Health Promotion International, Vol. 17, No. 2, 171-177,
June 2002
© Oxford University Press 2002
Booze and beach bans: turning the tide through community action in New Zealand
Alcohol & Public Health Research Unit, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Address for correspondence: Kim Conway Alcohol & Public Health Research Unit University of Auckland PB 92019 Auckland New Zealand E-mail: k.conway{at}auckland.ac.uk
 |
SUMMARY |
|---|
 TOP SUMMARY INTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Many beach and holiday resorts experience major problems with alcohol-related public disorder. Following an escalation in alcohol-related incidents in the New Zealand beach community of Piha, a community-driven response to address issues of community well-being and safety was initiated by concerned residents. A case study evaluation reported on the development of a community coalition involving community and statutory stakeholders and the successful implementation of local community action strategies. These included a beach alcohol ban, extensive local publicity and a community policing presence over successive summers. An examination of the case study suggests that inter-sectoral collaboration, and multiple level strategies through policy, promotion and enforcement activities are key factors in enabling communities to successfully reduce alcohol-related harm.
Key words: alcohol management strategies; alcohol-related harm/incidents; community collaboration and action; policing public alcohol; public disorder
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Alcohol-related problems, such as public disorder or drink-driving, arising from consumption in public places have become a major issue for many New Zealand communities. Beach and holiday resorts with large influxes of visitors during peak summer periods are particularly adversely affected.
The literature suggests there are two distinctive patterns of problems occurring with alcohol-related public disorder in public places. Both involve mobile groups of unsupervised young people who drink heavily and are often not local residents of the neighbourhood where problems occur.
The first pattern is time- and occasion-specific and develops in discrete situations such as sports events, concerts or at specific holiday times such as New Year, when large crowds of young people congregate in public places to drink and ‘party’ (Hannah-Parr, 1995
; Homel et al., 1997; Smith and Rosenthal, 1997).
The second pattern is linked to casual gatherings of young people at and outside private parties or popular public places. Many are too young to legally drink on, or purchase alcohol from licensed premises but nevertheless appear to obtain alcohol fairly easily. Their excessive alcohol consumption frequently leads to violence, vandalism and street disorder (Tuck, 1989; Homel et al., 1995).
Community action
Repeated alcohol-related public disorder in communities typically evokes calls for some form of intervention to establish control over the situation (Homel et al., 1995). Coordinated community action has been demonstrated to be an effective approach in addressing a range of alcohol issues (Holder et al., 1997a; Holder et al., 1997b; Holmila, 1997; Casswell, 1999). It requires the active involvement of the community in identifying problems, solutions and strategies, building strategic partnerships for collaborative effort, and developing community ownership and self-management (Labonte, 1998; Casswell, 1999).
There are four dimensions to building the community's capacity for the above involvement: (i) development and maintenance of partnerships across a range of health development structures; (ii) continuous reciprocal transfer of knowledge about harm reduction between these structures; (iii) flexible and innovative problem solving; and (iv) investment of social, human and economic capital (Bush and Mutch, 1999).
Before 2000, New Zealand's Local Government Act (1974) stipulated that any alcohol ban must be related to a special event or public gathering and it could only cover a designated, non-consecutive 12 h period within any consecutive 24 h period. The Act, with its lack of discretionary powers for police and local councils, particularly hampered the efforts and resources required to both apply and enforce alcohol-free public spaces (Hannah-Parr, 1995; News and Views, 1996; Conway, 1998). Many local district councils ignored or liberally interpreted the current legislation and declared a blanket ban on alcohol in public places over extended holiday periods. Police credited the greatly reduced alcohol-related disorder and levels of violence to these actions. There followed calls to introduce more flexible legislation to allow councils the authority to determine local provisions governing liquor bans (SOLTalk, 1995a; SOLTalk, 1995b; SOLTalk, 1996).
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
In 1995 a local alcohol ban was introduced and implemented at Piha beach, a popular West Auckland beach-resort community in the North Island of New Zealand. This ban was the central plank of a community action initiative that is the focus of this case study. The aims of the study were to evaluate the impact of the ban and to document and analyse the community action process as a case study that would contribute to the monitoring of the current initiative and any future developments.
