1 / 70

Balance Benchmarking 2011 24 th November 2011

Balance Benchmarking 2011 24 th November 2011. Introduction. Introduction. In 2010, Bluegrass Research undertook a piece of work, on behalf of Balance, which benchmarked alcohol-related perceptions and levels of alcohol consumption amongst the North East population

kaemon
Télécharger la présentation

Balance Benchmarking 2011 24 th November 2011

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Balance Benchmarking 2011 24thNovember 2011

  2. Introduction

  3. Introduction • In 2010, Bluegrass Research undertook a piece of work, on behalf of Balance, which benchmarked alcohol-related perceptions and levels of alcohol consumption amongst the North East population • The purpose of this work was to establish a method of tracking Balance’s performance in relation to its key targets of changing the region’s attitudes to alcohol and alcohol abuse, and reducing the amount of alcohol consumed • In 2011, a second wave of research was undertaken to measure progress against key performance indicators • This presentation outlines the findings from the 2011 Balance Benchmarking project, comparing them to the 2010 benchmark

  4. Methodology • Methodology used same as 2010: • Face to face interviewing • Interviews conducted across North East England • 91% of interviews conducted on-street; 9% door-to-door • Data weighted to socio-demographic profile of North East population • A total of 2,388 interviews were undertaken

  5. Alcohol Consumption

  6. Regional Profile of Drinkers 2011 No significant year on year change Low risk drinkers Increasing / higher risk drinkers Non drinkers 23% 38% 39% 11% of non drinkers have stopped drinking in the past 12 months

  7. Key consumption measures Frequency of consumption Number of standard drinks Incidence of binging No significant year on year changes • Patterns similar to 2010: • Younger people and men drink in greater quantities in a day and binge more often

  8. Regional Profile of Drinkers 2011 * * * * * * * * *

  9. Drinking Behaviour

  10. Drinking too much alcohol All drinkers 40% 60% 8% 66% 92% 34% % perceive drinking too much regularly / occasionally % perceive drinking too much rarely / never No Significant Change? No No Significant Change? No No No Low risk Increasing / higher risk Also higher than average amongst: Men 18-34 years Gateshead Women 55+

  11. Concern about amount of alcohol consumed All drinkers % fairly / very concerned % not very / not at all concerned 14% 86% 92% 2% 8% 98% Significant Change? No -2% No +2% No No Significant Change? Low risk Increasing / higher risk Also higher than average amongst: Women 65+ SEG C2 Men 25-34 years SEG E Gateshead

  12. Thinking about reducing amount of alcohol consumed In the past 12 months, have you ever thought about reducing the amount of alcohol that you drink 18% -8% % yes 2011 Significant Change? Thinking about reducing HIGHER than average amongst: Men Gateshead Increasing / higher risk drinkers Those very or fairly concerned about their drinking Those who regularly or occasionally drink too much Thinking about reducing LOWER than average amongst: Women 65+ SEG D Stockton-on-Tees, South Tyneside Low risk drinkers Those not very or not at all concerned about their drinking Those who rarely or never drink too much

  13. Thinking about reducing amount of alcohol consumed In the past 12 months, have you ever thought about reducing the amount of alcohol that you drink 18% -8% % yes 2011 Significant Change? 25-54, 65+ Men & women SEG: AB, C1, D Tyne & Wear, Tees Valley Drinkers (low & increasing / higher risk) Decrease driven by shifts amongst:

  14. Amount of alcohol consumed compared to 12 months ago All drinkers % consuming less % consuming more 26% 12% 8% 23% 25% 4% Significant Change? -6% -9% No No No No Significant Change? Low risk Increasing / higher risk 18-24 years Gateshead Increasing / higher risk drinkers 18-34 years 65+ Darlington North Tyneside Also higher than average amongst:

