All posts by The Beer Professor

Neil Reid is Professor of Geography and Planning and Director of the Jack Ford Urban Affairs Center at the University of Toledo. He studies and writes about the beer industry.

Authenticity, Sense of Place, Small Towns

Yuengling, Rolling Rock and Mare of Easttown

March 13, 2024 The Beer Professor Leave a comment

My wife and I recently finished watching a seven-part crime drama called Mare of Easttown. The show is set in the small community of Easttown, PA. The main character is Marianne “Mare” Sheehan, a police detective, who has to solve a missing persons case and the murder of a young single-mother. Sheehan’s character is played by English actress Kate Winslet. It is a well-made crime drama, with enough twists and turns to keep the viewer engaged and entertained.

The Mare of Easttown is a drama which does a great job of creating what Geographers call a ‘sense of place’ with respect to its setting. According to Geographers Ken Foote and Maoz Azaryahu sense of place is “used to describe the distinctiveness or unique character of particular localities and regions,” Easttown is a gritty, working class, Pennsylvania community which has Rust Belt written all over it. Indeed, in discussing the drama, the show’s creator Brad Inglesby refers to Easttown’s “blue-collar vibe” In making the show, Inglelsby strove to capture the “cultural authenticity of eastern Pennsylvania”.

There are a number of ways in which Inglesby conveys Easttown’s sense of place, one of which is having Winslet’s character talking with an authentic Delco accent. The fictional Easttown is located in Delaware County (aka Delco). The Delco accent is “characterized by its rounded vowels and shortened long-e and long-a sounds” so that the word “water” comes out as as “wooder”. In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Winslet said that “It is absolutely up there amongst the top two hardest dialects I’ve ever done”.

In addition to Winslet’s accent, another feature of the show is the fact that the only two beers that the characters seem to drink are Yuengling and Rolling Rock. Both have strong associations with Pennsylvania and both appear frequently throughout the series. Mare’s preference is Rolling Rock. I did find it a little strange that no one in the show drank Budweiser or Coors Light. This surely has to be the result of ‘product placement’, the practice of featuring well-known products in movies and television shows. According to a 2022 article in the New York Times, product placement is a $23 billion industry. It should be noted that in a 2023 survey, a sample of Pennsylvanians identified Yuengling as their favorite beer.

Historically, beers have had a strong connection to place. Numerous examples abound, including Pilsner Urquell (Plzeň, Czech Republic), Newcastle Brown Ale (Newcastle, England) and Guinness (Dublin, Ireland). The surging popularity of craft beer has reignited an interest in sense of place and what it means. Many craft breweries adopt names that they believe connect them with the neighborhood/city/region in which their beer is brewed. Thus, the Edmund Fitzgerald Porter brewed by Great Lakes Brewing Co. in Cleveland, OH makes an explicit connection to the Great Lakes freighter that sank in Lake Superior during a storm on November 10, 1975. The entire crew of 29 men were lost. The use of locally grown hops and other local ingredients are responsible for discussions as to whether beer can have a terroir (a term usually used in reference to wine) which connects it to a specific place. See here and here for contrasting positions on this debate.

Yuengling and Rolling Rock – the only two beers that Easttown’s residents seem to consume

A key concept when connecting a beer with a place (or vice versa) is that of authenticity. Authenticity can be defined as “the quality of being real or true”. Dictionary definitions are useful as they provide formal definitions of terms. Equally important, however, are the terms that the average person uses to express ideas such as authentic/authenticity (and their antonyms inauthentic/inauthenticity). The work of Balázs Kovács and his colleagues, which was published in the journal Organization Science, is useful in this regard. In a study of the restaurant industry, Kovács et al. (2013) asked consumers to identify words that expressed authenticity and inauthenticity. Words that consumers most frequently associate with authenticity include genuine, real, and legitimate, while words they most commonly associate with inauthentic include unreal, deceptive, and phony. So what about Yuengling and Rolling Rock? To what extent are they authentic Pennsylvania beers?

The Yuengling Brewery in the small town of Pottsville, PA (population ~13,000) is the oldest brewery in the United States. Established in 1829 by a German immigrant by the name of David Gottlieb Jüngling (anglicized to Yuengling) the brewery today remains under the ownership of fifth and sixth generation family members. While Yuengling is also brewed in Tampa, FL (in a brewery purchased by the family in 1999) and Fort Worth, TX (under contract with MolsonCoors) it remains loyal to its Pennsylvania roots. It is an authentic Pennsylvania beer.

The same, I would argue, cannot be said for Rolling Rock. First produced in 1939, this American Lager was brewed by Latrobe Brewing Company in the small town of Latrobe, PA (population ~8,000 and the birthplace of golfing legend Arnold Palmer and children’s television presenter Fred Rogers). In 1987, the brewery was purchased by Labbat Brewing Company. Further mergers and acquisitions occurred and, by 2004, Labbat (and Rolling Rock) was owned by InBev. In 2006, Anheuser Busch purchased the Rolling Rock brands from InBev for $82 million. Shortly after the purchase, production of Rolling Rock was shifted from Latrobe to Newark, NY where it was brewed in an Anheuser-Busch facility. Rolling Rock had left Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood.

The brewery in Latrobe where Rolling Rock was brewed before production to Newark — The brewery in Latrobe where Rolling Rock was brewed before production shifted to New Jersey

When it was brewed in Latrobe, part of the branding of Rolling Rock highlighted the fact that the water used to brew it came from nearby mountain springs. Latrobe sits at the foot of the Allegheny Mountains. Writing for The Pennsylvania Center for the Book, Nick Stumpo noted that the taste of the beer changed “ever so slightly . . . from year to year due to the sediments that run off the hills into the mountain streams that feed the main brewing reservoir”. This is effectively an argument for terroir. After the transfer of production was announced, one resident asked, “So will Rolling Rock now taste like the swamps of Jersey (with apologies to the Boss) rather than the mountain springs of Old Latrobe?”. Another stated, “If it ain’t from Latrobe, it ain’t Rolling Rock.” When the shift to Newark was announced, Anheuser-Busch brewmaster Doug Muhleman, stated, “we locate our breweries where we know we have an excellent source of fresh water. And, of course, Newark is no different. We are very confident we are going to produce a beer that is indistinguishable from the beer that is produced in Latrobe.”

Rolling Rock beer comes from the mountain springs to you

When news of Rolling Rocks imminent departure became known, there was significant local backlash. Consumers like Michael J. Pleva vowed “never to drink Rolling Rock again”, while local bar owners reported patrons shifting to other brands. In the State’s House of Representatives, House Resolution 798 was introduced. It read:

“A Resolution urging Pennsylvania residents to boycott Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc., by discontinuing the purchase of all Anheuser-Busch products if Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc., proceeds with its plan to close the Rolling Rock Brewery in Latrobe, Pennsylvania.”

These responses are understandable. Nick Stumpo suggests that Latrobe “owes its identity and national recognition” to Rolling Rock, a beer “embraced by mill and steel workers who shared pints after long days on the job”. Local restaurant owner Joyce Stern referred to Rolling Rock as “an icon. It’s the identity of this town.” Dave Taylor of Taylor Brand Group, described Rolling Rock as beer with a “blue collar following and steeped in the appeal of small town authenticity”. It was an identity that Anheuser-Busch tried to leverage after it moved production to New Jersey. They did so by creating and using the slogan “Born Small Town” to brand the beer.

So, to use a soccer analogy, did the creators of Mare of Easttown score an own goal when using Rolling Rock as a symbol of small-town Pennsylvania? If you wanted to make that case, there is certainly enough supporting evidence. However, I am going to give the creators of the show a pass here. Even though I know that Rolling Rock is no longer brewed in Pennsylvania, my subconscious mind immediately jumps to the the Keystone State (and specifically Latrobe) whenever I hear the beer’s name. It may no longer be brewed in Latrobe or Pennsylvania, but it’s identity is still strongly tied to both the town and the state.

