Sydney's inner-west is brimming with micro-breweries, should we be worried and what does it mean for research and policy?

Alcohol consumption is responsible for 4.5% of Australia's overall burden of disease [1]. A range of strategies are available to reduce alcohol consumption, and therefore harm, including reducing outlet density. Outlet density refers to the number of both on- and off-premises venues selling alcohol in a given area often ‘measured per-capita’ [2] or ‘per roadway kilometre’ [3-5]. Higher density is associated with increased harms [6]. Areas of Sydney, Australia have high levels of alcohol outlet density saturation [7], despite the known increased harm [8, 9] and the World Health Organization and Australian National Alcohol Strategy recommendation to reduce outlet density to reduce alcohol use [10, 11]. In Australia alcohol licensing is managed by the states and territories, where a wide range of state and local government legislation, rules and regulations govern the establishment and operation of alcohol outlet venues. For instance, in New South Wales (NSW) the State government Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority Board issues and monitors liquor licences [12]. Local government is responsible for implementing local policies and checking compliance with state government urban planning policies. Development consent permission from local government is required to satisfy licence requirements and to legally trade. Alcohol retail opportunities across Australia, however, have substantially expanded in recent years including home delivery of alcohol from online alcohol retailers and, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns, restaurants [13]. Thus, suggesting the market and demand for the expansion of alcohol retailers has been increasing for some time. Previously, micro-breweries in NSW were only authorised to provide customers with a ‘taste’ of their product onsite, but key changes to licensing were introduced on 1 September 2018 [14]. Specifically, a special ‘drink on premises’ authorisation was made available to eligible micro-breweries, thus providing them greater freedoms to operate similar to pubs and bars, thereby increasing the number of venues where alcohol could be consumed. The number and diversity of alcohol outlets within the inner-city areas of Sydney has increased in recent years with the proliferation of tasting bars operating in small-scale breweries (herein referred to as ‘micro-breweries’). This increase in alcohol outlets has been intentional and endorsed by key local government figures, including the Inner-West Council Mayor, Darcy Byrne, proclaiming, ‘I want the Inner-West to be for craft beer what the Hunter Valley and the Barossa are to Australian wine’ [15]. Micro-breweries are often seen as benign relative to the transnational ‘big alcohol’ companies with a reputation as being small owner-operated businesses. However, there has been an increasing number of these small operators being bought-out by the bigger multinationals, while still presenting themselves as local [16]. Little is known about the impact of this licensing change on alcohol consumption, patterns and alcohol-related harms. Here, we highlight the scant literature on micro-breweries, and the changes in micro-breweries in Sydney, Australia and consider the role these changes may have on increasing outlet density and harm. In line with Availability Theory [17], increased availability of alcohol is linked to adverse outcomes associated with alcohol consumption. Several Australian studies have reported a significant association between alcohol outlet density and increased rates of assault [18-21], and anti-social behaviour [22]. However, to our knowledge, no Australian studies have included micro-breweries in their analysis, despite their contribution to outlet density [18-23]. There is a paucity of literature on micro-breweries in general. One US study [24] examining the locality of brewpubs and micro-breweries found a significant increase in neighbourhood Walk Scores (i.e., the walking proximity between neighbourhoods and brewpubs or micro-breweries) and brewpub locations, but no significant relationship between Walk Scores and micro-brewery locations. Brewpubs were defined as venues selling 25% or more of their product onsite, usually with food, and micro-breweries were venues selling 75% or more of their product offsite. Another US study [25] found brewpub clusters were more likely to be found in high foot traffic areas alongside retail and restaurants, as a result of several factors including supply and demand factors and specific zoning laws. These studies, however, did not refer to alcohol use or alcohol-related harm. We are unaware of any Australian literature on the issue. Accounting for micro-breweries in outlet density assessments is important when considering the rapid increase in micro-brewery numbers in the inner-city areas of Sydney over the last 6 years. These micro-breweries are often run by small business owners and operate under a producer/wholesaler licence [26]. Until recently, these licences stipulated that producers could only provide customers with a ‘taste’ of an alcoholic product