  15. Amount of alcohol consumed compared to 12 months ago All drinkers % consuming less % consuming more 26% 12% 8% 23% 25% 4% Significant Change? -6% -9% No No No No Significant Change? Low risk Increasing / higher risk 18-24 years Gateshead Increasing / higher risk drinkers In both categories, those who: Regularly / occasionally drink too much Are very/fairly concerned about their alcohol consumption Have thought about reducing 65+ Darlington North Tyneside Also higher than average amongst:

  16. Pre-loading How often, if at all, do you drink alcohol at home / at a friend's house, before going out to a bar or a club 42% +6% % yes 2011 Significant Change? Incidence of pre-loading HIGHER amongst 18-34 Middlesbrough, Newcastle South Tyneside Increasing / higher risk drinkers Incidence of pre-loading LOWER amongst 45+ SEG E Darlington, North Tyneside Low risk drinkers

  17. Pre-loading How often, if at all, do you drink alcohol at home / at a friend's house, before going out to a bar or a club 42% +6% % yes 2011 Significant Change? 18-24, 55-64 Men SEG: C1, C2 Tyne & Wear Increasing / higher risk drinkers Increase driven by shifts amongst:

  18. The Influence of Health Professionals Non Drinkers who have given up in past 12 months All Drinkers % had a conversation with a health professional 34% 6% Did advice influence thinking about / reducing? Influenced.... Strongly: [13] To some extent: [3] A little: [0] Not at all: [4] Influenced.... Strongly: 25% To some extent: 24% A little: 25% Not at all: 27% % whose drinking has reduced because of advice from health professionals 27% 3% Base: Non drinkers who have given up in past 12 months (60) and have had a conversation (20) Caution, small base Base: All Drinkers (842) who have thought about reducing or who drink less and have had a conversation (81)

  19. Profiling the NE Drinker Segment

  20. Profiling the NE Drinker Segment 2011Perception of personal behaviour x concern Don't drink too much / are concerned Don't drink too much / not concerned Drink too much / are concerned Drink too much / not concerned 7% 27% 1% 65% Significant year-on-year changes: -1% +3%

  21. Profiling the NE Drinker Segment 2011Perception of personal behaviour x thought of reducing Don't drink too much / have not thought about reducing Don't drink too much / have thought about reducing Drink too much / have thought about reducing Drink too much / have not thought about reducing 13% 21% 61% 5% +10% Significant year-on-year changes: -7%

  22. Profiling the NE Drinker Segment 2011Perception of personal behaviour x change in past 12 months Don't drink too much / drink more Don't drink too much / drink the same Don't drink too much / drink less Drink too much / drink more Drink too much / drink less Drink too much / drink the same 48% 3% 15% 5% 19% 10% Y-O-Y -5% Y-O-Y +7%

  23. Profiling the NE Drinker Segment 2011Perception of personal behaviour x thought of reducing Not concerned / have thought of reducing Not concerned / have not thought about reducing Concerned / have NOT thought of reducing Concerned / have thought of reducing 7% 80% 1% 12% +9% Significant year-on-year changes: -8%

  24. Profiling the NE Drinker SegmentConcern x change in past 12 months Not concerned / drink more Not concerned / drink the same Not concerned / drink less Concerned / drink more Concerned / drink less Concerned / drink the same 65% 6% 21% 2% 3% 3% Y-O-Y -6% Y-O-Y +5%

  25. Profiling the NE Drinker SegmentIntention x change in past 12 months Have NOT thought about reducing / drink more Have NOT thought about reducing / drink the same Have NOT thought about reducing / drink less Have thought about reducing / drink more Have thought about reducing / drink less Have thought about reducing / drink the same Y-O-Y -7% 3% 7% 9% 61% 5% 16% Y-O-Y +7%

  26. Understanding Units & Limits

  27. Awareness of alcohol units Aware of measuring alcohol in units % yes 2011 91% Significant Change? No Awareness HIGHER than average amongst: SEG: AB, C1 Hartlepool Drinkers (increasing / higher risk) Awareness LOWER than average amongst: 65+ SEG E Newcastle South Tyneside Non-drinkers All NE Respondents