Craft Breweries, Neighborhoods, Walkability

Craft Breweries and the 15-Minute City

March 3, 2024 The Beer Professor 2 Comments

Last month, I attended a conference in Monterey, CA where I had the opportunity to hear Carlos Moreno speak. Born in Yunja, Colombia, Moreno is an urbanist and professor at Sorbonne Université in Paris. Among academics and city planners, he is best known for his work on the 15-Minute City, a term he coined at the 2015 Paris Climate Conference.

As an idea, the 15-Minute City is a pretty simple. It is an urban planning concept which advocates that most (if not all) of the amenities that you need for daily living (education, healthcare, work, leisure, entertainment etc.) should be accessible within 15 minutes using active modes of transport, i.e., walking or cycling. This is not necessarily a new concept.. As early as the late19th and early 20th centuries the idea of socially cohesive neighborhoods with a sense of community and amenities such as parks, schools, libraries, and public baths were being discussed.

The 15-Minute City emerged as a response to our excessive use of the automobile. The dominance of the automobile travel in the United States is reflected in data reported by The National Household Travel Survey (NHTS). This survey showed that, in 2022, the average shopping trip was 5.6 miles, the average trip for childcare was 6.5 miles and the average trip to participate in a religious activity was 8.9 miles. In contrast, data presented by the National Bureau of Economic Research shows that “residents of the median US neighborhood only take 12.1% of their trips to basic amenities within a 15-minute walking radius.”

Key planning concepts underlying the 15-Minute city include neighborhoods, accessibility, walkability, and land use mix. In a paper published in 2023 in the journal Sustainable Cities and Society, Efthymis Papadopoulos and his colleagues suggest that the 15-Minute City bringsthe idea of living locally at the forefront of city planning”. The benefits of living locally include a lower carbon footprint, healthier residents, and stronger community bonds.

Strong community bonds exist in the 15-Minute City because neighbors have more face-to-face interaction with each other. These interactions occur as people go about their daily living. And the interactions that people in a neighborhood have with each other do not need to be intense or long lasting in nature. Indeed in a 2014 paper published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, Gillian Sandstom and Elizabeth Dunn showed that a brief exchange with a coffee shop barista (having a short conversation) enhances an individual’s happiness and sense of belonging. People living in amenity rich neighborhoods have a larger number of face-to-face interactions with other residents, exhibit higher levels of interpersonal trust, are less likely to experience social isolation and loneliness, are more willing to help their neighbors, and generally feel better about their community than people living in lower amenity neighborhoods. As noted by the aforementioned Papadopoulos and his colleagues, the15-Minute City begins to “address the problem of alienation and disengagement between the citizens”.

In the 15-Minute City the necessities of everyday life can be accessed within 15 minutes by using active modes of transport (Source: City of Fort Collins, CO)

As I listened to Carlos Moreno speak I thought about craft breweries and the role they might play in the 15-Minute City. As myself and others have argued before, craft breweries function as neighborhood gathering spots (aka Third Places) in cities, large and small, across the United States.

Coined by the urban Sociologist Ray Oldenburg, the term Third Place refers to places outside of home or work, where people congregate and interact. Writing for Brookings Institution, Stuart Butler and Carmen Diaz (2016) note that Third Places are “locations where we exchange ideas, have a good time, and build relationships”. Others have referred to them as the “Living Room of Society” and “Centers of Community” respectively.

Some observers suggest that craft breweries are a new genre of Third Place on the American landscape. These include George Homewood, Norfolk, Virginia’s director of planning and community development, who argues that craft breweries are “gathering places that are in many ways replacing things like libraries and recreation centers within a neighborhood”, while Jim Morrison, writing for The Smithsonian Magazine, describes craft breweries as “the evening analog to the third place of the morning coffeehouse.” Furthermore, many craft breweries are child and dog friendly, offering families a place where they can gather, interact, and relax. As such, they have an important role to play in the 15-Minute City.

One advantage that craft breweries have over many other Third Places (libraries, coffee shops, farmers markets etc.) is that they serve alcohol. As a stimulant, alcohol releases endorphins in our brains, allowing us to relax and be more amenable to interpersonal interactions. Research by the evolutionary psychologist Robin Dunbar has demonstrated that people who have a pub (he did his research in England) they they frequent on a regular basis “tend to be more socially engaged, feel more contented and are more likely to trust other members of their community than those who do not drink at all”.

The concept of the 15-Minute City got me thinking about breweries in my neighborhood. While 85% of Americans of legal drinking age live within ten miles of a craft brewery, I have no idea how many live within a 15-minute walk or bike ride of a craft brewery. The brewery closest to my house is a 23 minute walk or a seven-minute bike ride. There is a second (newly opened) that is a 13-minute bike ride. I guess I could always invest in a bicycle.

Earnest Brew Works (Westgate location) in Toledo, OH is a 7-minute bike ride (23-minute walk) from my house

Further Reading:

Jeffres, Leo W., Cheryl C. Bracken, Guowei Jian, and Mary F. Casey. 2009. The impact of Third Places on community quality of life. Applied Research Quality Life, Volume 4, Issue 4, pp. 333–345.

Papadopoulod, Efthymis, Alexandros Sdoukopoulos, and Ioannis Politis. 2023. Measuring compliance with the 15-minute city concept: State-of-the-art, major components and further requirements. Sustainable Cities and Society, Volume 99.

Sandstrom, Gillian M. and Elizabeth W. Dunn. 2014. Is efficiency overrated?: Minimal social interactions lead to belonging and positive affect. Social Psychological and Personality Science, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp. 437-442.

History

The Past on Tap: Ancient Beer in Celtic Europe

February 24, 2024 The Beer Professor Leave a comment

Last week I attended a lecture at the Toledo Museum of Art. The event was organized and hosted by the Toledo Society of the Archaeological Institute of America. The title of the lecture was “The Past on Tap: Archaeological Evidence for Ancient Alcohol in Iron Age Celtic Europe”, and delivered by Dr Bettina Arnold, Professor of Anthropology at University of Wisconsin Milwaukee.

Dr. Arnold’s lecture focused on presenting archaeologial evidence and analytical advances used in investigating feasting practices and brewing of malt and honey-based beverages during the period 1200 BC and 600 BC in Celtic Europe. The Celts were a collection of tribes who were unified by a shared culture and language. They originated in central and Western Europe, particularly central and eastern France, southern Germany and the Czech Republic. Subsequent migrations saw them extend their geographical footprint to include the British Isles, the Iberian Peninsula, and northern Italy. Despite their dispersed geography and reputation of being fierce warriors, it is worth noting that the Celts never established an empire (as the Romans did).

In her work as an archaeologist. Dr. Bettina has excavated Celtic burial mounds in southwest Germany. Among other items, Bettina discovered vessels that had been used to hold alcohol. Archaeologists use a variety of analytical techniques in their research, including organic residue analysis (ORA). ORA involves the investigation of organic residues that are trapped in, or adhered to, ancient artifacts. In seeking to understand what ancient peoples drank, the artifacts of interest are vessels that were used to store or consume alcohol. In addition to ORA, Professor Arnold also uses what she calls mortuary consumption evidence. Mortuary consumption evidence refers to the artifacts (e.g., drinking vessels) that are buried or entombed with a corpse. These often provide an indication of the status that the individual held within the society within which they lived.

