduced alcohol control measures and the resulting changes in behavior. The object of the research are the groups of alcohol consumers and the peculiarities of their alcohol consumption. This paper presents the results of a study that covers the following aspects of alcohol consumption: 1) habits and frequency of alcohol consumption; 2) consumption environment; 3) opinion on the introduced alcohol control measures. 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Changes in alcohol cunsumption behavior in 2016–2020 To assess support for ongoing measures to limit alcohol consumption, respondents were asked to rate each of them positively, neutrally, or negatively – see Table 2. In general, all respondents view restrictions on the sale and advertising of alcohol more positively than negatively, with the exception of the increase in excise duty, and this attitude remains. The similar results were published by Spinter, who conducted a population survey in 2020 in February. Respondents were more positive than negative about policies restricting alcohol consumption, most in favor of the age restriction ( 67%) and banning advertising (62%) (Tabako, 2020). The introduction of an age limit was the most supported and the increase in excise duty was the most negative, although in 2019 the number of those who thought so decreased from 38% (according to 2018 results) to 32%; the second measure, assessed negatively, is the time limit for the sale of alcoholic beverages. In assessing the answers of the respondents by consumer groups, the general tendencies remain unchanged, but the groups of regular drinkers and binge drinkers are found to be more negative about the introduction of all measures; drinkers are equally negative regarding the time limits for selling alcoholic beverages (67% in 2018, 63% in 2019) and the increase in excise duties (79% in 2018 and 68% in 2019). The number of those who gave neutral evaluations Vita Karpuškienė. Alcohol Availability Restriction Policy and Changes in Consumer Behavior in Lithuania in 2016–2019 81 increased in the group of regular alcohol users, while the neutral evaluation among binge drinkers increased (28% in 2018, 49% in 2019) and the negative evaluation concerning age restrictions decreased (37% in 2018, 18% in 2019). Table 2. How do you assess these restrictions on alcohol sales and advertising? (% of respondents). 2018 2019 Age restriction Positively 61 60 Neutrally 24 27 Negatively 12 10 Advertising ban on alcohol Positively 44 44 Neutrally 38 39 Negatively 15 14 Sales time limitation Positively 39 40 Neutrally 33 31 Negatively 25 26 Excise duty increase Positively 27 30 Neutrally 32 35 Negatively 38 32 As it was mentioned in the beginning of the article, the impact of paternalistic measures on the decision-making process of citizens depends on the clarity of the aims and favorable attitude towards the executive policy. The results obtained showed that, in general, respondents view policies restricting the availability of alcohol more positively than negatively. 3.2. Quantities And Frequency Of Consumption Participants of the study were asked about the frequency of their alcohol consumption during the last 12 months. The scoreboard for the period 2016–2019 is presented in the table below. Table 3. Alcohol consumption in the last 12 months (%) 2016 2017 2018 2019 Having consumed (%) 57 60 65 64 Not consumed (%) 41 37 32 34 No response (%) 2322 ISSN 1392-1258 eISSN 2424-6166 Ekonomika. 2021, vol. 100(1) 82 In 2016 and 2017, less than two thirds of the respondents had consumed alcoholic beverages, whereas in 2018 and 2019, the share of these individuals approached two thirds; meanwhile, the proportion of people who did not drink alcohol fell from 41% in four years to 34%. Table 4 presents data on the frequency of alcohol consumption in 2016–2019. Table 4. Consumption of alcoholic beverages in the last 12 months (%) 2016 2017 2018 2019 Daily 4323 2-4 per week 10 6 7 7 1 time per week 17 17 17 15 Altogether: every week 31 26 26 25 2-3 times per month 23 20 25 29 1 time per month 17 22 19 19 Altogether: 1 or 2 times per month 40 42 44 48 Several times per year 25 30 27 26 No response 4221 Comparing the data of different years, it is observed that in 2017, the number of drinkers decreased each week, but in the following years, after this one-off jump, this share among all drinkers stabilized at 25–26%. Looking at the results of the