produced on the site of production [27], thereby limiting onsite consumption. However, this was altered by changes to licensing implemented in September 2018, by Liquor and Gaming NSW under the Liquor Act 2007 [14], which included a 12-month trial for Inner-West Local Government Area micro-breweries with Producer/Wholesaler licences to apply for a unique Drink-On-Premises authorisation, under section 50 of the Liquor Act 2007 [28]. Liquor and Gaming NSW consider micro-breweries as low-risk businesses [29], appointing Delegates to review and approve the licence [30]. According to division 6 of the Liquor Act 2007 [31], a Producer/Wholesaler licence permits both liquor producers and wholesalers to offer wholesale liquor product sales to other licensees, and wholesalers can provide customers onsite tastings of their own product. Liquor producers such as ‘winemakers, brewers and distillers’ [26] can apply for a ‘Drink On-Premises authorisation’, for the purpose of sale and consumption of liquor onsite subject to certain conditions such as sale of liquor must only be within standard trading hours, or authorised restricted trading day hours, and food must be provided whenever liquor is sold. Under division 3A of the Liquor Act 2007, small bars are permitted to sell alcohol between 12 PM to 2 AM, must make food available ‘of a nature and quantity’ that is consistent with ‘the responsible sale, supply and service of alcohol’, and are exempt from paying an annual trading hours risk loading fee [32]. To operate tasting bars, micro-breweries must receive both a licence from the NSW regulator and local government consent. To gain local government consent, operators must submit a development application (DA), which must include an outline of the anticipated social and environmental impacts on the community. In 2020, we examined Sydney's Inner-West Council's development applications for micro-brewery tasting bars and found that 19 DAs were submitted for nine licenced micro-brewery tasting bars (mean 2.1 per micro-brewery) [33]. We noted that while all applicants submitted an Environmental Effect Statement, only two submitted separate Social Impact and Environmental Effect Statements and only one included data about outlet density, alcohol-related crime, community health and socio-economic demographics. All applicants stated that the proposed social impact and environmental effect of micro-brewery tasting bars would be minimal and claimed community amenity would be positively affected. Importantly, we found no evidence of Council challenging these claims or the lack of documentation. All applications were approved. We found that when considering the legal framework in which Inner-West Local Government Area micro-breweries operate, there are areas of confusion with interpreting the Liquor Act 2007 and operationalising the principles and intention of the Liquor Act 2007, via the Liquor Regulation 2018. For example, there were discrepancies between the maximum number of patrons permitted on the premises while alcohol is sold under a Small Bar licence, with section 20C(1) of the Liquor Act 2007 stating 60 [34] and the Liquor Regulation 2018, Section 39 stating 120 [35]. This lack of consistency around the maximum number of patrons permitted on premises was also present for producer/wholesaler licences with Drink On-Premises authorisations. Under Section 37 s(1) of the Liquor Regulation 2018 document dated 8 April 2020 the maximum patron numbers was 120 [36]. However, when comparing this to the Liquor Regulation 2018 document dated 24 August 2018, the maximum patron number was 100 [37]. Further, Section 3(1) ‘Objects’ of the Liquor Act 2007 makes a number of goal-focused statements covering: (a) regulation and control of liquor supply and its usage, in line with broad community requirements; (b) growth of the liquor industry in a flexible and dynamic regulatory environment, and supported by the broader community; and (c) contribution to other industry diversity, in areas such as ‘live music, entertainment, tourism and hospitality’ [38]. Section 3 ‘Objects’ of the Liquor Act 2007 No 90, s(1) (a), suggests myriad interpretations, given the subjective nature of ‘community requirements’ [38]. Furthermore, Objects (b) and (c) of the Liquor Act 2007 appear to be targeted at ensuring the benefit of alcohol and related industries. Subsequently, to fulfil the requirements of the above-mentioned Objects and balance these aims against public health and safety considerations, Section 3(2) of the Liquor Act 2007 stipulates that the licensee and their associated employees ‘have due regard’ to: (a) harm minimisation associated with excessive alcohol consumption and its negative effects; (b) promoting a responsible culture around the ‘sale, supply, service and consumption of liquor’; and (c) ensuring that item (b) above, does not disrupt or interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of the broader community [39]. The licensing shifts mentioned in this piece have several additional implications including the opportunity for local communities to objects to new off- and on-premise outlets, how outlet density is conceptualised and alcohol availability is measured. Although