The research of Professor Arnold and other scholars showed that the Celts made both beer and mead. The ancient beer would have been made with either wheat, barley, and millet. The items discovered by Bettina include a fully intact cauldron used for serving alcoholic beverages. Previous excavations by other archaeologists at a nearby site yielded nine drinking horns, one of which could hold nine pints of ancient ale. At feasts, beer and wine would have been brought to diners in flagons, where it was decanted into drinking horns, which were made of natural horn and often decorated with gold foil bands. The anthropologist Michael Dietler has called the Celts “prodigious drinkers” and “reckless inebriates”, while the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus referred to their “furious passion for drinking”. Their is no doubt that the Celts like to feast and drink, a practice that they hoped to continue in the afterlife, witness the drinking horns and a large bronze cauldron (used to hold mead) found at the grave of a Celtic chieftain’s burial site near Hochdorf in Germany. As Dr Arnold has stated, “the Celts believed in a type of BYOB afterlife. You had to bring alcohol with you and throw a big party when you got to the other side. A sign of a good leader was generosity.” The purpose of feasting and drinking was not just hedonistic pleasure. It had what one might call a political purpose, being a mechanism to strengthen ties with allies. The Celts that Professor Arnold has researched also drank wine, but this was not produced locally, being imported from the Mediterranean region.

A Celtic drinking horn from Tuttlingen in southwestern Germany. Tuttlingen was established as a Celtic settlement (Source: Wolfgang Sauber)

Research by Maxime Rageot and colleagues, published in the online academic journal PLoS ONE, suggests that beer consumption may have been socially stratified with elites drinking beer made from barley or wheat, with warriors consuming beer made with millet. The reasons for these differences are not, unfortunately, reported.

In a 2018 paper in The Journal of Medieval Monastic Studies, Max Nelson suggests that Celtic brewing traditions influenced monastic brewing that became common in parts of Western Europe during the Middle Ages. Written evidence suggests that, during the 9th century, European monasteries introduced hops as an ingredient in the brewing of beer during the 9th century. Nelson, however, cites archaeological evidence which suggests that this may not be the case, and that hops were being used by Celts in northern Italy in 6th century B.C. While hops functioned as preservatives (important in the days before pasteurization or refrigeration) Nelson (p. 59) notes that “besides its preservative function, the bitterness of hops could help balance out the taste of an ancient beer, which might otherwise have been overly sweet from malt, sour from bacterial contamination, or smoky from fire-brewing”. The Greek historian, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, called Celtic beer “a foul smelling liquor made from barley rotted in water”. Based on archaeological evidence found at early Iron Age settlement of Eberdingen– Hochdorf in Germany, Hans-Pete Sitka of the University of Honenheim suggests that this particular Celtic beer was“probably a dark, smoky, and slightly sour. A caramelised taste would have decreased the sourness. Floating yeast sometimes produces a light lemon taste. If flavouring agents such as mugwort and carrot seeds were added, this beverage would have had a very different taste from our typical modern beer.”

Towards the end of her lecture, Professor Arnold described attempts by a number of contemporary craft breweries to recreate ancient Celtic beer. This included Lakefront Brewery in Milwaukee, WI who worked with Arnold, to create ”a recipe inspired by evidence collected from the archaeological remains.” Based on organic residue analysis, the beer they tried to recreate, in addition to yeast, contained four ingredients – barley, honey, mint and meadowsweet. In terms of taste, the final product has been described as “smooth and pleasant — almost like a dry port, but with a minty, herbal tinge to it.” While Lakefront’s Chris Ranson described the ancient Celtic beer as “drinkable”, she doubted that there would be a sizable market for it among modern-day craft beer drinkers.

The Celtic people were not the only ancient society to brew beer. Nor were they the first. For example, around 10,000 BC, various hunter gatherer groups would periodically come together at Göbekli Tepe, a Neolithic archaeological site (home to the world’s oldest known megaliths) in eastern Turkey for the purposes of ritualistic feasting. Brewing vats and images of festivals have been discovered there by archaeologists, with the beer being made from fermented wild crops. In similar fashion, at Qiaotou in Zhejiang Province in China, archaeologists have discovered vessels containing residues of ingredients used to brew beer. The beer, according to the authors, was “likely served in rituals to commemorate the burial of the dead.” The Qiaotou site dates to around 7,000 BC.

Ancient beer may not have tasted much like the beer that we drink today. But it did serve a similar purpose in the sense that it brought people together and provided a mechanism through which people could relax and bond, much like it does today.

Further Reading:

In addition to the readings below you can learn more about the Celts by visiting the website of the Center for Celtic Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Dr. Arnold is also the founding editor of the electronic journal e-Keltoi: Journal of Interdisciplinary Celtic Studies.

Dietler, Michael. 1994. Quenching Celtic thirst. Archaeology, Volume 47, Issue 3, pp. 44-48.

Nelson, Max. 2018. Celtic and Egyptian beer-production traditions and the origins of monastic brewing. Journal of Medieval Monastic Studies, Volume 7, pp. 47-77.

Rageot, Maxime, Angela Mötsch, Birgit Schorer, David Bardel, Alexandra Winkler, Federica Sacchetti, Bruno Chaume, Phillips Della Casa, Stephen Buckley, Sara Cafisdo, Janine Fries-Knoblach, Dirk Krause’s, Thomas Hope, Philipp Stockhsmmer, Cynthiaanne Spiteri. 2019. New insights into Early Celtic consumption practices: Organic analyses of local and imported pottery from Vix-Mont Lassois. PLoS ONE, Volume 14, Issue 6.

Sitka, Hans-Peter. 2011. Early Iron Age and Late Mediaeval malt finds
from Germany—attempts at reconstruction of early Celtic brewing and the taste of Celtic beer. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp. 41-48.

Dietrich, Oliver Dietrich, Manfred Heun, Jens Notroff, Klaus Schmidt, and Martin Zarnkow. 2012. The role of cult and feasting in the emergence of Neolithic communities. New evidence from Göbekli Tepe, south-eastern Turkey. Antiquity, Volume 86, Issue 333, pp. 674–695.

Wang, Jiajing, Leping Jiang, and Hanlong Sun. 2021. Early evidence for beer drinking in a 9000-year-old platform mound in southern China, PLOS ONE, Volume 16, Issue 8.

Alcohol Regulations

Don’t Mention Santa Claus

February 16, 2024 The Beer Professor Leave a comment

Earlier this week, I was in Salt Lake City International Airport. I had flown in from Detroit, MI and had a couple of hours layover before catching my flight to San Jose, CA. As per my normal operating procedure when I have an airport layover, I sought out somewhere to have a couple of beers. My search landed me in the taproom and restaurant of Red Rock Brewery. Established in 1994, Red Rock has been a pillar of Salt Lake’s craft beer scene for close to 30 years. Their main establishment is in downtown Salt Lake City.

Red Rock Brewpub and Restaurant at Salt Lake City International Airport

I found an empty seat at the bar and perused the beer menu. I opted for a beer called Monkey Mind, a Hazy IPA. As I was looking at the menu, something stood out; all ten of the beers on draft had an identical ABV – 5%. Yet, the Red Rock beers that were available in cans had ABVs ranging from 5.5% to 11%. I quickly figured what was going on, which my bartender quickly confirmed. Under Utah law, it is illegal to sell any beer on draft whose ABV exceeds 5%. Another fun fact regarding alcohol in Utah is that, at 0.05%, it has the strictest DUI limit in the country. Anyway, as I was enjoying my beer at the bar, I quickly discovered another quirk of Utah law. A young couple sat down next to me. The female member of the duo was interested in something light and refreshing. The bartender described two Lagers/Pilsners they had on draft. However, when she asked if she could sample them to aid in her decision making, she was stymied by Utah law – free samples are prohibited.

All beers on draft at Red Rock Brewery were 5% ABV, while the ABV of beers in bottles and cans ranged from 5.5% to 11% ABV

Had I been making this trip five years earlier, the strongest draft beer I would have been able to buy in a bar or brewery taproom in Utah would have been 4% ABV. This limit had been in place since the end of Prohibition in 1933. New legislation, however, passed in 2019, raised this limit to 5%.