survey, it can be stated that from year 2017, the proportion of people who drank daily and several times a week had decreased. In parallel, the proportion of people consuming alcoholic beverages once or several times a month had increased; it grew from 40% in 2016 to 48% in 2019; almost half of the respondents consume alcohol once or several times a month. The group who drink only during the holidays remains stable and makes up about 26–30% of the respondents. Table 5. Heavy drinking episodes 2017 2018 2019 Daily 1 1 0.2 2–4 times per week 2 2 2.2 1 time per week 2 3 2.7 2–3 times per month 4 7 3.1 1 time per month 11 11 8.5 Several times per year (celebrations, birthdays) 39 36 32 Never 38 38 48 Heavy drinking is characterized by a habit of consuming 6 or more standard units of alcohol (10 ml of pure alcohol) on a single occasion. Looking at the proportions of all Vita Karpuškienė. Alcohol Availability Restriction Policy and Changes in Consumer Behavior in Lithuania in 2016–2019 89 2018 2019 Binge drinkers Definitely yes 2 1 More yes 14 9 More no 48 34 Definitely no 36 55 Regular drinkers Definitely yes 6 1 More yes 11 7 More no 52 48 Definitely no 25 39 Occasional drinkers Definitely yes 5 2 More yes 12 10 More no 37 39 Definitely no 41 43 In order to clarify the often escalating issue of the increase in illicit alcohol consumption as a substitute for legal alcohol because of tighter legal consumption, the survey asked how the measures introduced had affected illicit alcohol consumption. According to the majority of the respondents, the amount of illegal alcohol purchases remained the same as before, but the number of those who think so increased in 2019. It is worth mentioning that in 2018, 30% of drinkers thought that illegal alcohol purchases had increased, whereas this number had actually dropped down to 15% in 2019. Table 13. Have people in your environment bought less of the same amount or more of illegally produced alcohol in the last year after the restrictions on the sale of alcoholic beverages? 2018 2019 Binge drinkers Buy less 7 7 Same as before 50 59 Buy more 30 15 Regular drinkers Buy less 8 5 Same as before 56 65 Buy more 14 16 Occasional drinkers Buy less 17 14 Same as before 46 57 Buy more 11 9 Continuation of Table 12. Have the restrictions on the sale and advertising of alcohol in the recent years changed the consumption habits of alcoholic beverages? ISSN 1392-1258 eISSN 2424-6166 Ekonomika. 2021, vol. 100(1) 90 Another issue often mentioned is the increase in excise duties on alcohol and the possible ineffectiveness of such measures and the damages incurred by Lithuanian alcohol producers. Respondents were asked to indicate how often and how many alcoholic beverages did they bring from abroad to Lithuania. Table 14. Did you buy alcoholic beverages abroad for return to Lithuania? (% of respondents) 2017 2018 2019 Not once From Poland 88 87 88 From Latvia 90 89 90 From Belarus or Russia 92 93 93 From other countries 92 93 93 Rarely (1–2 times) From Poland 466 From Latvia 365 From Belarus or Russia 222 From other countries 233 3 times or more From Poland 354 From Latvia 222 From Belarus or Russia 122 From other countries 111 The responses clearly show that the number of entrants is small (about 10%) and relatively stable. According to the groups of alcohol consumers, the number of those who drank alcohol more than 3 times a year had increased. If the percentage of such importers from Poland had shrunk to its level in 2017 (8% in 2017, 9% in 2019), then regarding Latvia, this percentage grew consistently and in 2019 reached 8% (previously reaching 3% in 2017). Representatives of this group from Belarus and Russia indicated that imports are rare, but their percentage also rose to 6 percent (being 1% in 2017). It should be emphasized that the number of those who used to carry alcohol back to Lithuania more than 3 times dropped down to zero. It is noteworthy that among occasional drinkers, a higher percentage of individuals in the last two years began to transport alcohol from Poland. In 2017, 4% of drinkers transported alcohol occasionally, while 5% of drinkers transported alcohol more than 3 times; for 2019, these figures increased to 9% and 8%, respectively. Less individuals transported alcohol from Latvia; in 2017, 5% of drinkers transported alcohol occasionally, while 2% of drinkers transported alcohol more than 3 times. For 2019, these figures