Rusmidler i Norge. Statistikk 06. Alcohol and Drugs in Norway. Norwegian Institute for Alcohol and Drug Research

Transkript

1 Rusmidler i Norge Statistikk 06 Norwegian Institute for Alcohol and Drug Research

2 Standardtegn i tabellene Standard symbols in the tables Symbol Tall kan ikke forekomme Category not applicable. Data mangler Data not available.. Null Nil - Mindre enn 0,5 Less than Mindre enn 0,05 Less than ,0 Foreløpige tall Provisional figures * Please note that commas are used as decimal points in the tables, in accordance with the Norwegian system.

3 Rusmidler i Norge 2006 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? Redaktør (editor): Anders Bryhni Redaksjonsutvalg (Editorial group): Elin K. Bye, Ragnar Hauge, Øyvind Horverak, Sturla Nordlund og Astrid Skretting Utgitt av: Statens institutt for rusmiddelforskning Produced by: Norwegian Institute for Alcohol and Drug Research Omslag (cover): ISBN

4 Forord Preface Preface This booklet, produced by Norwegian Institute for Alcohol and Drug Research (SIRUS), once again presents a selection of statistics on alcohol and drugs. The figures have been collected from public statistics and special studies is the eighteenth booklet in a series of yearly publications in which updated figures are presented on the use of alcohol, addictive medication and illegal drugs, and on the availability, economic aspects, damage/injuries and crime associated with such substances. Until 2000 the booklet was published in collaboration between the Norwegian Directorate for the Prevention of Alcohol and Drug Problems and the National Institute for Alcohol and Drug Research (SIFA). As a consequence of the reorganisation of the national responsibilities in the alcohol and drug field, SIFA and the statistical section of the Directorate were amalgated as of 1 January This resulted in a new institute, SIRUS, which now has the sole responsibility for the publication. Every other year s edition includes the more detailed presentation of a special theme, this year the subject being Norwegian Drinking Patterns. In 1990 the theme was Alcohol consumption since the Second World War, in 1992 Drugs and drug use, in 1994 Alcohol in the Nordic Countries, in 1996 Alcohol: sales, licences and economy, in 1998 Drugs and drug use once again, in 2000 Alcohol and Drugs in the Nordic Countries, in 2002 Norwegian and Nordic Alcohol Policy and the EU, and in 2004 Drugs and treatment.. All the figures presented here are to be found in the databases at SIRUS. For some areas long data time series are available in much greater detail which are, however, too extensive for inclusion in the present booklet. Some of these have been published before and can be found in earlier editions of, particularly in the 1991 edition. In some areas, the databases contain more detailed statistics than those which are presented here. All tables and more, are available in our online database at This booklet is intended to be a resource for everyone who wishes to have statistical documentation of the alcohol and drug situation in Norway. We hope that it will be useful for people who work with the dissemination of information and the planning and implementation of preventive programmes, for researchers, and for everyone with a general interest in this field. In order to make this book more available to people outside Norway, the complete text has been translated into English. Oslo, November 2006 Jostein Rise Director Rusmidler i Norge

5 Innholdsfortegnelse Contents Contents Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change?, by Øyvind Horverak 28 Appendix Tables 42 SALES OF ALCOHOL TABLE Annual sales of alcohol in the Nordic countries measured in litres of pure alcohol per inhabitant aged 15 years and over FIGURE Annual sales of alcohol in the Nordic countries TABLE Annual sales of alcohol in Norway in total in 1000 litres and in 1000 litres of pure alcohol TABLE Annual sales of alcohol in Norway per inhabitant aged 15 years and over in litres and in litres of pure alcohol FIGURE 1.3a. 56 Annual sales of alcohol in Norway FIGURE 1.3b. 57 Percentage of sales for the different types of alcohol in Norway 1980 and 2005 TABLE Annual sales of different types of beer in Norway in 1000 litres and in 1000 litres pure alcohol LICENCES TO SELL AND SERVE ALCOHOL TABLE Number of establishments licensed to sell alcohol by type of licence TABLE Number of Vinmonopolet sales outlets by county TABLE Number of establishments licensed to sell medium beer by county TABLE Number of establishments licensed to sell medium beer by type of establishmentand county 2005 TABLE Percentage of municipalities with different arrangements for sale of medium beer Rusmidler i Norge 2006

