- Smoking Bans -
The Effect on Businesses When Anti Smoking Laws Stop Smoking in Public Places.
Smoking bans and their effect on businesses have been studied by stakeholders
both for and against a ban on smoking in public.
What is the effect on business when anti smoking laws
come into effect and should governments consider that when deciding on measures to protect the public from the
possible harmful effects of smoking cigarettes?
History of Tobacco Economic Dependence
As tobacco addiction made its way across the European continent, tobacco became
an economic force in delivering money to governments, farmers and workers both on domestic
ground and in international trade.
Capitalists of course, seized the opportunity and started to create wealth from the sale and
distribution of tobacco. (See Tobacco Farming - Facts About Tobacco Smoking and the Economy).
Thus we see the strong connection between the economic benefit of tobacco and the addictive
qualities of nicotine. That relationship can be explained in this way:
The more nicotine dependent people in a society,
the more likely it is for the economy to be dependent on tobacco.
An economic dependence on tobacco whether real or imagined is often cited as a reason NOT to
implement universal bans on smoking in public places.
In other words "We need the money!"
Despite the fact that all the known evidence shows that healthier people earn more money and pay more taxes
there seems to be a belief out there that keeping people smoking is good for the economy.
It turns out that this belief is pure smoking fiction.
Facts on Smoking Bans and Effect on Businesses
The main arguments against smoking laws to restrict cigarette smoking comes either from smokers or businesses. Usually these arguments are predicated on "rights".
Smokers argue they have the right to smoke and business owners argue they have the right to determine
what happens on their premises and that they can provide controls to protect patrons and workers from
the harmful effects of smoking by installing good ventilation systems.
Seldom will you see either one of these stakeholders create an argument against public smoking bans based
on obligations or moral responsibility to others.
The hospitality industry usually lobbies to stop restrictions on smoking in public places and in fact
such lobby efforts were successful as the first smoking bans in the US exempted
restaurants, bars and casinos. This seems rather illogical
given the body of evidence about the effects of smoking cigarettes on the
human digestive system!
Now that people are getting used to restrictions on smoking in public places,
public attitude is changing. The growing body of evidence that suggests there is no negative
impact on business from smoking restrictions, lends more support for a demand for universal application
of restriction of smoking any place the public gathers.
In order to fight smoking facts with more smoking facts, the hospitality industry is now
seeking out evidence to support a detrimental economic impact if public smoking restrictions are
applied to them. Unfortunately there is little good research to support their predictions of
a significant and dire negative impact on business profits in the long term.
Back to the top of Smoking Bans - Effects on Business
So here are the smoking facts....
non-smoking workers in bars, restaurants and gambling casinos, that allow smoking show
higher levels of biological markers for exposure to cigarette smoke than workers in
non smoking establishments. Smoking bans then, are particularly important for protecting the
health of workers in the hospitality industry.
Where there is legislation and regulation of occupation health and safety that
impose standards on employers for control of potential or actual workplace hazards, an employer
cannot force an employee to work in an unsafe work environment. So even if hospitality employers
ignore their ethical obligation to protect the health of their employees, the legal obligation to do so
exists.1
And when this obligation exists legally, employees can sue the employer if they suffer from the
harmful effects of smoking cigarettes and other tobacco products.
One has to wonder why an employer in the hospitality industry would want this liability?
Many studies and polls show results that the majority of people support public smoking bans.
This support is strongest in areas where there are restrictions on smoking in public places already in force. This would seem to suggest that the smoking bans that are
in place can eventually lead to a change in public opinion.
Of the studies that report a negative economic impact from
anti smoking laws, a large portion of the researchers or funding sources have a relationship with the tobacco industry. When subjected to the rigors of academic
scrutiny these studies were found to be of "poor quality" and the body of evidence that is purported to show a negative impact of smoking bans effects
on business come from these poor quality studies.8
Many businesses in the hospitality industry thrive in areas where smoking in public places is banned universally.
There is a growing body of evidence that shows smoking bans
and the effects on business can be neutral or even positive.2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Being in business means responding to changing social values. Businesses that want to thrive in the long term will
continue to innovate and seek to create products and services that people will want to pay for regardless
of anti smoking laws that restrict smoking.
It should be the quality of your food, the service provided, and the enjoyment of the whole experience of
being in your business establishment that brings customers in.
The smoking facts seem to show that unpleasant effects of smoking cigarettes
do not add to this experience as smokers and non-smokers alike will continue to go out for dinner and
enjoy a drink with friends after smoking bans are implemented.
It is a mystery why a business owner would not want to protect the health of its employees and customers by proudly exclaiming:
"We want to protect the health of our valued employees and customers, so we are proud to be a non-smoking establishment."
Banzhaf J, 2010 3rd Hand Smoke Study Has Legal Implications Tobacco Facts Website http://www.tobacco-facts.net/2010/02/3rd-hand-smoke-study-has-legal-implications accessed [02-08-2011]
Benjamin A, Stanton AG (2007) Effect of smoke-free laws on bar value and profits. American Journal of Public Health, 2007 Aug;97(8):1400-2.
Boyles, M et alSmoke-free law associated with higher-than-expected taxable retail sales for bars and taverns in Washington State. Preventing Chronic Disease Volume 7: No. 4, July 2010 http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2010/jul/09_0187.htm accessed [02-08-2011]
Cowling DW,Bond P.(2005)Smoke-free laws and bar revenues in California--the last call Health Econ. 2005 Dec;14(12):1273-81.
Glanz SA, Smith LR. (1994)The effect of ordinances requiring smoke-free restaurants on restaurant sales. American Journal of Public Health, 1994 Jul;84(7):1081-5.
Glantz SA, Charlesworth A. Tourism and hotel revenues before and after passage of smoke-free restaurant ordinances. JAMA. 1999 May 26;281(20):1911-8.
Pyles M, Hahn E(2010) Economic effects of Ohio's smoke-free law on Kentucky and Ohio border countiesTobacco Control 2011;20:73-76
Scollo M, Lal A, Hyland A, Glantz S. Review of the quality of studies on the
economic effects of smoke-free policies on the hospitality industry. Tobacco Control 2003 Mar;12(1):13-20.
The purpose of the information provided here is to help you cooperate with your doctor and other
health practitioners. It is not intended to take the place of medical advice and you are encouraged to
discuss health concerns with your physician or a professional health care provider who is
familiar with you and your unique personal health context.