increased to 8% and 3%, respectively. The volume of imported alcohol increased, with beer import increasing the most (in 2017 – 8.88 liters., In 2019 – 11.02 liters). The volume of spirits grew slightly less (in 2017 – 2.35 liters, in 2019 – 3.46 liters). Vita Karpuškienė. Alcohol Availability Restriction Policy and Changes in Consumer Behavior in Lithuania in 2016–2019 91 024681 01 2 2019 2018 2017 Beer Wine Strong alcoholic drinks Fig. 2. Amount of alcohol imported from abroad in liters per journey It is still difficult to unambiguously assess the impact of alcohol restriction measures on alcohol consumption behavior. The currently visible changes show that the number of drinking individuals increased along with the younger consumers, the episodes of heavy drinking and the share of weekly consumers decreased; when examining the amount of alcohol consumed per week, positive shifts can be seen in the groups of binge and regular drinkers. There are several obvious trends and places of consumption: significantly more alcohol is consumed in bars and at events, while alcohol consumption at work is increasing, especially in the binge drinkers’ group; morning alcohol consumption has decreased. Despite the changes that have taken place, respondents do not feel that restrictive alcohol policies influence their decisions on alcohol consumption habits. Respondents’ answers do not confirm the fears about the increase in illegal alcohol consumption or its transportation from abroad, although the increase in the volume of imported alcohol is worth considering. Based on the findings, and understanding the limitations of the survey method and the defined time, we believe that alcohol restriction policies may have adjusted alcohol consumption and consumption habits and were met with a relatively favorable public stance, but the increase in numbers of young alcohol consumers did not meet the expected policy outcomes. For further research, in order to thoroughly substantiate the policy results, we plan to continue comparing the results of the new surveys and to include additional questions in order to understand the validity of the respondents’ decisions. Conclusions The study revealed that in the period of 2016–2019, the share of drinkers and non-drink- ers in the last 12 months has changed – the share of drinkers has increased from 57% to 64% in 4 years. ISSN 1392-1258 eISSN 2424-6166 Ekonomika. 2021, vol. 100(1) 92 In order to distinguish the drinking habits in detail, all drinkers were divided into three groups depending on the frequency of drinking and the amount consumed during the week: binge drinkers, regular drinkers, occasional drinkers, and non-drinkers. The group of binge drinkers included individuals who consumed alcohol frequently and heavily, who drank daily or 2–4 times a week, and drank 20 or more units of an alcoholic beverage, i.e., more than 200 ml of pure alcohol per week. The group of regular drinkers consists of people who drink alcohol every week and consume 10–19 units of alcoholic. This group includes individuals who drink frequently but do not exceed a particularly risky threshold. Occasional drinkers are those respondents who consume alcoholic beverages once a month or less. The study showed that in the period of 2016–2019, the structure of consumer groups remained stable. It consisted of binge drinkers (5%), regular drinkers (7%); occasional drinkers (50%), and non-drinkers (34%). Heavy drinking episodes (over 60 ml of pure alcohol per occasion) became less common, except for the group of individuals who consume alcohol every week. Alcohol consumption has become less common. The proportion of respondents who consume alcohol every week is declining. An examination of the amount of alcohol consumed per week shows positive shifts in the groups of binge drinkers and regular drinkers, but no significant changes were observed in the group of occasional drinkers over the 4 years. The survey shows a considerable number in the increase in alcohol consumption in bars and at events and an increase in alcohol consumption at work, especially among binge drinkers; decreased alcohol consumption is seen among those who frequently drank alcohol in the morning; respondents do not feel that restrictive alcohol policies influence their decisions about alcohol consumption habits; the answers of the respondents do not confirm the fears about the increase of illegal alcohol