6 Innholdsfortegnelse Contents TABLE Number of establishments with a municipal licence to serve alcohol by type of licence FIGURE Number of premises licensed to sell alcohol TABLE Number of establishments licensed to serve alcohol by type of licence and county 2005 TABLE Number of establishments licensed to sell and serve alcohol per inhabitants aged 18 years and over by county 2005 TABLE Number of municipalities without establishments licensed to sell or serve alcohol FIGURE Number of municipalities without establishment licensed to sell or serve alcohol TABLE Percentage of the population who live in municipalities without establishments licensed to sell or serve alcohol TABLE Number of military establishments and passenger ships with a state licence to serve alcohol by county 2005 ECONOMY AND ALCOHOL TABLE Real price indices for spirits, fortified wines, table wines and beer TABLE Index for the relationship between nominal price index for different types of alcoholic beverages and index for nominal wages and salaries from the National Account TABLE Consumers expenditure on spirits, wine and beer. Total expenditure in millions of Norwegian kroner and expenditure on alcohol as a percentage of household consumption TABLE Consumers expenditure on spirits, wine and beer per inhabitant aged 18 years and over in Norwegian kroner TABLE Excise duty on wine and spirits. Basic duty in Norwegian øre (100 øre = 1 krone) per percent alcohol by volume per litre FIGURE Basic duty on spirits and wine TABLE Excise duty on beer in Norwegian kroner per litre and classification of beer before and after TABLE Government revenue from the sale of alcohol in millions of Norwegian kroner Rusmidler i Norge

7 Innholdsfortegnelse Contents DEATHS CAUSED BY ALCOHOL TABLE Number of deaths caused by alcohol by diagnosis and gender (underlying cause of death) TABLE Number of deaths caused by alcohol by age and gender (underlying cause of death) TABLE Number of deaths caused by alcohol by age and gender (total number of deaths over 17 years), TABLE Number of deaths caused by cirrhosis of the liver in total and per inhabitants by gender FIGURE Number of deaths caused by cirrhosis of the l iver by gender CRIME ASSOCIATED WITH ALCOHOL TABLE Number of sanctions for misdemeanour according to the Act of vagrancy, conduct by county FIGURE Number of sanctions for misdemeanour according to the Act of vagrancy, conduct by county 1995 and 2005 TABLE Number of sanctions in cases involving misdemeanours against Act no. 27 on the sale of alcoholic beverages or against the Customs Act by type of misdemeanour TABLE Number of sanctions for illicit distilling by county DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE OF DRUGS TABLE Number of tests from drivers by type of suspicion (alcohol and/or drugs) FIGURE Number of tests from drivers by type of suspicion alcohol and other drugs TABLE Number of tests from drivers by type of suspicion and gender (alcohol and/or drugs) TABLE Number of tests from drivers, which are tested positive for drugs TABLE Number of sanctions for driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs as a percentage of all sanctions for traffic misdemeanours TABLE Number of sanctions for driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs by county Rusmidler i Norge 2006

8 Innholdsfortegnelse Contents TABLE Number of sanctions for driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs per 10,000 inhabitants aged 18 years and over by county FIGURE Number of sanctions for driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs per 10,000 inhabitants aged 18 years and over by county 2005 NORWEGIAN NARCOTICS STA- TISTICS TABLE Deaths caused by use of drugs by gender according to the National Bureau of Crime investigation (KRIPOS) and Statistics Norway (underlying cause of death) TABLE Deaths caused by use of drugs by gender and age according to Statistics Norway (underlying cause of death) TABLE Deaths caused by use of drugs by gender and age according to KRIPOS TABLE Number of seizures of opiates, cannabis, amphetamines and cocaine FIGURE Number of seizures of cannabis, heroin, cocaine, and amphetamine TABLE Number of seizures of ecstasy, LSD, khat, magic mushrooms, GHB and tranquillisers FIGURE Number of seizures of ecstasy, LSD and khat TABLE Amount of confiscated opiates, cocaine, cannabis and amphetamines in kilogrammes TABLE Amount of confiscated ecstasy, LSD, khat, magic mushrooms and tranquillisers TABLE Number of drug offences reported FIGURE Number of drug offences reported STUDIES ON THE USE OF ALCO- HOL AND DRUGS BY YOUNG PEOPLE TABLE Percentage of young people in Norway who have at some time drunk alcohol by gender and age TABLE Percentage of young people in Oslo aged years who have at some time drunk alcohol by gender and age TABLE Estimated annual consumption measured in litres of pure alcohol by type of beverage among young people in Norway aged years Rusmidler i Norge

9 Innholdsfortegnelse Contents TABLE Estimated annual consumption measured in litres of pure alcohol for young people in Norway aged years, by age and gender TABLE Mean age of drinking as much as one bottle of beer, one decilitre of wine or 0.2 decilitre of spirits in Oslo and Norway TABLE Percentage of young people in Norway aged years who say that they have at some time used different drugs FIGURE Percentage of young people in Norway who say that they have at some time used different drugs TABLE Percentage of young people in Oslo aged years who say that they have at some time used different drugs FIGURE 8.7a. 120 Percentage of young people in Oslo who say that they have at some time used different drugs FIGURE 8.7b. 121 Percentage of young people in Oslo and Norway who say that they have at some time used different drugs.2006 TABLE Percentage of young people in Norway aged years who mean that cannabis should be sold freely and who would try it if there were no danger of being arrested TABLE Percentage of young people in Oslo aged years who mean that cannabis should be sold freely and who would try it if there were no danger of being arrested FIGURE Percentage who mean that cannabis should be sold freely and who would try if there where no danger of being arrested Rusmidler i Norge 2006

