Our
View -
Social norms program criticized
Budget cuts, tuition increases and a report
on the progress of the alcohol policy all
fresh from the Cal State University system––
are these all related? Maybe.
A July 21report from the Harvard University's
School of Public Health highly criticized
a strategy known as "social norms marketing"
used by universities to curb alcohol
abuse. The strategy uses a variety of techniques
including posters, advisories and peer outreach
to tell to students that their peers drink
less than what is believed students actually
drink.
The
findings in the Harvard report show alcohol
use and total volume of alcohol rose on
some campuses using that strategy. Henry
Wechler, the study's principal investigator,
said that the social norms marketing strategy
adopted by college campuses might normalize
drinking for students who don't drink much.
Perry
Angle, director of the CSU Sober Driver
Program at Cal State Fresno, refutes Harvard's
study by stating that Wechler offers no
solution himself. "The strategy works
towards environmental change in behavior,
policy and law, rather than poster presentation,"
Angle said. The program works with local
law enforcement agencies, beverage servers
and partnerships formed within the individual
campus' structure revolving around its advisory.
While the point is well taken and any effort
to curb alcohol abuse on college campuses
is appreciated, even Angle recognizes that
the strategy takes time to develop. Each
of the eight CSU campuses selected as pilots
for the alcohol tailors the strategy to
its campus. As a result, the statistical
data for each campus varies. Additionally,
the novelty use of the social norms marketing
strategy makes it hard to get clear statistical
data.
While the CSU alcohol policy using the social
norms strategy seems promising. We ask ourselves
whether the information provided by the
CSU Chancellor's Office may be a bit precipitous
and presumptuous. Regardless of the social
norms criticism, we must wonder if the first
alcohol report issued by the Chancellor's
Office was in part an attempt to pat themselves
on the back. Perhaps it was issued as an
effort to relieve tensions that rose following
the announcement of the 30 percent increase
in tuition at the 23 CSU campuses.
|