Utah, of course, is home to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, whose members take many of their rules for living from the Book of Mormon. Estimates of the share of the state’s population who are Mormon range from 42% to 67%. The Mormon faith prohibits the consumption of a range of unhealthy substances, including alcohol, coffee, and tobacco. According to an article written by Kathy Stephenson in the Salt Lake City Tribune, “the government-controlled liquor system has always walked a fine line between providing alcohol for legal adults and being fully separate from the beliefs of the predominant religion: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, whose members (including a majority Utah officials setting the state’s liquor laws) are taught to abstain from alcohol.”

The alcohol industry is highly regulated in the United States, with almost all of that regulation being overseen by state agencies. In the case of Utah, that agency is the Utah Department of Alcoholic Beverage Services (DABS). Created by the Utah State Legislature in 1935, DABS’ is charged with “the responsibility of conducting, licensing and regulating the sale of alcoholic beverages in a manner and at prices which reasonably satisfy the public demand and protect the public interest, including the rights of citizens who do not wish to be involved with alcoholic beverages.”

I should point out that in writing this blog. I am not picking on poor old Utah. I could easily have written about the state of Indiana. On a recent trip there, I was aghast to discover, upon arriving at my hotel, that I could not buy a cold can of beer to take to my room to enjoy. You guessed it, Indiana law prohibited it. And it was not only my hotel where I was unable to purchase a cold beer to go. The same law applied to gas stations, grocery stores and pharmacies across the state. A 2023 lawsuit, in which plaintiffs tried to have this law overturned, failed. At the time of writing, Indiana is the only state in the union where buying cold beer to-go is illegal. That could soon change, however. A bill currently making its way through the Tennessee legislature would see the same restrictions regarding cold beer sales coming into effect in that state. The hope is that, by passing such a bill, the number of alcohol-related automobile accidents will be reduced – who wants to drink a warm beer behind the wheel? Meanwhile, in my own state of Ohio, it is illegal to “represent, portray, or make any reference to Santa Claus” when advertising alcohol.

Choice, Craft Beer

Craft Beer and The Paradox of Choice

February 8, 2024 The Beer Professor Leave a comment

A recent article in the New York Times suggested the emergence of a new trend in the world of craft beer. In an industry where brewers have provided consumers with an almost endless choice of beer styles and variations thereof, Joshua Bernstein suggests that brewers and retailers are cutting back on the number of different beers they offer. As an example, Bernstein cites Suarez Family Brewery in Livingston, NY who used to offer its customers eight different beers. That was pre-COVID-19 pandemic. Post-pandemic they have shrunk that number to two craft beers. Indeed as I started writing this blog entry I visited the Suarez website and, sure enough two beers were available for taproom visitors to purchase – Qualify Pils and Hecto Hoppy Pale Ale. Retailers such as Whole Foods have also been reducing the number of different beers they offer customers, partly to be able to devote more shelf space to faster growing segments such as Ready-to-Drink cocktails.

In making the decision to produce only two beers, the owners of Suarez Family Brewery are partly inspired by “the model of traditional European taverns and breweries that serve only one or two beers at a time”. On two recent trips to Europe I experienced this phenomena. In Osnabrück, Germany I spent an evening in Rampendal Brewery where my choice of beers were a Dunkel, a Weizen, and a Helles Lager. At Brasserie du Molard, a nice little brewery in the heart of Geneva, Switzerland, I was similarly offered a choice of three beers – a Witbier, a Lager, and an Amber Ale.

Rampendahl Brewery in Osnabrück, Germany where my choice of beers were Dunkel, a Weizen, and a Helles Lager

Craft breweries who have opted to downsize (or who never upsized in the first place) offer a number of explanations. According to Dan Suarez of Suarez Family Brewery, too many beers on tap can cause customers “a lot of agony over choosing”. This is an interesting observation, and one supported by Barry Schwartz, a Professor Emeritus in Social Theory and Social Action at Swarthmore College. One of his areas of research, sitting at the intersection of psychology and economics, is consumer decision making. In 2004, Schwartz published a book titled “The Paradox of Choice”, which carried the subtitle “Why More is Less”. It is a fascinating read. The basic premise of Schwartz’s thesis is Americans have too many choices, whether that be when purchasing a breakfast cereal, a coffee maker, or an automobile. Intuitively, we think of choice as a good thing and more choice as better than less choice. Schwartz, however, suggests that while some choice is good, too much choice is bad. It is bad because it generates anxiety for the individual making the choice.

As noted by Schwartz (p. 5), “autonomy and freedom of choice are critical to our well being, and choice is critical to freedom and autonomy. Nonetheless, though modern Americans have more choice than any group of people ever has had before, and thus, presumably, more freedom and autonomy, we don’t seem to be benefiting from it psychologically”

We are victims of and suffering from what some have termed choice overload. Too much choice taxes our cognitive systems. We feel overwhelmed. We second-guess ourselves, wondering if we made the best decision. The more choices we have, the more likely we are to be less satisfied with the decision we make, perhaps even regretting it. Anyone who has stepped into a Home Depot and picked out a new paint color for their master bedroom will know what I mean. If a company offers a product (say a coffee maker) with a large number of feature variations and in a wide variety of styles/colors consumers may struggle to figure out which one is best for them. Choice overload can cause us to feel overwhelmed and even delay decision-making.

Interestingly (at least I find it interesting) the term choice overload was coined by Alvin Toffler in his 1970 book Future Shock. Not only did he coin it, but he predicted it. Looking to the future Toffler suggested “the people of the future may suffer not from an absence of choice, but from a “paralyzing surfeit of it.” (p. 264). While Toffler was primarily focused on information overload, his basic premise also applies to products.

In their 1998 Annual Report, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas provided data on the overwhelming number of choices facing consumers. They did so by comparing the early 1970s to the late 1990s. For example, in the early 1970s Colgate offered consumers the choice of two different toothpastes. By the late 1990s consumers could choose from 17 different toothpastes. Over the same period, the number of television screen sizes increased from 5 to 15, McDonalds’ menu items from 13 to 43, and Frito Lay chip varieties from 10 to 78.

What about beer? In same report the Dallas Fed reported the number of SKUs (aka Stock Keeping Units) for a variety of retail items. An SKU code is a “unique code consisting of letters and numbers that identify characteristics about each product, such as manufacturer, brand, style, color, and size.” For example, if a manufacturer introduces a new product (e.g., a new breakfast cereal) or the same product in a different size (e.g., 36oz in addition to 24oz) it is assigned its own unique SKU. Between 1980 and 1998, the number of SKU codes for beer increased from 25 to 187. This was, of course, before the craft beer revolution went into overdrive. Between 2008 and 2015, the number of craft beer SKUs increased from 2,274 to 7,400. While the number of craft beer SKUs have dropped in recent years, the amount of choice availability to craft beer drinkers remains extensive.

The increasing number of craft breweries (there are now over 9,000 in the United States) and SKUs definitely give the craft beer drinker more choice. But is it too much? Carlos Brito seems to think so. In 2016 interview, the then CEO of Anheuser Busch suggested that craft beer consumers were “tired of choice”. Hardly a surprising statement from the man whose company was seeing their market share being eroded by increasing consumer demand for craft beer. As Bob Pease, President and CEO of the Brewers Association suggested, “It’s a hypothesis being willed into existence for the greater good of one brewery.”

Most craft beer drinkers disagree with Mr. Brito’s assessment. Indeed, a survey conducted in the same year found that 58% of craft beer drinkers craved even more flavor options than were available to them at that time. A 2013 study examining the behaviors of craft beer drinkers noted that a large number of craft beer drinkers “find satisfaction in discovering new beers and breweries” For such drinkers, “loyalty to one brewery will be difficult . . . if new products are not constantly being offered.” This is why most craft breweries offer patrons to opportunity to try five or six of its beers by purchasing a flight. The growth of beer tourism is another indicator that craft beer drinkers yearn choice. A 2016 study by Jennifer Francioni and Erick T. Byrd found that the main reason individuals engage in beer tourism is to taste new beer.