10 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? Ø YVIND H ORVERAK Alcohol statistics published in (Rusmidler i Norge) are mainly concerned with volume and composition of alcohol sales, number of businesses serving or selling alcohol, and prices and taxes. The original data come from the institutions that are directly involved in the operations they report on. Vinmonopolet, wine and spirits wholesalers and the brewery sector report sales volumes. The Ministry of Finance provides information on alcohol taxes and local authorities tell us how many businesses are licensed to serve and sell alcohol in their municipality. By communicating with primary sources, and assuming they are telling the truth, we can try to piece together as accurate a picture of operations in the various sectors as possible. Obviously, there will always be margins of error: it would be difficult to make sure every litre sold is reported in official statistics, or that every retail outlet is included or every krone derived from sales accounted for. But these data are the best there are, essentially because they come from people with firsthand knowledge. A common feature of this information is that it refers to population aggregates. It says little about drinkers individually or different groups of drinkers. If we want to learn about an individual s drinking habits we need to get in touch with him or her directly as the primary source. And by picking respondents who collectively offer a representative sample of the population, we gain access to the drinking habits of the wider public on the basis of information from primary sources the individual consumer. Studies of people s drinking habits based on personal interviews with a representative sample of the population started as early as 1956 in Norway. The first survey was a joint project uniting Statistics Norway, the state-owned and run wine and spirits monopoly Vinmonopolet and the Norwegian Gallup Institute, Norsk Gallup. From 1962 these surveys were conducted by the recently created National Alcohol Research Institute (Statens institutt for alkoholforskning). The institute carried out similar surveys 1966, 1968, 1973, 1979, 1985, 1991, 1994, 1999 and Typically these survey are run every fifth year the next being due in Questions in the first surveys concerned whether respondents had drunk in the course of the last year and if so how frequently. The surveys also investigated whether various types of unrecorded alcohol were drunk, i.e. homemade alcoholic beverages, alcohol purchased abroad and smuggled spirits. It was not until 1973 that surveys began to ask people how much they usually drank of beer, wine, and/or spirits respectively. In 1979 respondents were also asked to report how much beer, wine and/or spirits they had consumed at the last drinking session, and how much time had elapsed since their last drink. By 1994 an interest had developed into the drinking context, and respondents were asked where the last drinking session took place, and how many others they were with. This last question 28 Rusmidler i Norge 2006

11 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? was actually included in the 1979 survey as well. By the late 90s alcopops was widely available, prompting questions in the 1999 survey about drinking habits with this type of beverage. By comparing findings on the population derived from personal interviews with sales data compiled by Vinmonopolet, wine and spirit wholesale merchants and the brewery businesses, it became possible to estimate the accuracy of the information provided by respondents. This type of comparison was impossible before 1973, the first time the survey asked people how much they drank. As interviewees were asked how much beer, wine and/or spirits they had drunk irrespective of origin, we would have expected the resulting figures to be in excess of the national sales statistics. That assumption was wrong. We reproduce and compare below estimates of consumption of pure alcohol per head of population aged 15 and over based on the interview surveys and national sales statistics. Table 1: Estimate of alcohol consumption based on interview data and sales statistics. In litres pure alcohol per inhabitant aged 15 years and over Interview data Interview data as percentage of sales statistics Year All alcohol Unrecorded Sales All alcohol Minus unrecorded 1973* *Unregistered alcohol for 1973 includes only homemade spirits and wine. Respondent age for 1973 is 18 and over As the table shows, consumption rates derived from interview data were significantly lower than retail statistics suggest. If we allow for unrecorded consumption, the interview data accounted for only per cent of the volume actually sold in Norway. So despite the first-hand quality of the information, consumption rates emerging from the interview data were incorrect. There are several reasons for this, the most important of which in our opinion is first a systematic tendency for people to underestimate own alcohol consumption. People prefer to see themselves and be seen in a better light than they merit, and since high consumption rates are likely to elicit a negative response, people will tend to under-report actual drinking practice. This is not unique to alcohol; we see the same phenomenon at work in relation to smoking. If the issue is how much people exercise, on the other hand, people are likely to over-report how often they work out or trek through the countryside. The second point is that the surveys don t reach the really heavy drinkers. While the surveys are representative by sex, age, geography etc, they are not representative on the most essential variable, al- Rusmidler i Norge