From the introduction of the bans in late 1995 until April 1997, data were collected by document analysis, key informant interviews, a small survey and participant observation. Archival and document sources of information included local authority reports, minutes, correspondence and media reports. Audiotaped interviews about the community initiative and impact of the beach alcohol ban were conducted through purposive sampling. These initially comprised 10 identified key informants: local Neighbourhood Watch coordinators, surf club members, First Aid coordinators, Campground staff, Waitakere City councillors and staff, Community Board members and police. A further 10 informants such as local shop keepers, a rubbish collector, a volunteer Fire service chief, park rangers and beach-front residents were recruited through the snowball technique. Six other key informants were later interviewed to ascertain possible impacts in other areas of West Auckland. A small-scale survey of 12 young beachgoers' attitudes to the bans was also carried out. Participant observation involved beach patrols and attendance at community meetings.
Data were analysed to develop a description of the process and impact of the community action in terms of community action and sustainability indicators, and outcome measures. Themes included community ownership of problems, solutions and strategies, flexible and innovative problem solving, development and management of collaborative partnerships, reciprocal exchange of harm reduction information, and investment of social and economic capital.
The Piha Community Action Initiative
Piha has a small mixed resident population of 
800; mainly families, alternative lifestylers and retired people. These numbers swell substantially at weekends and holiday times, with thousands flocking to the beach. Through the early 1990s, the Piha community experienced a spate of alcohol-related problems. Most involved anti-social public behaviour and vehicle incidents from groups of young people drinking in beachfront car parks and reserves. Piha's problems reflected the casual gathering pattern of alcohol-related public disorder that had occurred spasmodically at other Waitakere City beaches but were concentrated at Piha. The situation was compounded by proximity to the large Waitakere City youth population, the social calendars of two local surf clubs, a hazardous access road and lack of a local police presence.
From 1993 there was an escalation in serious alcohol-related incidents that included two deaths as well as a surge in injuries, violence and vandalism at Piha. As incidents increased and intensified, concerned local residents placed pressure on the police and the Waitakere City Council (WCC) to introduce alcohol and glass bans. These were rejected as unenforceable without a stronger police presence. Attempts by the council's local Waitakere Community Board (WCB) to resolve the problems through enhancing traffic safety and controls on community events held at Piha were initiated. These were ad hoc approaches, however, and did not always focus on addressing the alcohol-related issues nor involve all the stakeholder groups in a collaborative effort. There was little subsequent progress in reducing the disorder experienced. A 1995 Easter weekend ‘demolition party’ to mark the temporary closure of one of the surf clubs resulted in several hundred young people congregating to drink in a beachfront car park. This unruly gathering, dispersed by a major police call-out, provided the final impetus for concerted action.
The WCC delegated responsibility for resolving the Piha problems to the WCB. They facilitated a coalition of key stakeholders—the Piha Behaviour Working Party (PBWP)—which comprised community groups, council staff and police. A series of strategy meetings culminated in the implementation of a well publicized beach alcohol ban and a daily police presence at Piha for 5 weeks from Christmas 1995. The WCC enacted a 5pm–5am alcohol ban bylaw that covered six specific public holiday dates over the 1995–1996 summer period. Police also agreed to trial a community constable police presence if the community could provide justification and support. Support for police included provision of a base and amenities from the local camping ground, caravan accommodation supplied by the Auckland Regional Authority, and special frequency radio-telephones from the surf clubs. The Piha Neighbourhood Watch group, the local voluntary Fire Service and surf clubs all offered local back-up if required. Police conducted regular educational traffic checkpoints and beach patrols throughout the summer as well as a Compulsory Breath Testing operation outside the only licensed premises then operating in Piha.
Publicity was seen as crucial to compliance with the alcohol ban. Radio and local print media (Western Leader, 1995a) were used initially to raise public awareness of the bans. The publicity campaign included information, posters and letters targeting all secondary schools in West Auckland. ‘Beach Booze Ban’ posters and fliers were widely distributed to recreational, food and liquor outlets, and pasted up throughout Piha. Significantly, despite the specified ban dates, both the media and the fliers portrayed the ban as a blanket ban on alcohol at Piha.