A flight of beer at Ill Mannered Brewing Company in Powell, OH

An interesting exception to choice overload are individuals who consider themselves to be ‘experts’ with regard to the product they are choosing. A 2014 paper by Alexander Chernev and his colleagues note that “it has been shown that for consumers who are unfamiliar with the product category, choices from larger assortments are more likely to lead to choice deferral and weaker preferences for the selected alternative than choices from smaller assortments. In contrast, for expert consumers, the impact of assortment size is reversed, leading to greater likelihood of choice deferral and weaker preferences for the chosen alternative in the context of smaller rather than larger assortments”. In other words, people with product knowledge may have a tougher time choosing when they have a smaller number of options from which to choose.

Choice abounds at Yellow Springs Brewery in Yellow Springs, OH

The extent to which craft beer drinkers are ‘experts’ when it comes to the product they consume can, I am sure, be debated. Some craft beer drinkers are undoubtedly more knowledgeable than others. Indeed, in the aforementioned 2013 study of the behaviors of craft beer drinkers, the authors identify four types of craft beer drinkers – enthusiasts, explorers, loyalists, and novices. Of the four types, enthusiasts are the most knowledgeable craft beer drinkers, priding “themselves on trying all the different beers from different breweries and seek to acquire knowledge about how the beer is made and the ingredients that are used in the process.” I know a lot of people who drink craft beer on a regular basis. Most of them, I would consider fairly knowledgeable. And if not knowledgeable, then certainly very interested in the product and sampling ones they have not tried before.

The examples of breweries cutting back on the number of beers they brew in the New York Times article are small in number, anecdotal even. I seriously question how widespread this phenomenon is. I visit a lot of breweries throughout the year. I can’t recall one that I have visited in the last twelve months that has what I would consider a small number of beers on tap. Indeed, one of the most popular craft beer bars in Toledo, OH (where I live) is an establishment called The Casual Pint. It regularly has at least 25 different beers on draft. It is a very popular venue for local craft beer drinkers. No one I see in there looks particularly stressed or anxious when they are selecting which beer to purchase. In all honesty, most seem quite happy and relaxed and, if anything, appear to find the extensive beer list as a benefit and not a burden.

Further Reading:

Chernev, Alexander, Ulf Bockenholt, and Joseph Goodman. 2015. Choice Overload: A Conceptual Review and Meta-Analysis. 2015 Journal of Consumer Psychology, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp. 333–358.

Schwartz, Barry. 2004. The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less. HarperCollins Publishers.

History, Scholarship, Social Drinking

Drunk

January 28, 2024 The Beer Professor Leave a comment

Drunk is both an adjective and a noun. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines the former as “having the faculties impaired by alcohol”, and the latter as “one who is drunk”. Drunk is also the name of a book written by Edward Slingerland. The full title is “Drunk: How We Sipped, Danced, and Stumbled Our Way to Civilization”. It is a fascinating book and one I have just finished reading. The author, Slingerland, is Distinguished University Scholar and Professor of Philosophy at the University of British Columbia in Canada. While Slingerland is an academic, Drunk is a book that is written for a general audience.

The front cover of “Drunk” by Edward Slingerland

The basic thesis underpinning Slingerland’s treatise is that alcohol has played, and continues to play, an important role in society; a role that is generally beneficial both to the individual and to society as a collective entity. A key characteristic of alcohol is that it triggers the release of endorphins whose effects include enhancing a person’s overall mood, while decreasing anxiety and stress levels. In our transformed, more relaxed state, alcohol helps us “with the communal demands of being human” (p. 106).

Central to Slingerland’s thesis is that part of the human brain called the prefrontal cortex (PFC), which “plays a role in regulating emotions in interpersonal relationships and social situations.” Alcohol, however, temporarily disarms the PFC, the locus of rational thinking and self-control, and make us more playful, creative, emotional, and trusting. As a result, consumption of alcohol facilities social bonding among people who may not otherwise be pre-disposed to bond and work cooperatively. As noted by Slingerland, alcohol “functions to bind together non-related individuals” (p. 257) Indeed it has fulfilled this role for thousands of years.

One of the many examples given by Slingerland is Göbekli Tepe, a Neolithic archaeological site (home to the world’s oldest known megaliths) in eastern Turkey where disparate and otherwise unconnected groups of hunter-gatherers periodically met for the purposes of ritualistic feasting. Brewing vats and images of festivals dating to around 10,000 BC have been discovered at Göbekli Tepe.
The ancient beer that was brewed played a central role in the feasting that took place there. According to the Archaeologist Oliver Dietrich and his colleagues “at the dawn of the Neolithic, hunter-gatherers congregating at Göbekli Tepe created social and ideological cohesion through the carving of decorated pillars, dancing, feasting—and, almost certainly, the drinking of beer made from fermented wild crops.” This pattern of feasting and consuming alcohol was replicated in many ancient pre-agricultural societies throughout the world.

Göbekli Tepe in eastern Turkey, an ancient site of feasting and drinking of beer made from fermented wild crops

Slingerland provides numerous more contemporary examples of the benefits of moderate alcohol consumption. He talks about visiting the Whiskey Room on a Google campus where coders retire with colleagues to have a wee dram and engage in creative back-and-forth of ideas. He also tells of getting together with his graduate students and faculty members, post-seminar, in a pub on the UBC campus. Much of the conversation revolved around research ideas, with the end result being the establishment of a new research center, a multi-million dollar grant, and a slew of high impact research projects.

It should be noted that in addition to the real-world examples of the benefits of moderate alcohol consumption, Slingerland does cite and discuss many laboratory-based scientific studies which provide support for his central thesis. With respect to maximizing creativity, how much alcohol is beneficial? That particular sweet spot is a blood alcohol content of 0.08, or the equivalent of two beers with an an ABV of around 5%.

Slingerland is an advocate of social drinking. Indeed, in his final chapter he warns against the dangers of drinking alone. He cites the work of Robin Dunbar, an evolutionary psychologist. In 2017, Dunbar co-authored a paper in which he explored the functional benefits of moderate alcohol consumption. In particular, he found that people who have a pub they they frequent on a regular basis “tend to be more socially engaged, feel more contented and are more likely to trust other members of their community than those who do not drink at all”. Visiting the same pub on a regular basis often results in engaging in social drinking with other regular customers, thus providing patrons with a strong social network. Summing up Dunbar’s findings, “moderate, social drinking brings people together, keeps them connected to their communities, and lubricates the exchange of information and building of networks (p. 192).

Slingerland also touches on a topic that is close to my heart as a professional academic – the value of attending an academic conference, as opposed to participating via Zoom or a similar communication platform. As he so eloquently states, “a unique intellectual benefit provided by in-person academic or professional conferences is the networking, brainstorming, and idea-honing that goes on over meals, over coffee breaks, and most of all informal venues, as the day draws to an end and the intoxicants come out” (p. 180). Indeed it was at an academic conference in New York City in 2012 that a conversation, over a beer, with a colleague from Kennesaw State University was the catalyst for my first paper on the craft beer industry; thus The Beer Professor was born. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, many scientific organizations offer hybrid conferences, whereby participants can choose to participate in-person or virtually. Sadly, those who choose the latter option miss out on the added value that in-person attendance bestows. As Slingerland observes, “even the best videoconference is a poor substitute for the visceral buzz of interpersonal chemistry, catalyzed by chemical intoxicants, that comes from in-person socializing in pubs and cafes” (p. 181).