12 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? cohol consumption levels. The problem is aggravated because as alcohol consumption is so highly skewed in the population: we estimate that the 10 per cent of the population making up the heaviest drinkers consumes about half the total volume. If it is the case that these are systematically under-represented in the surveys, our estimates will give too low consumption figures. Despite the apparent weaknesses confronting the data from these interview studies, they are still useful for estimating people s drinking habits over time. If we assume, for instance, that the mentioned data weaknesses remain constant from one survey to the next, the results should be comparable over time. By making this assumption, we can describe changes in consumption patterns in Norway based on data from these surveys. That said, there are several more reasons to approach these data with caution. In the period we are studying, for example, there may be an increasing tendency to report actual consumption accurately, insofar as attitudes to drink have changed so much since the 70s. Public opinion is much more accepting today than two or three decades ago. The silent pressure to tone down reports of own consumption was less in 2004 than 1973, making it easier for people to report actual drinking habits. H OW MANY DRINK? Before examining drinking practices in the segment of the Norwegian population which drank alcohol in the years , it might be useful to establish how many reported complete abstinence. Figure 1 details the numbers reporting an alcohol-free past year as a percentage of the population. As we see, the proportion fell significantly from the 1956 survey to the 2004 one. In 1956, 37 per cent of the female population claimed to have consumed no alcohol in the past year; fifty years later, that figure had shrunk to 15. The sharpest drop in the proportion of non-drinkers happened in the 60s. Between 1962 and 1966 there was a drop in female non-drinking population from 37 to 22 per cent, and in the male from 21 to 12 per cent. Only minor fluctuations in the male non-drinking population have occurred since then; on the other hand, the female non-drinking population continued to shrink. By the time of the 2004 survey, 13 per cent of Norway s population had reportedly not touched alcohol in the year to date. 30 Rusmidler i Norge 2006

13 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? Figure 1: Non-drinking population, year to date Men Women All *) For the years the age group is 18 and over, for 1979 and later, 15 and over W HEN, AND HOW FREQUENTLY, DO N ORWEGIAN MEN AND WOMEN DRINK? The figure shows the distribution in the Norwegian population of drinking episodes by day of the week, 1973, 1994 and 2004 respectively. We treat the sexes and age groups as one, as there were only minor differences vis-à-vis the population as a whole. Between 1973 and 2004, Norwegians drank most on Fridays and Saturdays, accounting for 46, 64 and 62 per cent respectively of all drinking episodes in 1973, 1994 and We note an increasing focus on the two days between 1973 and 1994, possibly an outcome of the introduction of the five-day week (free Saturdays) during the period, which would have widened the weekend drinking window. Apart from Fridays and Saturdays, the number of drinking episodes is relatively evenly distributed across the other days of the week, though we see slightly higher preponderance of drinking on Sundays compared with ordinary weekdays. Rusmidler i Norge

14 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? Figure 2: Drinking episodes by day of week Pee cent Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday To get an idea of how the number of drinking episodes might be changing we looked at the proportion of respondents whose last drinking session was on the day of the interview or the day before, last 2 7 days, in the past 1 4 weeks, and so forth. The results are shown by Figure 3. Both male and female respondents were more likely to locate their last drinking episode to the interview day or previous day in 1979 than in The female percentage had grown from 10 to 15, the male from 20 to 24 per cent. The percentage whose last drinking episode was 2 7 days ago had also risen: from 34 to 39 per cent and 47 to 49 per cent for the female and male respondents respectively. Following this, fewer reported extended periods of abstinence. Figure 3: Elapsed time since last drinking episode Per cent day 2-7 days 1-4 weeks 1-3 months 4-6 months 6-12 months 0-1 day 2-7 days 1-4 weeks 1-3 months 4-6 months 6-12 months Men Women 32 Rusmidler i Norge 2006

15 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? As Figure 3 demonstrates, men drink more frequently than women. In 2004, 70 per cent of the male respondents reported having drunk on several occasions in the week to date; the female percentage was 54. W HAT DO N ORWEGIAN MEN AND WOMEN DRINK, AND HOW MUCH? On the basis of questions concerning alcohol type and amount drunk at last drinking episode, we can build a picture of preferences and amounts consumed per episode. Preferences on last drinking episode are given in Figure 4. The aggregated percentages exceed 100 per cent because many drank a mixture of alcoholic beverages at the last drinking episode. Figure 4: Preferences at last drinking episode 80 Per cent Men Women Beer Wine Spirits Alcopops * For women, preference for spirits in 1994 is computed as the average of 1991 and Wine continues its rise in popularity as the preferred drink of women, in per cent of female respondents said they had drunk wine on their last drinking episode. Twenty-five years before, the percentage was 37. Again among the female population, spirits declined as beer increased in popularity right into the late 1990s. Between 1999 and 2004, however, women s preference for beer fell, something possibly explained by the contemporary emergence of alcopops. The impact of alcopops was greatest in the youngest female age group, that is, the age group where a preference for beer was most widespread. Among male respondents, beer acquired new popularity at the expense of spirits. In 1979, 43 per cent had drunk beer and 53 per cent spirits at their last drinking episode. By 2004, preference for beer had grown to 65 per cent while preference for spirits had dropped to 40 per cent. The percentage reporting wine as their last drinking episode preference grew slightly from 24 per cent in 1979 to 29 per cent in The male population was less likely than the female population to express a preference for alcopops. Rusmidler i Norge

