Skip to main content
. 2018 Mar 30;42:e6. doi: 10.26633/RPSP.2018.6

TABLE 2. Policy domains in developing the International Alcohol Policy Injury Index (IAPII).

Domain/Policy topic Effectiveness ratinga Level of stringencyb Level of enforcementc
Physical availability
Legal minimum alcohol purchase age 3 (high) 16
17
18
19
≥ 20
Low, low middle, upper middle, high
Government monopoly of retail sales of beer, wine, and spirits 2 (moderate) 0 to 3 beverage types Low, low middle, upper middle, high
Restrictions on density of outlets 2 (moderate) None
Beer, wine, spirits
Low, low middle, upper middle, high
Restrictions on hours and days of sale for beer, wine, and spirits 2 (moderate) None
Hours or days
Hours and days
Low, low middle, upper middle, high
Drinking context
Government support for community action programs (earmarked, technical tools, training, and targeted at-risk groups) 3 (high)d 0 to 4 types Low, low middle, upper middle, high
Mandatory server training of bar staff and management to better manage aggression 3 (high)d No Low, low middle, upper middle, high
Yes
Alcohol advertising/promotion
Restrictions imposed on the majority of advertising media 3 (high)d None
Voluntary self-regulation Partial statutory Ban
Low, low middle, upper middle, high
Vehicular
Random breath testing conducted 3 (high) No Low, low middle, upper middle, high
Legal blood alcohol concentration limit in drivers 3 (high) Yes
≥ .08
.03-.07
0-.02
Low, low middle, upper middle, high
Number of mandatory penalties for exceeding legal maximum blood alcohol concentration, incl. fine, penalty points, disqualification/license suspension, incarceration for repeat offenders, other 2 (moderate) 0 to 5 penalties Low, low middle, upper middle, high

Source: The authors derived the data in this table from the WHO's Global Information System on Alcohol and Health (GISAH) (accessed on 31 May 2016 and archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6HKT0zJGQ).

a

Policies that were considered to be effective in reducing injury were given a 1 (limited), 2 (moderate), or 3 (high) rating, based on guidelines from prior international alcohol control policy studies and our own empirical results.

b

Level of stringency was coded following API and/or TEASE-16 conventions.

c

Four levels of enforcement were considered, based on the gross national income (GNI) in U.S. dollars: low = less than or equal to US$ 1 025; lower middle = US$ 1 026 to 4 035; upper middle = US$ 4 036 to 12 475, and high = greater than or equal to US$ 12 476.

d

The pricing domain was dropped as a policy domain for the IAPII because it did not correlate with injury death.