While Slingerland’s book outlines the benefits of drinking alcohol, it is important to note that he warns against its excessive consumption. Indeed, his final chapter is devoted to the dark side of consuming alcohol, with a discussion of topics such as the negative health consequences, drunk driving, and the role of alcohol in contributing to violence against women. He also discusses the discovery of distillation, by which humans were able to produce spirits whose Alcohol By Volume levels are significantly higher than that of either beer or wine. According to Slingerland, “the many functional benefits of alcohol notwithstanding, distillation radically increases its danger to both individuals and society” (p. 237). During the Industrial Revolution in Europe, beers such as Guinness were considered a temperance drink, while high potency distilled spirits were not. As noted by Mark Schrad , writing in Foreign Policy, the growing availability of distilled spirits in early 19th century Europe meant that “once jovial communal celebrations devolved into drunken riots“, while “murder, other crimes, and arson all increased”. This became a concern for European Socialists who saw the devastating effects of spirits on the working class, while lining the pockets of profit-minded and predatory capitalists. In Germany, the Social Democratic Party called for a nationwide boycott of schnapps but not beer. Emile Vandervelde, leader of the Belgian Labour Party and President of the Second International (a collaborative network of European socialist parties) held the position that there’s “no real difference between the moderate use of fermented beer or wine and the complete abstinence from alcohol.” Spirits, not beer and wine, were the real problem.

Slingerland’s book is a lively read. It is well written and follows a logical flow. Anyone interested in the history of alcohol and its role in societies, ranging from ancient to modern, will find it a worthwhile purchase.

Further Reading:

Dunbar, Robin I. M., Jacques Launay, Rafael Wlodarski, Cole Robertson, Eiluned Pearce, James Carney, and Pádraig MacCarron. 2016. Functional Benefits of (Modest) Alcohol Consumption. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, Volume 3, Pages 118–133.

Schrad, Mark Lawrence. 2021. How Europe’s Temperance Movement Saved Beer. Foreign Policy, September 26.

Slingerland, Edward. 2021. Drunk: How We Sipped, Danced, and Stumbled Our Way to Civilization. Little, Brown Spark Publishers.

Craft Breweries, Gentrification, Neighborhoods

Barrio Logan – Gentrification or Gentefication?

January 14, 2024 The Beer Professor Leave a comment

The role that craft breweries have played in the revitalization of distressed urban neighborhoods has received a significant amount of attention in both the popular media and academic literature. Indeed, it is a topic I have addressed several times in previous blog entries (for example see here and here). The relationship between craft breweries and neighborhood revitalization is a complicated one. In some neighborhoods, the introduction of a craft brewery may be the catalyst for revitalization of the neighborhood, while in others craft breweries arrive after the revitalization process is already underway. An example of the former includes the Ohio City neighborhood in Cleveland, OH, while the NoDa neighborhood of Charlotte, NC provides an example of the latter. Some see the revitalization of a distressed neighborhood as a positive development, while others view it through a negative lens. The latter group point to the displacement of incumbent residents and businesses who can no longer afford the higher rents that inevitably come with a revitalized neighborhood. – the term gentrification is often used to describe such a process. Gentrification can be defined as the “a demographic and economic shift that displaces established working-class communities and communities of color in favor of wealthier newcomers and real estate development companies.”

No large American city is exempt from gentrification. This includes the city of San Diego, CA where approximately 30% of census tracts have undergone gentrification since 2000. Late last year I had the opportunity to visit Barrio Logan, a San Diego neighborhood where gentrification has been an issue of ongoing debate.

Barrio Logan is a community of approximately 4,800 people in south central San Diego. Just over 70% of the population are Hispanic. Indeed the neighborhood has been predominantly Hispanic since the early 20th century when refugees from the Mexican Revolution settled there. The neighborhood is bordered by United States Naval Base San Diego to the southeast, Interstate 5 (built in 1963) to the northeast, and the San Diego Unified Port District and bay to the southwest. A central focus of the neighborhood is Chicano Park, which has been described as “the geographic and emotional heart of Barrio Logan” and “one of San Diego’s most culturally significant landmarks.” Established in 1970, the park is located beneath Interstate 5 and the on-ramps for the San Diego-Coronado Bridge. With over 80 murals, the park has the largest collection of outdoor murals in the world. The murals focus on Chicano culture, “ranging from Mesoamerican influences to local San Diego Chicano struggles”. In 2022, Time Out listed Barrio Logan in its top ten list of the world’s coolest neighborhoods.

Barrio Logan (Source: Barrio Logan Community Plan)

Many of the Chicano Park murals have been painted on the pylons that support the Coronado Bridge

One of the most famous murals is “Hasta La Bahia. Translated, this means “**All the way to the bay**,” refers to a campaign throughout the 1970s and ’80s to extend the park to the San Diego Bay

On my recent visit there, I had the opportunity to participate in a group walking tour of the Barrio Logan neighborhood. Our tour guide was David Favela, owner of one of the neighborhood’s breweries, Border X Brewing. We started our tour at Border X, where David provided us with a history of both the brewery and its relationship to the neighborhood.

Since its opening in 2013, the brewery has served as a community gathering spot, a neighborhood Third Place if you will. In a recent interview David also noted that “We’re serving the community that exists today. We’re not waiting for a new community to displace them.” The last statement is a nod to gentrification, a topic that is discussed in more detail below.

David Favela, owner of Border X Brewing, tell us about the history of the brewery

After sampling four different beers at Border X, David took us through a transect of the neighborhood, at the conclusion of which we arrived at Mujeres Brew House. Mujeres is owned by David’s wife Carmen Velasco-Favela and her business partner Esthela Davila. It is a brewery with an interesting origin story. In 2019, a survey revealed that 60% of Border X’s customers were female. This gave Velasco-Favela, who was then BorderX’s marketing director, the idea to start a women’s brew club. The brew club functioned primarily as an educational forum, with guest speakers covering every conceivable topic from the history of beer to how the stuff is made. The speakers’ series proved highly successful and soon the idea of opening a female-owned brewery was mooted by Velasco-Favela. When a vacant building became available in the neighborhood, the idea quickly evolved to become a reality. On July 1, 2020 Mujeres Brew House opened its doors.

David talking to our tour group at Mujeres Brew House, with the freeway on-ramp as a backdrop.

Many of the beers at both Border X and Mujeres Brew House are inspired by David and Carmen’s Hispanic heritage. For example, at Border X we sampled their Blood Saison. This particular beer, whose ingredients include the leaves of the hibiscus, is inspired by Agua de Jamaica, a hibiscus iced tea. At Mujeres, the La Jefita Tamarindo Hefeweizen includes fresh tamarind pulp which is imported from Mexico. Both David and Carmen are running breweries which brew great beer and appear to be contributing to the vibrancy of the Barrio Logan neighborhood. More formal recognition of David’s efforts came in 2020 when he was a semi-finalist for the prestigious James Beard Award in the Outstanding Wine, Spirits, or Beer Producer category. The objective of the awards is to “is to recognize exceptional talent and achievement in the culinary arts, hospitality, media, and broader food system, as well as a demonstrated commitment to racial and gender equity, community, sustainability, and a culture where all can thrive.”. Although he never won, being a semi-finalist was a recognition of the what David has achieved at Border X.

David Favela in front of one Barrio Logan’s murals

One of the issues that I raised with David during our tour was that of gentrification. Rather than experiencing gentrification, David suggested that the neighborhood had actually underwent a process he called ‘gentefication’. According to one definition, “Gentefication happens when college-educated, upwardly mobile Latinos invest in neighborhoods they’ve grown up in.” In short, the difference between gentrification and gentefication is that in the former it is outsiders with no ties to the neighborhood who invest, while in the latter it is people with ties to the neighborhood (and in some cases current residents) who invest. The word gentefication is derived from “la gente” (“the people” in Spanish), suggesting “grassroots, Latino-led redevelopment of the community.”