16 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? Figure 5 presents men and women s consumption of alcohol in different drinking situations grouped according to the main alcoholic beverage at that session. We see that men drank a great deal more than women in situations dominated by beer or spirits. But when wine was the preferred drink, women drank almost as much as their male counterparts. According to the 2004 survey, in situations where wine was the main drink, men drank on average 43 cl, women 36 cl, the equivalent of a half bottle. Figure 5: Volume consumed of main drink at last drinking episode* 10 Cl pure alcohol Men Beer Wine Spirits Women * For 1994 spirits is computed as the average of 1991 and 1999 Male respondents drank less in situations where wine figured as the preferred drink, than in situations where beer or distilled spirits was the dominant drink. For the female respondents the pattern was not as clear: volume consumed depended less on what was drunk. Figure 5 illustrates that there has been a tendency among women to drink more per episode when the main drink is beer or wine. If it is distilled spirits, on the other hand, we find no such tendency. Men tended to drink more beer per episode in 2004 than in the 70s and 80s. There was no analogous rise when wine and distilled spirits predominated. B INGE DRINKING If we assume that a person who reports drinking 10 cl pure alcohol at his or her last drinking episode (more than six half bottles of Pilsner or a half bottle of wine or 25 cl distilled spirits) is likely to get drunk, Figure 6 shows the percentage of last drinking episodes at which respondents aged 26 and over drank sufficient alcohol to induce drunkenness and the predominating beverage involved. We ignore the age group this time because they tend to get drunk more frequently than the older segment of the population and because we know that beer followed by distilled spirits is a highly popular intoxicant. 34 Rusmidler i Norge 2006

17 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? As we see from Figure 6, men tend more to get drunk on beer and distilled spirits, less on wine, whereas the correlation between type of drink and drunkenness among women is less apparent. Five to ten per cent of women s drinking episodes results in intoxication, irrespective of the type of drink involved. Men get drunk more frequently, especially when the main drink is beer or spirits. In 25 per cent of these events men aged 25 and over drink at least 10 cl pure alcohol in 2004; when wine is the main drink, men drank to intoxicate in 11 per cent of drinking sessions in Both men and women were more likely to get drunk in 2004 than Figure 6: Proportion of last drinking episode at which subjects drank 10 cl pure alcohol or more. By type of drink. Per cent Men 26 years or more Women 26 years or more All types Beer Wine Spirits Now it s not necessarily the case that people are less like to get drunk because they drink wine. It can just as easily be that people with a preference for wine get drunk less frequently than those with a preference for spirits or beer, whatever the drinking session s main drink. We looked at this when we compared the group of blue collar workers with the group of white collar workers. White collar workers were more likely to state a preference for wine than blue collar workers, but we also found that white collar workers were significantly less likely to drink to the point of inebriation than blue collar workers, whatever happened to be the drink of the occasion. The point is not that white collar workers drank wine, but that they were white collar workers. Both white and blue collar workers were less likely to binge drink if the main drink was wine. Again, wine is not necessarily the explanation. Wine may be the customary drink in certain circumstances, while in others beer and spirits may figure as the dominant beverage. The point is not that wine was drunk, but that the context happened to be main meal of the day. Getting drunk has more to do with people s social status and the company they keep, and partly as a consequence of this contexts where alcohol is customarily required, rather than what people drink. What decides how often people get drunk are basic attributes of the person and the context, not the choice of drink. Rusmidler i Norge

18 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? Starting with the 1979 survey, respondents were also asked whether they had been drunk in the past year, and if so on how many occasions. Among women we see a rise in both factors. The proportion reporting being drunk in the past year rose from 27 per cent in 1979 to 36 per cent by 2004, while the number of occasions per year rose from 1.6 to 3.3. There was no change in the number of men who said they had been drunk in the past year: for all years the percentage remained between 50 and 60 per cent. The male respondents reported a higher drunkenness frequency in 2004 than 1979, with 5 episodes in 1979 against 7 in C HANGES IN TOTAL ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION AND CONSUMPTION S DISTRIBUTI- ON IN THE POPULATION Figure 7 shows the distribution of alcohol consumption among Norwegians who drink in 1973 and 2004, based on data obtained from the interview studies. The distributions are largely similar, though there are two noticeable differences. The proportion which drank least dropped from 35 per cent in 1973 to 21 per cent in And the proportion which drank most (more than 10 litres of pure alcohol) rose from 6 per cent in 1973 to 12 per cent in In the years , it became less common to drink very little and increasingly common to drink a great deal. Consumption distribution was highly skewed both years. In 1973, the 10 per cent which drank most accounted for half the alcohol drunk that year. In 1973 they drank an average of 7.4 litres pure alcohol or more. By 2004, the 10 per cent with the highest consumption was drinking 11.3 litres, and the group accounted for 46 per cent of total alcohol use that year. At the other end of the scale are the 50 per cent which drank least, accounting for just 6.2 per cent of overall alcohol consumption in 1973 and 8.5 per cent in In 1973, half of all drinkers drank less than 1.1 litre pure alcohol, providing as such the distribution s median value. By 2004 the threshold had risen to 2.1 litres, with the median value growing by 86 per cent between 1973 and Average consumption rose in the same period from 3 to 4.5 litres, or by 50 per cent. 36 Rusmidler i Norge 2006