the legislative changes allowing micro-breweries with a producer/wholesaler licence to apply for a Drink On-Premises authorisation (essentially to serve more customers over longer hours) has always been subject to formal consent or permission from local government, there is uncertainty regarding the opportunity for local communities to object to new off- and on-premises outlets. All Drink On-Premises authorisation applications must be lodged within two working days to local Council and Police for objections, are automatically advertised on the Liquor and Gaming Application Noticeboard for 30 days to allow for public submission, and applicants must notify all neighbouring occupiers within 50 m of the boundary of the venue and land adjoining the venue, regardless of a separating road [40]. However, in our review of DAs we found one micro-brewery only had to update an existing consent and as a result did not have to submit a full application [33]. The property had previously been approved to operate as an alcohol warehouse. A Complying Development Certificate approved change of use of the premises from a distributor centre to a micro-brewery and subsequently as a ‘tasting’ bar. No insight was provided about the proposed size and scope of the operations and anticipated social and environmental impacts. Further, it remains unclear how community concerns, when raised, are weighted, especially in the context of very favourable political environments such as described above. Claims in DA submissions that micro-breweries would alleviate rather than exacerbate alcohol-related issues contradicts current outlet density evidence which shows greater outlet density is associated with increased harms [6]. Measuring outlet density by the number of venues within a given area may be too simplistic as it does not capture information regarding the distribution and configuration of venues (e.g., clustering in one area and may be associated with separate harms) [41]. Other methods such as proximity and spatial access of micro-breweries may provide insight into their contribution to alcohol-related harm [41]. Importantly, it is unclear whether enforcement approaches relating to the mitigation of alcohol-related harm across the liquor industry—which includes micro-breweries—are appropriate and effective, given the inconsistencies with interpreting and operationalising the licensing framework described above [42, 43]. With micro-breweries adding to the already high levels of alcohol outlet density in Sydney, the potential for alcohol-related harm should not be overlooked. To safeguard public health and safety, we recommend that future research not only investigate whether micro-breweries contribute to alcohol-related harm, but also provide more careful analysis on the impact of micro-breweries in different locations (i.e., high foot traffic and industrial areas) on alcohol-related harm. Second, we recommend an evaluation on how micro-breweries contribute to the normalisation and even glorification of alcohol (e.g., promoted as family-friendly venues despite a key focus on alcohol consumption) and focus on different population groups that frequent micro-breweries to determine whether some are more vulnerable to alcohol-related harm than others. Third, we recommend exploratory research on determining how micro-brewery operators interpret and operationalise the Liquor Act 2007 principles and intentions and whether harm-minimisation from alcohol is adequately addressed. Fourth, we recommend clear guidelines be developed and disseminated on what is meant by and how licensees and their associated employees ‘have due regard’ to the points listed under Section 3(2) of the Liquor Act 2007 in practice. Fifth, the process for community consolation requires greater transparency and more overt discussion. Lastly, we recommend further research into best methods for conceptualising outlet density and measurement of alcohol availability in general. We are unaware of research to date that has specifically investigated the impact of micro-breweries on alcohol harms, especially outlet density. This is concerning, given that law changes in one of Sydney's most alcohol-dense areas has led to at least 19 DAs approved by Inner-West Council, with only two applicants submitting the mandatory Social Impact Statements, and none referring to the potential harm of increased alcohol outlet density. Of greater concern is that there is confusion between the Liquor Act 2007 and Liquor Regulation 2018, in terms of interpreting and operationalising the principles and intention of the Liquor Act 2007, via the Liquor Regulation 2018. Impacts of this confusion include question marks over the effectiveness of appropriate enforcement approaches related to mitigation of alcohol-related harm. Therefore, in view of the above-mentioned points, future research must consider the impact of micro-breweries on outlet density and councils and other bodies responsible for approving these venues must pay appropriate attention to potential harms. Open access publishing facilitated by The University of Sydney, as part of the Wiley - The University of Sydney agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.