While gentefication has undoubtedly occurred in Barrio Logan, so has gentrification. And indeed, both may be having a similar impact. In a paper published in 2021, Emanuel Delgado and Kate Swanson suggest that both processes (not just gentrification) have contributed to increased rents, making it difficult for some longer-term residents and businesses to remain in the neighborhood. They cite the cases of Mesheeka and the Chicano Art Gallery, two local galleries, closed due to escalating rents. Local residents such as Maritza Garcia, who works with the Environmental Health Coalition, are fighting back against further gentrification. The city appears to be listening. The 2023 Community Plan for the neighborhood “seeks to limit the displacement of residents”. Policies identified in the Plan to facilitate this include working with development applicants to provide very-low and low income affordable housing, promoting homebuyer assistance programs for moderate-income buyers, and encouraging compliance with State and local affordability requirements to ensure an adequate supply of affordable housing. But residents are not depending upon the City to address gentrification. The Barrio Logan Community Land Trust Committee has been established to purchase land, with the objective of using it in a way that is beneficial to the community. Community Land Trusts are recognized as one of a number of best practices when it comes to fighting gentrification. I have visited Barrio Logan twice in recent years. As an outsider, it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the state of play with regards to the changes which have taken place in the neighborhood in recent years. All I will say is that I enjoy visiting Barrio Logan, and find it a vibrant and friendly neighborhood. And, of course, it has two wonderful breweries.

One Barrio Logan resident makes their feelings on gentrification clear

Further Reading:

Delgado, Emanuel and Kate Swanson. 2021. Gentefication in the barrio: Displacement and urban change in Southern California. Journal of Urban Affairs, Volume 43, Number 7, pp. 925-940.

Rosen, Martin and James Fisher. 2001. Chicano Park and the Chicano Park Murals: Barrio Logan, City of San Diego, California. The Public Historian , Volume 23, Number 4, pp. 91-111.

Cities, Craft Breweries

Craft Breweries and Cities: Perspectives from the Field

December 22, 2023 The Beer Professor Leave a comment

I was in San Diego, CA last month. My main reason for going was to attend the annual North American Meetings of the Regional Science Association International. The conference was excellent and, in addition to learning about current research being done by fellow Regional Scientists, it was an occasion to re-connect with old friends and colleagues. It was also, however, an opportunity to participate in an event not connected with the conference – a panel discussion focused on the future of craft breweries and cities.

The panel discussion was organized by my friend, Julie Wartell and her colleague Vince Vasquez. Earlier this year, Julie and Vince, had published a book titled “Craft Breweries and Cities: Perspectives from the Field“. They had invited me to contribute a chapter on the topic of craft breweries as neighborhood assets. I happily accepted their invitation and, along with it, the challenge of saying everything I wanted to say on the topic in no more than 15 double-spaced pages. For those who are interested, my chapter explored the role that craft breweries play in the adaptive reuse of abandoned buildings, neighborhood transformation, and serving as neighborhood gathering spots (aka Third Places). The panel discussion was partly an event to promote Julie and Vince’s book, but also to open up the topic (and discussion thereof) to a broader audience. In addition to myself, Julie, and Vince, Russ Gibbon of Blue Dome Consultants joined us on the panel.

Blind Lady Ale House’s promoted our even on their website

Our host for the event was Blind Lady Ale House (also known by the acronym BLAH). Established in 2009, BLAH describes itself as “one of San Diego’s original indie beer bars and a pioneer in the Farm to Pizza movement in San Diego” and “one of San Diego’s earliest “nano breweries.” Blind Lady is located in Uptown San Diego, and is a vibrant hub of activity. They have live jazz every Thursday, vinyl nights on Friday and Saturday, and industry night on Monday. Our panel discussion that evening was followed by a performance by the Barnacle Boys. Speaking of our panel discussion, each of the panelists spoke about their respective chapters for about five minutes each. In addition, Jeff Motch, the owner of BLAH, provided his insights on the current state of the craft brewing industry.

The Barnacle Boys performing at Blind Lady Ale House

I have read a lot of books about the craft brewing industry. Many of these have been written by academics, while others have been authored by well-known brewery owners (e.g. Ken Grossman of Sierra Nevada Brewing Co. and Tony Magee of Lagunitas Brewing Company). In the latter, the authors focus on their own personal story and their journey to starting and growing a successful craft brewery business. The book by edited by Julie and Vince is a little different, however. Yes, there are contributions from academics such as me, and a chapter co-authored by Greg Koch of Stone Brewing. Many of the contributions, however, are from what might be broadly termed practitioners; people who work with the craft beer industry in some capacity. These include Kevin Ham (Director of Economic Development for the City of Vista, CA), Dustin Hauck (Hauck Architecture) who helps design craft breweries, Russ Gibbon (Blue Dome Consultants LLC) who assists craft breweries in navigating the swamp-like regulatory environment, Omar Passons (a former land use attorney), and Bart Watson (Chief Economist of the Brewers Association).

The front cover of Craft Breweries and Cities: Perspectives from the Field

As an academic, I found the chapters by practitioners to be especially fascinating. This is mainly because they bring a completely different perspective to a topic than that often brought by those of us in academia. They bring a voice that, while different, is equally (maybe more) valuable. These are individuals who work with breweries and who are focused on finding solutions to problems and challenges. They do this by bringing their unique knowledge and expertise to the table. In many respects, they are focused on making the world a better place by getting things done – in many of the cases discussed in this book, the “getting things done” is assisting with the opening of a new brewery. As someone who researches and writes about the craft brewing industry, most of my focus is on the brewers and the breweries that provide me with beer. Contributing to this book and participating in this panel discussion was a reminder that there are many other people who are working, often quietly in the background, to help the industry be successful.

From left to right: Vince Vasquez, Russ Gibbon, and Julie Wartell who all shared their insights on the future of craft breweries and cities

Jeff Motch, the owner of Blind Lady Ale House, shares his thoughts’

Further Reading:

Wartell, Julie and Vince Vasquez. Craft Breweries and Cities: Perspectives from the Field. Routledge Publishers.

AB InBev, Brewery Closures, Craft Breweries, Macro-brewers, Ownership

The De-Platforming of Platform: A Cautionary Tale

November 13, 2023 The Beer Professor Leave a comment

Between 2011 and 2017, in their attempts to corner a share of the burgeoning craft beer market, AB InBev purchased ten American craft breweries. With each acquisition, craft beer drinkers and supporters of locally owned breweries, such as myself, felt a sense of dismay and disappointment. In 2019, AB InBev purchased yet another craft brewery. For me this one hit a little closer to home. Platform Brewing Company was located in my state, Ohio. Platform’s home city of Cleveland is only two hours west of where I live. To the owners of Platform, the acquisition was greeted as a harbinger of so many good things for the brand. Platform would have access to the vast resources of AB InBev, thus allowing them to build their brand, while retaining autonomy in day-to-day decision making – the best of both worlds in other words. Sadly, less than four years after acquiring Platform. AB InBev did the unthinkable – they announced the closure of their Cleveland brewery. To me this was a tremendously sad announcement, not only because of the inevitable job losses, but also because Platform had delivered so much to the Cleveland craft beer scene.

Platform Brewing Company opened its doors on July 2, 2014. The new brewery was located in Cleveland’s vibrant Ohio City neighborhood. As with many other craft breweries across the country it engaged in adaptive reuse, with the brewery moving into an abandoned space that started life in 1915 as a Czechoslovakian social hall, complete with bar and bowling alley. In an nod to the building’s history, Platform’s owners Paul Benner, Justin Carson, Shaun Yasaki and Greg Benner reclaimed as much of the building’s original floor as they could and used it for bar tops, flooring and signage. They placed a bowling machine close to the taproom’s entrance.

In addition to brewing and selling beer, Platform’s owners had a much more expansive vision for the brewery. Their desire was that it function as a small business incubator for budding home brewers who had a yearning to commercialize their hobby. Four times a year, one lucky individual got the opportunity to work as a brewer’s apprentice at Platform. From designing the recipe, to brewing the beer, and learning about the business side of running a brewery, the brewery aspired to provide a “platform” from which budding commercial brewers could learn.