19 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? Figure 7: Distribution of alcohol consumption in the population. Alcohol users Per cent ,01-0,50 1,01-1,50 2,01-2,50 3,01-3,50 4,01-4,50 5,01-5,50 6,01-6,50 7,01-7,50 8,01-8,50 9,01-9,50 10 litres or more Because a relatively small number of big drinkers are responsible for a significant wedge of average consumption, the median value may in fact be a better guide to how people drink than the computed average, which is the usual gauge. As the figure shows, alcohol use in both 1973 and 2004 deviated significantly from the normal distribution curve. It alerts us to the fact that it is better to err on the side of caution when it comes to describing alcohol consumption in terms of averages; we risk otherwise creating a distorted picture of what is actually the case. Data from 1973 and 2004 can help illustrate the problem. In 1973, average alcohol consumption among drinkers was 3 litres pure alcohol. However, only 13.5 per cent drank between 2 and 4 litres pure alcohol, that is, what we could say was in the reasonable vicinity of the average value. As many as 72 per cent drank less than the average. In 2004, consumption averaged at 4.5 litres pure alcohol, and 11 per cent drank between 3.5 and 5.5 litres, both within reasonable distance of the average. That year, 71 per cent drank less than the average. In both years then, people were significantly more likely to drink less than the average than near it. Average consumption therefore gives a less reliable picture of the population s normal drinking habits in both 1973 and The median values were a long way under the average values, and as such paint a completely different picture of the amounts people usually drank. In 1973, normal consumption, in terms of the median, was only 38 per cent of what used to pass as normal consumption based on the average value. For 2004, the median was 41 per cent of the average value. Rusmidler i Norge

20 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? U NREPORTED CONSUMPTION One of the purposes of the surveys is to establish prevalence and changes in the unreported consumption. Unreported alcohol use covers of homemade beer, homemade wine, homemade spirits, smuggled spirits, beer, wine and spirits purchased across the border (generally in Sweden), and in tax free shops. Figure 8 illustrates the historical tendencies. Surveys have not consistently asked respondents about all aspects of unreported use. For that reason only the columns are comparable. Figure 8: Unreported consumption by type. Alcohol users* 250 Cl pure alcohol Men *Tax free and cross-border shopping is not differentiated for the years 1979 and 1985 Women Homemade spirits Smuggled spirits Homemade wine Crossborder trade from Sweden Tax free The figure shows that men drink more unreported alcohol than women, in line with their tendency to drink more overall. The difference is particularly striking in relation to homemade and smuggled spirits, with men accounting for nearly all consumption in recent years. While women used to drink a relatively large quantity of homemade wine, its popularity has declined significantly. The consumption of privately distilled spirits is also falling. Men drank in 2004 only two-thirds of the amount they consumed in Prevalence of smuggled spirits peaked in 1994, and sales have declined ever since. The decrease needs to be seen in light of the so called methanol affair, which costs nearly 20 lives from drinking smuggled spirits laced with methanol. In 2004, tax free shopping accounted for the major part of unreported consumption. Tax free shopping made up 39 per cent of men s consumption of unreported alcohol in 2004, and 52 per cent of women s. Cross-border and tax free shopping together amounted to two-thirds of overall unreported alcohol use in As Figure 8 shows, unreported consumption has been relatively stable between 1979 and 2004; there are changes in the composition however. Homemade beverages have increasingly lost out to crossborder and tax free alcohol throughout the period. Recent years have seen a decline in the consumption of smuggled spirits, the 2004 levels of which were not much different from the 1979 ones. 38 Rusmidler i Norge 2006

21 Det norske drikkemønsteret under endring? Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? C ONCLUSION The two most important changes in the way Norwegians consume alcohol between the 70s and 2004 are that we drank more in 2004 than in 1973 and that we drank less spirits, and more beer and wine, and from the early 2000s alcopops. The increased consumption of alcohol comes from the rise in the number of people who drink more or less regularly, i.e., daily drinkers and those who drink once or several times a week. In addition it is increasingly common to drink more per session: women s average consumption per session rose from an amount equivalent to one and a half glasses of wine on average in 1973 to three glasses on average in Men s average consumption rose from over two to over three half-litres of beer. These figures are almost certainly too low, given that people tend to report lower quantities than they actually drink. While spirits accounted in 1973 for 44 per cent of women s alcohol consumption, that had shrunk by 2004 to 21 per cent. Although male consumption of spirits fell from 47 to 30 per cent of overall alcohol use, there has been no let up in the frequency of intoxication. This frequency, measured here as the number of times 10 cl pure alcohol or more was drunk at the last drinking episode, rose between 1979 and In 1979, men older than 25 reached inebriation in 18 per cent of their drinking episodes; by 2004 the percentage was 24. The female proportions were 3 and 8 per cent respectively. Men are more likely to get drunk on beer and spirits than wine. For women the type of drink has little effect on whether they get drunk or not. Unreported alcohol use is a major contributor to overall consumption in Norway, and has remained relatively stable the last twenty-five years, But preponderance of the various types of unreported alcohol has changed, as homemade drinks and smuggled spirits have forfeited shares to alcohol obtained via tax free and cross-border shopping. Because people tend to under-report own alcohol use, it is difficult to estimate precisely unreported consumption as a share of overall consumption in Norway. In light of the 2004 survey, however, its share is probably between 25 and 37 per cent. Alcohol consumption distribution is extremely skewed across the population. The 10 per cent who drink most are responsible for the consumption of half of all alcohol drunk in Norway, while those who drink least account for less than 10 per cent. Because of this skewed distribution describing consumption in terms of averages is not a particularly productive guide to the majority drinking habits. Acknowledgement to Sturla Nordlund at SIRUS who kindly read an earlier draft of this article and offered many useful comments. The author, however, is responsible for whatever errors may remain. Rusmidler i Norge

