Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 1, 2026

The Motivation for Alcohol Reward: Predictors of Progressive-Ratio Intravenous Alcohol Self-Administration in Humans
Published on: April 28, 2022
Price Changes in Washington Following the 2012 Liquor Privatization: An Update Through 2016 With Comparisons to
Edwina Williams1, William C Kerr1, Sarah Beth L Barnett1,2
1Public Health Institute, Alcohol Research Group, Emeryville, California.
Background:
Washington State ended their wholesale and retail monopoly on liquor on June 1, 2012, resulting in a 5-fold increase in liquor outlets in diverse store types. The legislation also included taxes at the wholesale and retail levels. This study seeks to investigate whether prices have changed from 2014 through 2016, as a follow-up to a previous study finding increases in prices from 2012 to 2014, compared to prices in other states.
Methods:
We developed an index of 68 brands that were popular in Washington in early 2012. Data on final liquor prices (including taxes) in Washington and California were obtained through store visits and online sources between November 2013 and March 2014, and again between April and May 2016 for Washington only. Pricing data for Idaho and Oregon were obtained from the Statistics for Alcohol Management Database over both sampling periods. Primary analyses were conducted on the utmost brands available in the majority of the stores sampled.
Results:
Liquor prices in Washington rose an average of 3.9% for 750 ml and 6.5% for 1.75-l containers overall from 2014 to 2016, while bordering states Idaho (+2.9%) and Oregon (+1.5%) experienced smaller increases for 750-ml and declines for 1.75-l containers (Idaho: -2.9%, Oregon: -4.9%). In the analyses of spirits prices in Washington compared to California, prices in California were 24.1% lower for 750-ml containers and 29.6% lower for 1.75-l containers.
Conclusions:
Our findings indicate liquor prices in Washington have increased since our 2014 assessment at a larger percentage than prices in the neighboring control states Oregon and Idaho, with varying effects on brands, container sizes, and store types. We demonstrate privatization is associated with a different pattern of prices across store types than seen in California.
More Related Videos
08:45Modeling Alcohol Consumption in Rodents Using Two-Bottle Choice Home Cage Drinking and Microstructural Analysis
Published on: November 8, 2024
09:12Optimization of Processing of Tiebangchui with Highland Barley Wine Based on the Box-Behnken Design Combined with the Entropy Method
Published on: May 19, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Distillation: Vapor–Liquid Equilibria
Vapor Pressure Lowering
Comparing Intermolecular Forces: Melting Point, Boiling Point, and Miscibility
Temporary attractive forces like dispersion are present in all molecules, whether they are polar or nonpolar. They...
Physical Properties of Alcohols and Phenols
Alcohols possess a higher boiling point than aliphatic hydrocarbons of similar...
Protection of Alcohols
Protection
It defines a protecting group as the masking agent to make the more reactive species inert to a given set of conditions. This concept is depicted via the illustration of liquid flow through different outlets in an assembly of pipes. The analogy helps to understand the role...
Clausius-Clapeyron Equation