  28. Keeping a check of units Do you keep a check of how many units of alcohol you drink? % yes 2011 15% Significant Change? -9% Monitoring units HIGHER than average amongst: Women SEG AB Darlington North Tyneside Low risk drinkers Monitoring units LOWER than average amongst: Men 18-24 SEG D Middlesbrough Gateshead Increasing / higher risk drinkers All NE Drinkers

  29. Keeping a check of units Do you keep a check of how many units of alcohol you drink? % yes 2011 15% Significant Change? -9% 55+ Men & women SEG: C1, C2, D, E Tyne & Wear; Tees Valley Drinkers: low & increasing / higher risk Decrease driven by shifts amongst: All NE Drinkers

  30. Awareness of recommended maximum number of units Aware that there is a recommended maximum number of units % aware 2011 76% Significant Change? -7% Awareness HIGHER than average amongst: 35-44 SEG: AB, C1 Hartlepool Northumberland Drinkers (increasing / higher risk) Awareness LOWER than average amongst: 65+ SEG: D, E Redcar & Cleveland Newcastle Non-drinkers All NE Respondents

  31. Awareness that there is a recommended maximum number of units Aware that there is a recommended maximum number of units % aware 2011 76% Significant Change? -7% 18-24, 55+ Men & women SEG: C2, D, E Tyne & Wear Drinkers (low risk) Non drinkers Decrease driven by shifts amongst: All NE Respondents

  32. Understanding of recommended maximum number of units OVERALL POPULATION Proportion of MEN who understand recommended daily limits % understand 2011 42% 43% 46% 39% -7% Significant Change? No -6% No Proportion of WOMEN who understand recommended daily limits DRINKERS Proportion of MEN DRINKERS who understand recommended daily limits Proportion of WOMEN DRINKERS who understand recommended daily limits

  33. Minimum Pricing

  34. Attitudes to current prices for alcohol No significant year on year changes 18-24 year olds SEG: E Drink 4+ days a week S Tyneside Northumberland 65+ years SEG: AB Non-drinkers Base: All respondents (2,388)

  35. Awareness of minimum pricing Aware of Minimum Pricing % aware 2011 45% Significant Change? No Awareness HIGHER than average amongst: Men 35 – 54 SEG: AB, C1 Darlington Northumberland Drinkers Awareness LOWER than average amongst: Women 18 – 34 SEG: D, E Newcastle South Tyneside Non-drinkers All NE Respondents

  36. Support for minimum pricing Support Minimum Pricing % 2011 56% 28% Significant Change? +7% No Against Minimum Pricing Support HIGHER than average amongst : Women SEG: AB South Tyneside Sunderland Northumberland Non-drinkers & low risk drinkers Objection HIGHER than average amongst : 18-24 years SEG: C2s Stockton on Tees Gateshead Drinkers (increasing & higher risk) All NE Respondents

  37. Support for minimum pricing Support Minimum Pricing % 2011 56% 28% Significant Change? +7% No Against Minimum Pricing 25-44 Women SEG: E Northumberland Tyne & Wear Drinkers Increase in support driven by shifts amongst: All NE Respondents

  38. Minimum Pricing Prepared to pay more for positive societal benefits % 2011 53% 29% Significant Change? +6% +4% NOT prepared to pay more for positive societal benefits Preparedness to pay more HIGHER than average amongst : Women 55 – 64 SEG: AB South Tyneside , Sunderland, Northumberland Low risk drinkers Supporters of minimum pricing Not prepared to pay more HIGHER than average amongst : Men 18-24 SEG E Stockton on Tees, Darlington Increasing & higher risk drinkers Objectors to minimum pricing All NE Respondents