Working Party members were also very aware of promotions of new beer products linked to Piha. The previous summer had seen major brewery sponsorship of a surf club beach carnival at Piha where free samples had been supplied. On the same day that the alcohol ban was announced, a new beer advertisement appeared in a local newspaper. It featured a beer can superimposed over a picture of Piha beach. This marketing strategy, which was viewed by the PHWP as undermining the beach ban, sparked an immediate denouncement and media response from their chairperson. The advertisement subsequently disappeared very quickly. This was an immediate effect, showing the strength of a united front that provided added credibility.
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
If this project is successful it should reduce the incidence of trouble and provide information to answer the two key questions. Is there a visible difference? Is the community happy? (Chair, WCC Safer Communities Project and PBWP member).
From the key informant interviews and from community group and police data it is clear that both the frequency and severity of incidents of alcohol-related problems and other antisocial behaviour significantly decreased while the police-supported alcohol ban was in place that first summer. There were no major incidents from October 1995 to April 1996.
Neighbourhood Watch experienced a sharp fall in crime. There were only 20 incidents reported and attended from December 1995 to April 1996 in contrast to 46 incidents over the same period of the previous summer.
Compared with the previous summer period, the Piha First Response Team (a voluntary First Aid group) recorded a large decline in call-outs to known alcohol-related incidents, as well as motor vehicle crashes (which were unconfirmed but often suspected to be alcohol related). Of 21 call-outs from October 1995 to early February 1996, none were directly alcohol related. The same period in 1994–1995 had 20 call-outs, five of which were alcohol related. Ambulance facilities use was reduced from 14 occasions in 1994–1995 to seven in 1995–1996, with only one motor vehicle crash being reported in the study period. The First Aid team coordinator commented:
We used to dread this time of year and this year it's been a breeze. You’re out here for the lifestyle and you accept that Piha will be a big draw-card for the crowds and you learn to live with that, but you don’t expect all that drinking and you certainly don’t want all that riotous kind of behaviour that goes with alcohol consumption.
The Piha Volunteer Fire Brigade attributed a very quiet summer to the alcohol ban, with no call-outs to motor vehicle incidents. The Piha Campground manager, who had been on the verge of leaving the previous summer because of the problems experienced, reported a complete contrast in behaviour.
The whole scene has changed from the moment the press releases started coming out and then a pretty constant police presence (the police had set up base in the campground). Between Christmas and last night (2 January 1996) I’ve gone to bed between 11 [pm] and midnight. Last year it was three and four in the morning.
A small survey of four groups comprising a total of 12 young people showed many were aware of the ban but didn’t think it would dissuade their friends from coming to Piha or stop them drinking. Those who brought alcohol commented that they would be more careful about drinking in public because of the police presence. A few noted how much quieter it was now while the new Piha Surf Club was under construction. It appeared that the surf club social calendar had been a major source of the reputation of Piha as a desirable party venue.
There was only one actionable breach of the ban reported by the police. There were three other alcohol-related incidents where people were charged with dangerous driving, disorderly assembly and assault.
The police were also concerned that they were seen to be fair to all groups. There was a widely held perception from many sectors of the Piha community that it was outsiders, particularly the young people, who created all the problems. The police checkpoint outside the Returned Services Association (RSA) club signalled to the community that they too had to demonstrate responsible alcohol-related behaviour. The police did not have the resources for a full Compulsory Breath Testing operation so it was conducted largely as an educational exercise. When the first driver stopped tested positive, officers gave a warning, took his car keys, told him to walk back to the RSA to arrange a ride home and pass on the message that the next driver to return a positive breath test would be processed and charged. There was then a flurry of activity at the RSA with cars arriving to ferry people home and non-drinking drivers providing transport for others. None of the further 37 cars stopped had a driver who tested positive. The RSA manager fully approved and felt it supported her role in trying to maintain a responsible premise.
The closure of the largest and most socially active surf club for rebuilding over the 1995–1996 summer did mean that one identified ‘hotspot’ for young people was initially removed. Areas immediately outside licensed premises are critical settings for public disorder and violence (Tuck, 1989; Homel et al., 1995). The effective loss of this attraction made the timing of the first ban fortuitous, allowing its introduction with the least possible pressure and confrontation. This also gave the surf club the opportunity to improve its image and implement responsible practices such as host responsibility staff training to avert future trouble.