consumption or its transportation from abroad; the increase in imported alcohol is worth a closer study. It can be concluded that alcohol restriction policies, met with a relatively favorable public attitude, may have adjusted alcohol consumption and consumption patterns, but the increase in the number of young people among alcohol consumers did not meet the expected policy outcomes. The measures adopted did not encourage respondents to give up alcohol in the longer term (12 months). References Anker, T. B. (2016). Analysis of the Paternalistic Justification of an Agenda Setting Public Health Policy: The Case of Tobacco Plain Packaging. Public Health Ethics, 9(2), 208–228. https://doi.org/10.1093/phe/phw007 Clarke, H. (2008). The Economist’s Way of Thinking About Alcohol Policy. Agenda: A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, 15(2), 27–42. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43199518 Friedman, D. (2013). Public Health Regulation and the Limits of Paternalism. SSRN Electronic Journal. https:// doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2332988 John, S. (2018). Should We Punish Responsible Drinkers? Prevention, Paternalism and Categorization in Public Health. Public Health Ethics, 11(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/phe/phx017 Larm, P., Livingston, M., Svensson, J., Leifman, H., & Raninen, J. (2018). The increased trend of non-drinking Vita Karpuškienė. Alcohol Availability Restriction Policy and Changes in Consumer Behavior in Lithuania in 2016–2019 93 in adolescence: The role of parental monitoring and attitudes toward offspring drinking. Drug and Alcohol Review, 37(S1), S34–S41. https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.12682 Leigh A., (2009). What evidence should policymakers use? Economic Roundup, 1, pp. 27–44 Law on Alcohol Control of the Republic of Lithuania (current consolidated version 2020-08-01-2020-10-31), no. I-857. https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/TAIS.17752 Increasingly tightening paternalistic control (2019). Lithuanian Free Market Institute. <https://www.llri.lt/ wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Paternalistin---politika-grie--t--ja-1.pdf> Livingston, M., Callinan, S., Raninen, J., Pennay, A., & Dietze, P. M. (2018). Alcohol consumption trends in Australia: Comparing surveys and sales-based measures. Drug and Alcohol Review, 37(S1), S9–S14. https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.12588 Nutritional paternalism. Taxation and nutrition - experiences of other countries. (2017). Lithuanian Free Market Institute. https://www.llri.lt/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Mitybinis-paternalizmas-Mokes--iai-ir-mityba- kit-----ali---patirtys.-2017.pdf Parmet, W. (2014). Beyond Paternalism : Rethinking the Limits of Public Health Law. Connecticut Law Review, Forthcoming, 46(5), 25. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2466572 Raitasalo, K., Simonen, J., Tigerstedt, C., Mäkelä, P., & Tapanainen, H. (2018). What is going on in underage drinking? Reflections on Finnish European school survey project on alcohol and other drugs data 1999–2015. Drug and Alcohol Review, 37(S1), S76–S84. https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.12697 Rastenienė, A., Karpuškienė, V., Liepuonius, A. (2019). Alcohol consumption habits, environment and consequences in Lithuania. Social Theory, Empirics, Politics, and Practice, 18, 59–73. https://doi.org/10.15388/ stepp.2019.4 Rehm, J. (2014). Re-examining the theory about the collectivity of changes in alcohol consumption. Addiction, 109(9), 1397–1398. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.12644 Tabako gaminių ir alkoholio vartojimo prevencijos ir kontrolės priemonių efektyvumo ir požiūrio vertinimas (2020) Conducted by Spinter tyrimai. https://ntakd.lrv.lt/uploads/ntakd/documents/files/Ataskaita.pdf Thomas, M., & Buckmaster, L. (2010). Paternalism in social policy when is it justifiable? Research Paper no. 8 2010–11 (p. 1–23). Parliamnebt of Australia. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh. abstract2016 Toumbourou, J. W., Rowland, B., Ghayour-Minaie, M., Sherker, S., Patton, G. C., & Williams, J. W. (2018). Student survey trends in reported alcohol use and influencing factors in Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review, 37(S1), S58–S66. https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.12645