22 Tabellvedlegg Appendix - Tables Appendix Tables N OTES ON THE TABLES In what follows we show alcohol consumption associated with a number of key variables using data extracted from the surveys conducted between 1973 and The tables show alcohol use in various segments of the population. Due to the highly skewed distribution of alcohol consumption among Norwegian men and women (see the relevant chapter in Norwegian Drinking Patterns Undergoing Change? in this publication), we provide both average and median consumption values. We also include the standard error of the average as an illustration of the level of uncertainty associated with the estimates. The most significant difference in alcohol consumption in Norway is that between men and women. As table1 shows, in 1973 women drank on average 25 per cent of men s overall consumption. By 2004, women were drinking 45 per cent. The table shows that women accounted for a much larger share of the rise in alcohol consumption than men over the period. Relatively speaking, the median value is closer to men s average than the women s, which may indicate that proportionately more women than men drank less than the average for the group. The second table shows alcohol use on another key variable, age. Consumption is highest in the age group, and lowest in the highest age group. The steepest rise in consumption levels is accounted for by the under 30s and over 50s. There was also an increase among yearolds, but it was insignificant. There may be a connection here with the different consumption patterns found at different stages of life; for this age group, consumption would be constrained by family responsibilities. The low consumption level in the oldest age group is partly due to the fact that people drink less as they grow older and partly because that particular generation drank comparatively less than succeeding generations at all stages of life. Again comparatively, the gap separating median from average consumption is wider in the older age groups than the under 50s, which suggests the former were less likely to continue to drink heavily relative to the amounts drunk in younger years. The third table describes drinking habits by education. As we see, average consumption tends to follow length of education. In 2004, people with a university or similar education drank twice as much on average as people with only compulsory schooling. This should not be taken to suggest that education duration explains or causes the difference. The high education group differs from those in the lowest education group on other variables with a much stronger effect on drinking habits, sex and age in particular. Consumption levels have more to do with age and sex differences between the groups than education. We cannot draw conclusions regarding cause and effect on the basis of these tables. 42 Rusmidler i Norge 2006

23 Tabellvedlegg Appendix - Tables In the fourth table we see that respondents describing themselves as blue collar workers drank consistently more than white collar workers apart from one of the years covered by the surveys. The heaviest drinkers, excepting students and pupils whose drinking habits are related to their young age, were the highly non-homogeneous categories other, self-employed and farmer. Pensioners drank least due to advanced age. Median values suggest a less evenly distributed consumption pattern within the blue collar category than the other occupational groups, apart from the pensioner group. Tables 5 and 6 show alcohol use by place of residence. The first shows distribution by population size of respondents home municipality, the second by geographic location. There is a tendency for city dwellers to drink slightly more than residents of rural communities without large urban centres. The heaviest drinkers live in the Oslo region. This pattern is largely repeated in the next table, where, with the exception of Oslo, residence in one part of the country is no more likely to predict how much people drink than others. The final table shows the association between drinking and household income. By low income we refer here to the 25 per cent that reported the lowest incomes; similarly, high income refers to the 25 per cent that reported the highest incomes. The remainder fall in the middle income bracket. With the exception of the 2004 survey, the high income group has consistently displayed the highest average consumption. In the same period, the middle income group was consistently likely to drink more on average than respondents in the lowest income bracket. With the 2004 survey, however, the pattern was reversed, with the lowest income group reporting the highest consumption and the highest income group the lowest. Within each of the three income categories consumption varied as well. In 2004 the median of the lowest income group was only 20 per cent of the average value. For those in the middle income category, the median accounted for 29 per cent of the average, and 56 per cent of the highest income group. The low income group therefore contained a much higher percentage of light drinkers than the high income group. On the other hand, we find a number of very heavy drinkers in this group. Rusmidler i Norge