The surf club's new club-house received favourable comment from local residents, community groups and surf club members on its upmarket image, tighter management practices, fewer party-style social functions, an emphasis on meals, and better links to the community. Local residents and police expressed pleasure that it was not the ‘hotspot’ of previous years. The toned-down calendar of social events initially raised some concern from surf club members that the club might experience difficulty attracting and retaining younger members. A drop-off in younger members did not occur. Instead, the junior and family membership increased substantially.
Overall, residents reported that the tide had turned with a marked change evident in the Piha environment. Crowds still flocked to Piha and young people continued to frequent the beach, but the alcohol-related disorder and unruly behaviour had virtually disappeared. Displacement of similar problems to other beaches in West Auckland was not apparent.
The alcohol bans and community policing trial were regarded as so successful that they were continued over subsequent summers.
Apart from occasional minor incidents, annual follow-ups since 1995 with police, community groups and residents have indicated that the improvement in alcohol-related problems has largely been maintained.
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Community action
Initial attempts to deal with the problems of disorder at Piha were weakened by piecemeal efforts that failed to focus on the alcohol-related issues and build a platform and constituency for community action. The advent of the Piha Behaviour Working Party enabled the emergence of a collaborative, intersectoral initiative with strong community ownership, stakeholder partnership and common vision. Consideration of the main elements of this case study show a strong match between theoretical expectations as to what constitutes effective community action and what happened at Piha (Labonte, 1998
; Bush and Mutch, 1999; Casswell, 1999).
Community capacity building was evident in the process of the PBWP. Most of the elements described by Bush and Mutch were clearly demonstrated (Bush and Mutch, 1999). Key partnerships with stakeholder groups emerged and remained over the time that the PBWP continued in operation. The Working Party felt a strong sense of achievement in what it had accomplished with longstanding problems resolved, relationships forged and networking links established or reinforced.
Throughout this initiative, exchange of knowledge on harm reduction strategies was ongoing. There was considerable interaction between different groups and agencies relating to other issues in addition to alcohol. At meetings, different sectors such as the local council, police and community groups shared information on traffic and water safety, liquor licensing, media advocacy, resource production and distribution, as well as learning more about the local community context. This became beneficial for broader community issues as well. It assisted local people with tools and contacts to continue a focused community watchdog role. Council networks and processes were built on to advance other intersectoral initiatives such as a public reserve development project and a coastal management plan.
Central to the initiative was a flexible and innovative approach to problem solving. The promulgation of the impression of a blanket ban on alcohol to circumvent the restrictive specifications of the existing legislation achieved goals that time-limited bans could never have delivered. The proactive community policing role was adopted because limited police resources meant they could not afford to tie themselves up with offence processing procedures. Strategic use by the police of predominantly educational traffic checkpoints initially educated people about the ban and later, as at the RSA, gave potential drink drivers the chance to organize alternative transport, reinforcing the desired behaviour without evoking the full force of the law.
The Piha community action initiative cost little in direct economic resources. The police presence was the largest expense but compared favourably to the cost of full team-policing operation call-outs. Previous findings regarding the value of community policing in predicting trouble and early intervention to prevent alcohol-related problems (Tuck, 1989; Stewart, 1993) were reiterated by the Piha experience. Proactive police involvement and adequate resourcing of police are critical components in a partnership approach to promote compliance with and to enforce any legislation at a local or national level aiming to reduce alcohol-related harm. The investment of social and economic capital by all stakeholders made clear the commitment from each to support the community action initiative. All benefited from the council facilitation, financial and promotional support, police presence, and the community resources in measurable terms of harm reduction and restoring community well-being. Moreover, this initiative was also regarded as very productive in both building local community capacity and as a public relations exercise for the Police and Council.
The issue of sustainable change is noted in the literature as a benchmark of effective community action. Ongoing monitoring of the situation by the author has shown sustainability to be a strong feature of the Piha experience with a collaborative commitment to a policy and enforcement strategy. However, maintaining momentum in the face of a low level of problems and creeping complacency remains a constant challenge for any community.
Alcohol bans
The beach alcohol bans were regarded by the PHWB as the pivot around which all the other strategies revolved. They were a symbol of community control; a statement about community norms and expectations.
‘Booze Ban at Piha’ became both a catch-phrase and a consistent message as the communication theme for the media coverage, promotional material and the police's educational role in checkpoints in West Auckland over the summer of 1995–1996.