  39. Minimum Pricing Prepared to pay more for positive societal benefits % 2011 53% 29% Significant Change? +6% +4% NOT prepared to pay more for positive societal benefits Women SEG: C2,E Tyne & Wear Drinkers Increase in support driven by shifts amongst: Men SEG: A,B County Durham Tees Valley Increase in objection driven by shifts amongst: All NE Respondents

  40. Effects of minimum pricing: impact on support Reduce alcohol related crime and violence % 2011 84% 78% 83% 69% 80% +4% +6% +7% +6% +7% Significant Change? Reduce drunk / rowdy behaviour Reduce amount under 18s drink Reduce cost of alcohol related burden to NHS Only penalised heavy drinkers who bought cheap alcohol All NE Respondents

  41. Effects of minimum pricing Effects have greater influence amongst: Women Non drinkers Low risk drinkers Middlesbrough Redcar & Cleveland Supporters of minimum pricing Effects have lower influence amongst Men Stockton on Tees North Tyneside Drinkers (increasing / higher risk) Those neutral and objectors to minimum pricing Increases typically driven by: Younger age groups (18-34) Women C2DEs (most notably C2 & E) Drinkers Non-drinkers

  42. Effects of minimum pricing on behaviour If minimum pricing was introduced, do you think that you would drink more, less or the same as you drink now? 86% would drink the same 14% would drink less 18-24 year olds Es Increasing/higher risk drinkers Darlington ; Hartlepool Gateshead; Newcastle All NE Respondents

  43. Children & Alcohol

  44. Alcohol Advertising & Children Alcohol advertising currently targets the under 18s % agree 2011 55% +10% Significant Change? HIGHER than average agreement amongst: Older age groups – 55+ Women Non drinkers South Tyneside LOWER than average agreement amongst: Younger age groups (18-34) Men SEG: C1 Increasing / higher risk drinkers Darlington; N Tyneside All NE Respondents

  45. Alcohol Advertising & Children Alcohol advertising currently targets the under 18s % agree 2011 55% +10% Significant Change? 25-44, 55-64 Men & women SEG groups (except C1s) Tees Valley Low risk drinkers & non-drinkers Positive shifts in opinion evident amongst... All NE Respondents

  46. Alcohol Advertising & Children There should be a ban on alcohol advertising before 9pm % agree 2011 68% +3% Significant Change? HIGHER than average agreement amongst: Women Older age groups (55+) SEG: E County Durham Non-drinkers LOWER than average agreement amongst: Men Younger age groups (18-34) Hartlepool Stockton-on-Tees North Tyneside Drinkers (Increasing / higher risk) All NE Respondents

  47. Alcohol Advertising & Children There should be a ban on alcohol advertising before 9pm % agree 2011 68% +3% Significant Change? Age groups: 18-34; 55-64 Women SEG: C2, E Northumberland Tees Valley Non-drinkers Positive shifts in opinion evident amongst... All NE Respondents

  48. Giving alcohol to children Proportion stating that children aged 13-15 should NEVER drink alcohol % 2011 72% -5% Significant Change? More likely to agree: 65+ SEG: E Darlington; Hartlepool; Gateshead; South Tyneside Non-drinkers Lower risk drinkers Less likely to agree: 18-24 SEG: AB,C1 County Durham; Stockton Increasing / higher risk drinkers All NE Respondents

  49. Giving alcohol to children Proportion stating that children aged 13-15 should NEVER drink alcohol % 2011 72% -5% Significant Change? 18-24; 35-44 Men & women SEG: C1, D Tyne & Wear; Tees Valley Increasing / higher risk drinkers Negative shifts in opinion evident amongst... All NE Respondents

  50. Giving alcohol to children Proportion stating that children aged 16-17 should NEVER drink alcohol % 2011 34% -7% Significant Change? More likely to agree: Women 65+ SEG: E Darlington; South Tyneside Non-drinkers Less likely to agree: Men 18-24; 35-44 SEG: C1 Stockton Increasing / higher risk drinkers All NE Respondents

More Related