24 Tabellvedlegg Appendix - Tables Tabell 1 (Table 1) Kjønn (Sex) Liter ren alkohol siste år per innbygger 15 år og eldre* Litres of pure alcohol consumed last year per capita 15 years and over Mann (Men) Kvinne (Women) År (year) Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) ,62 4,00 0, ,25 1,00 0, ,94 4,25 0, ,33 1,39 0, ,83 3,85 0, ,47 1,52 0, ,92 3,70 0, ,39 1,42 0, ,35 4,50 0, ,68 1,75 0, ,33 4,60 0, ,76 1,84 0, ,65 5,53 0, ,87 2,50 0,11 Totalt (Total) År (year) Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) ,67 2,47 0, ,81 2,80 0, ,94 2,66 0, ,97 2,58 0, ,25 3,09 0, ,34 3,19 0, ,59 3,99 0,13 *1973: 18 år og eldre (18 years and over) Tabell 2 (Table 2) Alder (Age) Liter ren alkohol siste år per innbygger 15 år og eldre* Litres of pure alcohol consumed last year per capita 15 years and over år# år År (year) Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) ,97 4,39 0, ,52 3,58 0, ,32 3,48 0, ,10 3,72 0, ,40 3,16 0, ,10 4,02 0, ,47 3,74 0, ,99 3,53 0, ,12 4,32 0, ,56 4,33 0, ,88 4,36 0, ,37 4,35 0, ,81 5,27 0, ,76 6,41 0, år år År (year) Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) ,21 3,19 0, ,65 2,25 0, ,58 3,24 0, ,90 3,27 0, ,83 3,41 0, ,19 2,47 0, ,34 3,32 0, ,25 2,45 0, ,93 3,48 0, ,60 3,29 0, ,64 3,51 0, ,70 3,58 0, ,69 3,28 0, ,86 3,99 0, år 61 år og over År (year) Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) ,36 1,92 0, ,10 1,08 0, ,49 2,53 0, ,07 1,27 0, ,66 1,96 0, ,23 1,19 0, ,65 2,07 0, ,11 1,04 0, ,06 2,86 0, ,20 1,23 0, ,43 2,93 0, ,30 1,45 0, ,62 4,54 0, ,29 1,75 0,14 *1973: 18 år og eldre (18 years and over) #1973: år (18-20 years) 44 Rusmidler i Norge 2006

25 Tabellvedlegg Appendix - Tables Tabell 3 (Table 3) Utdanning (Education) Liter ren alkohol siste år per innbygger 15 år og eldre* Litres of pure alcohol consumed last year per capita 15 years and over Folkeskolenivå (Primary school) Ungdomsskole/ Realskolenivå (Lower secondary school) År (year) Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) ,19 1,46 0, ,54 2,30 0, ,17 1,98 0, ,75 2,62 0, ,19 1,34 0, ,63 2,19 0, ,09 1,71 0, ,42 2,17 0, ,20 1,37 0, ,87 3,06 0, ,19 1,56 0, ,91 3,20 0, ,23 2,10 0, ,94 3,71 0,34 Videregående skole/ Gymnasnivå (Upper secondary school) Universitetsnivå (College, university) År (year) Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) ,71 3,61 0, ,15 4,06 0, ,45 3,28 0, ,31 3,68 0, ,91 3,59 0, ,90 3,41 0, ,57 3,11 0, ,78 2,89 0, ,57 3,41 0, ,47 3,85 0, ,74 3,61 0, ,98 3,46 0, ,79 4,28 0, ,48 4,54 0,23 *1973: 18 år og eldre (18 years and over) Tabell 4 (Table 4) Yrke (Occupation) Liter ren alkohol siste år per innbygger 15 år og eldre* Litres of pure alcohol consumed last year per capita 15 years and over Arbeider (Blue collar workers) Funksjonær (White collar workers) År (year) Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) ,50 3,46 0, ,42 3,30 0, ,96 4,15 0, ,64 3,06 0, ,44 3,46 0, ,79 3,29 0, ,55 3,10 0, ,49 2,32 0, ,48 3,07 0, ,15 3,57 0, ,76 3,78 0, ,79 3,00 0, ,98 4,61 0, ,77 2,99 0,18 Student/skoleelev/lærling Pensjonist/trygdet (Students, pupils, craft apprentices) (Penisoniers, recipients of social assitance) År (year) Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) ,15 5,61 0, ,17 1,82 0, ,75 3,03 0, ,13 2,41 0, ,56 3,02 0, ,22 1,40 0, ,70 3,22 0, ,24 2,46 0, ,47 3,80 0, ,22 1,86 0, ,76 3,65 0, ,32 1,67 0, ,79 5,24 0, ,43 2,78 0,22 Selvstendig/bonde (Self-employed, peasant) Annet (Other) År (year) Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil Antall Median Gj.snitt stand.feil (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) (number) (median) (mean) (s.e. mean) ,17 3,64 0, ,21 0,82 0, ,40 3,43 0, ,21 0,99 0, ,55 3,94 0, ,32 0,85 0, ,78 3,50 0, ,16 0,78 0, ,15 3,24 0, ,68 4,54 0, ,44 4,99 0, ,58 3,60 0, ,19 4,04 0, ,14 5,30 0,69 *1973: 18 år og eldre (18 years and over) Rusmidler i Norge