Despite the fact it was only a 12 h ban on specific dates, spokespeople and the media continually and deliberately gave the impression of a blanket alcohol ban (Western Leader, 1995b). Media advocacy as a strategy for promoting social or public policy initiatives has become a well utilized health promotion tool (Wallack et al., 1993; Casswell, 1995; Holder and Treno, 1997). Two local newspapers in Waitakere City actively picked up on initial controversial elements and took the position of supporting the local community as underdog throughout the long-running coverage.
It was obvious at the onset of this case study that current legislation in New Zealand did not meet the requirements of many communities and local district councils who were increasingly using alcohol bans to try to control drinking in public places (Conway, 1998). Although the government of the time favoured a hands-off approach, political support for legislative change gathered momentum from the late 1990s. This was exemplified by a private members bill proposing more flexible use of alcohol bans (Simcock, 1997) and the Attorney General indicating the need for a change in the law (New Zealand Herald, 28 June 1997). With Millennium celebrations looming, and a significant policy change in the lowering of the drinking age from 20 to 18 years in December 1999 (New Zealand Parliament, 1999) and the prospect of major disruption to beach resorts, renewed priority was given to introducing amendments to the existing law.
In September 1999, legislation was enacted to allow local councils to invoke 24-h alcohol bans (Local Government Law Reform Bill No. 3). However, these were still restricted to events or specified public holiday occasions, despite numerous submissions from district councils including the WCC arguing for greater autonomy in setting their own hours to meet local community needs.
Many councils simply continued their practice of declaring blanket bans. A challenge to the legality of one such council bylaw was upheld in a Gore District Court decision in December 2000 (New Zealand Weekend Herald, 2001), effectively making all similar bylaws by councils invalid. This decision coupled with considerable anecdotal reporting of increased public disorder amongst minors drinking in public places and collective concern expressed by many city councils at their lack of regulatory muscle has spurred impetus for further proposed changes to the legislation (Southland Times, 2001). A prominent Member of Parliament in one area that had enacted a blanket ban tabled his intention to push for a law change calling the current law ‘a recipe for drunken riots’ and stated:
We just think the law is wrong. We think the right of people to live in a civilised town is more important than the right to drink in a public place (Nelson Mail, 2001
|
CONCLUSION |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
This case study demonstrates the value of intersectoral initiatives and key role of local authorities in the arena of reducing alcohol-related harm through supporting local community action efforts (Homel et al., 1995
; Carvolth, 1998; McAllister et al., 1999). National and local collaborative approaches to implement comprehensive local body policies on alcohol are an important area for future development (Gliksman et al., 1995; McAllister et al., 1999). Local government legislation, policies and processes that are flexible and responsive to community concern are essential for health promotion initiatives. Responsibilities for liquor licensing and involvement with community partnerships and coalitions such as Safer Communities and Healthy Cities place local authorities in a strategic position to facilitate health promotion initiatives. There are a raft of additional, complementary local body policies and measures that could be adopted to reduce alcohol-related harm, including liquor licensing requirements and public event management measures. The role of local councils as a hub for localized participatory democracy equips them well to coordinate relevant stakeholders to address community alcohol and other public health issues. |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
The background research to this paper was conducted with the assistance of research grant aid from the Alcohol Advisory Council, and as part of a Health Research Council training fellowship.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Bush, R. and Mutch, A. (1999) Capacity building for harm reduction at the district level: conceptual development and the dimensions of practice. In Casswell, S., Holder, H., Holmila, M., Larsson, S., Midford, R., Moewaka Barnes, H., Nygaard, P. and Stewart, L. (eds) Kettil Bruun Society Thematic Meeting: Fourth Symposium on Community Action Research and the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems. Alcohol & Public Health Research Unit, Auckland.
Carvolth, R. (1998) Partnerships to Reduce Intoxication, Violence and Injury in the Licensed Environment: Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug Services. Queensland Health, Queensland.
Casswell, S. (1995) Public discourse on alcohol: implications for public policy. In Holder, H. and Edwards, G. (eds) Alcohol and Public Policy: Evidence and Issues. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Casswell, S. (1999) A decade of community action research. In Casswell, S., Holder, H., Holmila, M., Larsson, S., Midford, R., Moewaka Barnes, H., Nygaard, P. and Stewart, L. (eds) Kettil Bruun Society Thematic Meeting: Fourth Symposium on Community Action Research and the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems. Alcohol & Public Health Research Unit, Auckland.