Platform was also good for the Ohio City neighborhood. Darren Cross, owner of a nearby Cleveland Brew Shop, a home brewing supply store, credited Platform with being “a catalyst for getting the neighborhood going a bit”.

Within a few years of opening Platform was posting impressive growth numbers, and by 2018 was producing 27,000 barrels of beer. In addition to an ever-broadening distribution footprint, Platform opened up taprooms in both Columbus, OH and Cincinnati, OH. Such was Platform’s success, it was soon on the radar of the behemoth that is AB InBev and, in August 2019, the Belgian-based multinational corporation announced the acquisition of Ohio brewery. This was good news (right?), At least it was to one of Platform’s owners Paul Brenner. Commenting upon the acquisition, Benner had this to say:

“In speaking with the other craft brewery founders in Brewers Collective [A-B’s craft brewery arm], we know partnering with Anheuser-Busch means we will have the resources and the autonomy to bring our vision for Platform Beer Co. to life”

Furthermore, according to Benner:

“Being able to continue leading the day-to-day operations was an important factor in our decision and we have no doubt that this partnership will benefit our loyal staff and passionate customer base.”

In short, AB InBev would bring resources to the brand, while also respecting Platform’s autonomy. Surely this would ensure a bright future for the brewery; sadly, it did not.

In announcing the closure of the Cleveland brewery, AB InBev noted that it would continue to produce three beers that had been part of Platform’s portfolio. Interestingly, these are all IPAs – Haze Jude IPA, Odd Future Imperial IPA, and Canalway IPA. AB InBev did not say where these three beers would be produced. Commenting upon the closure one loyal Platform customer, David Sefcik, stated, “It’s just sad. It’s a sad thing that a big company would close something that means so much to the community”. I have to agree with Mr. Sefcik. It is sad, incredibly sad. A brewery that had once been an integral part of Cleveland’s craft beer scene being gutted by the world’s largest brewer, now reduced to three solitary beers.

So, what happened to Platform (and its beers) under AB InBev’s stewardship. In a highly insightful article published on GoodBeerHunting.com, Kate Bernot provides us with some clues. Among other things, Bernot suggests that AB InBev oversaw a decline in the sale of Platform beers in chain retail outlets such as grocery stores. In 2018, before being acquired by AB InBev, Platform produced 28,000 barrels of beer. In 2021, after the acquisition, the brewery’s production levels had dipped to 22,500 barrels. A major issue, according to Bernot, with respect to AB InBev’s oversight of Platform was “Inconsistent sales priorities and changes within ABI’s craft sales force”. One former post-acquisition Platform employee told Bernot, “Sales priorities changed at Platform pretty frequently and it was hard to get a grip on what our goals were” with the result that “sales team often struggled to maintain focus to build particular brands”.

Bernot uses some interesting language to capture AB InBev’s attitude towards Platform. Phrases such as “minor irritation”, “lost in the shuffle”, “a footnote, and left “by the wayside” indicate, to me at least, an owner who was not fit for purpose and negligent in their duty of care. It wasn’t that AB InBev were incapable of making Platform a success in the marketplace. It was quite simply that they did not seem to care enough to do so. Platform was just another brand in its a huge portfolio of 500+ brands; a brand that was both dispensable and expendable.

Festivals, Food, Local Beer, Neolocalism

A Taste of Place

July 12, 2023 The Beer Professor Leave a comment

In 2009, Amy Trubek, published her book The Taste of Place: A Cultural Journey into Terroir“. Trubeks’ book is about food. In particular, it is about local food and its connection to place.

One of the concepts that Trubek discusses at some length in her book is that of terroir. You may be familiar with this concept, but if you are not, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines terroir as “the combination of factors including soil, climate, and sunlight that gives wine grapes their distinctive character”. While it is a concept most commonly used within the wine industry, it is being increasingly used in discussions taking place around the craft beer. For example, a number of scientific studies show that the same hop varietal grown in two different places will exhibit different taste and aroma characteristics. A study conducted by scientists at Oregon State University showed that “Cascade hops grown in Oregon were characterized by strong citrus, floral, fruity, herbal and resinous aroma. Cascade hops from Washington displayed more tropical and sweaty aroma”. These findings have been replicated in numerous other studies, including one conducted in Italy. The reasons for these differences are quite simple, different soils and micro-climates impact hops differently. As noted by the Italian researchers, “the differences found in the hops were reflected in the beers, which were clearly recognized as distinct by a sensory panel.” In short, hops have terroir.

Approximately, 95% of all hops harvested in the United States are grown in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) states od Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. The growth of craft breweries, however, has resulted in farmers outside of the PNW experimenting with hops as a crop. Their primary customers are local breweries. Hops are now grown in 30+ states outside the PNW. This provides beer drinkers in states such as California, Michigan, and Ohio to taste beer with locally grown hops. And, because of terroir, one can make the case that they are experiencing a s taste of place.

But hops are not the only local crop being used in the brewing of craft beer. Other locally sourced crops are also commonly used. Earlier this spring, I enjoyed a basil honey ale at one of my local breweries, Earnest Brew Works, whose ingredients included locally grown basil. Other examples from across the country abound. Island Brewing Company in Carpinteria, CA brew an avocado honey ale using locally sourced avocados, while Cape May Brewing Company of Cape May, NJ use local beach plums in the making of their Beach Plum IPA.

This basil honey ale from Earnest Brew Works in Toledo, OH included locally grown basil as one of its ingredients.

Some breweries also forage for local ingredients to include in their beer. Foraging simply means “searching for potable ingredients from one’s own property, nearby park or forest, or even neighbors’ backyards” and harvesting these ingredients by hand. For example, Matt Hofmann, the founder of Sahale Ale Works in Grafton, WI brewed a farmhouse ale that included dandelion heads from a nearby nature preserve. In 2015, Bob Kunz, the owner of Highland Park Brewery in Los Angeles, CA produced a Saison using fruits and herbs (lemongrass, sour flower and a half-dozen varieties of lemons and limes) foraged from the back yards of both him and his neighbors. The Saison is appropriately called Yard Beer.

On a recent trip to Italy, I had an opportunity to enjoy another taste of place. I was attending a local food and beer festival in the small town of Lecce nei Marsi (population 1,694) in Italy’s Abruzzo region. One of the local beers available at the festival was an English Browm Ale whose ingredients included the faggiola – beech nuts from local beech trees. The beer, Moricento, is brewed by Beer Park Brewery. What makes Moricento special, at least in my eyes, is that the beech nuts come from ancient beech trees that are located in a UNESCO World Heritage site.

Beechnuts are an ingredient in Moricento English Brown Ale

Moricento – a beer whose ingredients include beech nuts

Lecce nei Marsi is located in the Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise National Park. The park covers 50,000 hectares, 60% of which is covered by beech forests. As noted above, the beech forests in the park are a UNESCO World Heritage Site. This is a somewhat an unusual World Heritage site, as it is part of a chain of beech forests that are spread across eighteen European countries. According to UNESCO, these “ancient beech forests are primeval beech forests that have changed very little over the centuries, because they are preserved in areas that are difficult to reach and because beech trees easily adapt to diverse climatic and geographical conditions. Among the various specimens, there are beech trees over 500 years old”. Thus, when you taste Moricento, you might argue that not only are you sampling a taste of place, but perhaps also a taste of the region’s natural history.

TheBeerProfessor

All posts by The Beer Professor

Yuengling, Rolling Rock and Mare of Easttown

Craft Breweries and the 15-Minute City

The Past on Tap: Ancient Beer in Celtic Europe

Don’t Mention Santa Claus

Craft Beer and The Paradox of Choice

Barrio Logan – Gentrification or Gentefication?

Craft Breweries and Cities: Perspectives from the Field

The De-Platforming of Platform: A Cautionary Tale

A Taste of Place

Musings on Beer