• Energy Research

Many governments are failing to systematically introduce evidence-based alcohol control policies, and debate continues around issues of market freedom and personal responsibility. The aim of this international study was to assess the extent to which the public considers a range of alcohol control policies to be the responsibility of three different categories of actors: government, the private sector, and individuals. Around 1000 respondents from seven countries (Australia, Canada, China, India, New Zealand, the UK, and the US; n = 7559) completed an online survey assessing demographic characteristics, alcohol consumption status, and perceived responsibility for four alcohol harm-reduction actions relating to alcohol availability, advertising, and public education campaigns. Across the total sample and all assessed actions, governments were selected as an appropriate actor in 66 % of instances, the private sector in 39 %, and individuals in 28 %. Respondents from New Zealand were most likely to consider the actions to be government responsibility and respondents from the US the least. In relatively few instances (8 %), respondents considered the actions unworthy of attention by any actor. Across all seven countries, governments were considered to be the most appropriate actors to undertake actions relating to restricting alcohol availability, regulating alcohol advertising, and disseminating campaigns to educate the public about alcohol-related harm. The results indicate that the public may be receptive to greater intervention in these areas.

(1) Background: The automation of transport systems is well underway; however, it is unclear how this will affect people’s mobility choices. Changes in these choices have implications for health and the sustainability and efficiency of transport systems, making it important to understand how the advent of autonomous vehicles might affect people’s transport behaviors. The aim of the present study was to address this knowledge gap in the Australian context. (2) Methods: Respondents reported their demographic information, current transport behaviors, the perceived importance of transport-related factors, and attitudes toward autonomous vehicles. They then read a vignette describing a future scenario involving autonomous vehicles that was informed by expert stakeholders. After reading the vignette, the respondents selected those transport options that they would anticipate using in the depicted scenario. Descriptive analyses were conducted to examine changes in transport choices, while regression models were employed to identify the predictors of choices in the future scenario. (3) Results: Most respondents envisaged making greater use of active, shared, and public transport options in an autonomous future, compared to their current use of these options. The intended use of private transport options halved. The most consistent predictor for selecting a certain mode of transport was the current use of that option or its non-autonomous equivalent. (4) Conclusion: Overall, favorable changes in the envisaged use of transport were observed for the hypothetical scenario, which was characterized by improved public transport, a practical active transport infrastructure, and relatively cheap shared autonomous vehicles. If policymakers can act to realize these outcomes, the autonomation of transport is likely to lead to positive societal change.

There is growing evidence of the increased cancer risk associated with alcohol consumption, but this is not well understood by the general public. This study investigated the acceptability among drinkers of cancer warning statements for alcoholic beverages.Six focus groups were conducted with Australian drinkers to develop a series of cancer-related warning statements for alcohol products. Eleven cancer warning statements and one general health warning statement were subsequently tested on 2,168 drinkers via an online survey. The statements varied by message frame (positive vs negative), cancer reference (general vs specific), and the way causality was communicated ('increases risk of cancer' vs 'can cause cancer').Overall, responses to the cancer statements were neutral to favorable, indicating that they are unlikely to encounter high levels of negative reaction from the community if introduced on alcoholic beverages. Females, younger respondents, and those with higher levels of education generally found the statements to be more believable, convincing, and personally relevant. Positively framed messages, those referring to specific forms of cancer, and those using 'increases risk of cancer' performed better than negatively framed messages, those referring to cancer in general, and those using the term 'can cause cancer'.Cancer warning statements on alcoholic beverages constitute a potential means of increasing awareness about the relationship between alcohol consumption and cancer risk.