Conway, K. (1998) The Piha Beach Alcohol Ban: Community Action on Alcohol Issues. Thesis submitted for Masters of Philosophy (Social Policy), Massey University, Albany.
Gliksman, L., Douglas, R., Rylett, M. and Narbonne-Fortin, C. (1995) Reducing problems through municipal alcohol policies: the Canadian experiment in Ontario. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 2, 105–118.
Hannah-Parr, R. (1995) Alcohol and Violence, Situational; Violence—Management of Public Events. Alcoholic Liquor Advisory Council of New Zealand, Wellington.
Holder, H. and Treno, A. (1997) Media advocacy in community prevention: news as a means to advance policy change. Addiction, 92 (Suppl. 2), S189–S199.
Holder, H., Saltz, R., Grube, J., Voas, R., Gruenewald, P. and Treno, A. (1997a) A community prevention trial to reduce alcohol-involved accidental injury and death: overview. Addiction, 92 (Suppl. 2), S155–S173.
Holder, H., Saltz, R., Grube, J., Voas, R., Gruenewald, P. and Treno, A. (1997b) Summing up: lessons from a comprehensive community prevention trial. Addiction, 92 (Suppl. 2), S293–S303.
Holmila, M. (ed.) (1997) Community Prevention of Alcohol Problems. MacMillan Press, London.
Homel, R., Hauritz, M., Wortley, R., McIlwain, G., Carvolth, R. and Clark, J. (1995) The impact of the Surfers Paradise Safety Action Project on local government and communities. Dealing with Drugs: Ethics, Economics and Efficiency: the Second Window of Opportunity National Congress.
Homel, R., Hauritz, M., Wortley, R., McIlwain, G. and Carvolth, R. (1997) Preventing alcohol-related crime through community action: the Surfers Paradise Safety Action Project. Crime Prevention Studies, 7, 35–90.
Labonte, R. (1998) A Community Development Approach to Health Promotion. Health Education Board of Scotland/Research Unit in Health and Behaviour Change, Edinburgh.
McAllister, J., Giesbrecht, N., Rankin, J., Langdon, N. and Kobus-Matthews, M. (1999) Community Alcohol Policy Solutions Project. In Casswell, S., Holder, H., Holmila, M., Larsson, S., Midford, R., Moewaka Barnes, H., Nygaard, P. and Stewart, L. (eds) Kettil Bruun Society Thematic Meeting: Fourth Symposium on Community Action Research and the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems. Alcohol & Public Health Research Unit, Auckland.
Nelson Mail (2001) Court Rules Council's Alcohol Bylaw Invalid, 10 January.
New Zealand Herald (1997) Liquor Ban Law Tipped, 28 June, p. 3.
New Zealand Parliament (1999) Sale of Liquor Amendment Act.
New Zealand Weekend Herald (2001) Local Bodies Seek Clout to Ban Liquor, 13–14 January.
News & Views (1996) At the Beach, March, p. 12.
Simcock, B. (1997) Local Government (Liquor Bans in Public Places) Amendment Bills.
Smith, A. M. and Rosenthal, D. A. (1997) Sex, alcohol and drugs? Young people's experience of Schoolies Week. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 21, 175–180.[Medline]
SOLTalk (1995a) Happier New Year, March.
SOLTalk (1995b) Complex Interactions: Reducing Alcohol-Fuelled Crowd Violence, July, p. 8.
SOLTalk (1996) Cups of Kindness, March.
Southland Times (2001) Bill Could Lead to Street Booze Ban, 30 March, p. 2.
Stewart, L. (1993) Police Enforcement of Liquor Licensing Laws: The U.K. Experience. Alcohol & Public Health Research Unit, Auckland.
Tuck, M. (1989) Drinking and Disorder: A Study of Non-Metropolitan Violence. Home Office Research Study 108. HMSO, London.
Wallack, L., Dorfman, L., Jernigan, D. and Themba, M. (1993) Media Advocacy and Public Health: Power for Prevention. Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Western Leader (1995a) Summer Patrols at Piha, 12 December.
Western Leader (1995b) Piha Yobs Facing a Booze Ban, 18 August.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||