Prevention Science

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 168–174 | Cite as

Does the Type of CIA Policy Significantly Affect Bar and Restaurant Employment in Minnesota Cities?

  • E. G. Klein
  • J. L. Forster
  • D. J. Erickson
  • L. A. Lytle
  • B. Schillo
Article

Abstract

Clean indoor air (CIA) policies that include free-standing bars and restaurants have been adopted by communities to protect employees in all workplaces from exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, most notably employees working in restaurants and free-standing bars. However, due to the perception of negative economic effects on alcohol-licensed hospitality businesses, partial CIA policies (those that provide an exemption for free-standing bars) have been proposed as a means to reduce the risk of economic effects of comprehensive CIA policies applied to all worksites. Bar and restaurant employment per capita were used to determine if partial CIA policies produced differential economic effects compared to comprehensive CIA policies. Ten cities in the state of Minnesota were studied from 2003–2006. Economic data were drawn from monthly employment in bars and restaurants, and a pooled time-series was completed to evaluate three types of local CIA policies: Comprehensive, partial, or none beyond the state law. Communities with a comprehensive CIA policy had a decrease of 9 employees per 10,000 residents compared with communities with partial CIA policies (p = 0.10). Communities with any type of CIA policy (partial or comprehensive) had an increase of 3 employees per 10,000 residents compared to communities without any CIA policies (p = 0.36). There were no significant differential economic effects by CIA policy type in Minnesota cities. These findings support the adoption of comprehensive CIA policies to provide all employees protection from environmental tobacco smoke exposure.

Keywords

Tobacco Policy Clean indoor air Time-series Economics 

References

  1. Alamar, B., & Glantz, S. (2004). Smokefree ordinances increase restaurant profit and value. Contemporary Economic Policy, 22, 520–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alamar, B., & Glantz, S. (2007). Effect of smoke-free laws on bar value and profits. American Journal of Public Health, 97, 1400–1402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American’s for Nonsmokers’ Rights. (2006). Economic impact of smokefree ordinances: Overview. Berkeley, CA: ANR.Google Scholar
  4. American Nonsmokers’ Rights Foundation. (2007). How many smokefree laws? Retrieved December 2007, from http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/mediaordlist.pdf
  5. American Nonsmokers’ Rights Foundation. (2009). Local 100% smokefree laws in all workplaces, restaurants, and bars: Effective by year. Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  6. Beck, N., & Katz, J. N. (1995). What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross-section data. American Political Science Review, 89, 634–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Box, G., & Jenkins, G. M. (1976). Time series analysis: Forecasting and control, revised edition. Oakland, CA: Holden-Day.Google Scholar
  8. Bryan-Jones, K., & Chapman, S. (2006). Political dynamics promoting the incremental regulation of secondhand smoke: A case study of New South Wales, Australia. BMC Public Health, 21, 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bureau of Labor and Statistics. (2007). Productivity and costs by industry: Wholesale trade, retail trade, and food services and drinking places, 2006. from http://www.bls.gov/lpc/
  10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2004). Impact of a smoking ban on restaurant and bar revenues—El Paso, Texas, 2002. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly, 53, 150–152.Google Scholar
  11. Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Pyschological Science, 1, 98–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cowling, D., & Bond, P. (2005). Smoke-free laws and bar revenues in California - The last call. Health Economics, 14, 1273–1281.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dearlove, J., Bialous, S. A., & Glantz, S. A. (2002). Tobacco industry manipulation of the hospitality industry to maintain smoking in public places. Tobacco Control, 11, 94–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heironimus, J. (1992). Workplace restrictions. Retrieved Bates No: 2023914279. April 16.Google Scholar
  15. Hennepin County Office of Budget and Finance. (2005). Economic impact of the Hennepin County smoking ordinance. Minneapolis, MN: Hennepin County Board of Commissioners.Google Scholar
  16. Hilton, S., Semple, S., Miller, B. G., MacCalman, L., Petticrew, M., Dempsey, S., et al. (2007). Expectations and changing attitudes of bar workers before and after the implementation of smoke-free legislation in Scotland. Biomed Central Public Health, 7, 206.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hyland, A., Cummings, K. M., & Wilson, M. P. (1999). Compliance with the New York City Smoke-Free Air Act. Journal of Public Health Management Practice, 5, 43–52.Google Scholar
  18. Kuneman, D., & McFadden, M. J. (2006). Economic losses due to smoking bans in California and other states. Retrieved November 21, 2006.Google Scholar
  19. Luk, R., Ferrence, R., & Gmel, G. (2006). The economic impact of a smoke-free bylaw on restaurant and bar sales in Ottawa, Canada. Addiction, 101, 738–745.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pursell, L., Allwright, S., O’Donovan, D., Paul, G., Kelly, A., Mullally, B. J., et al. (2007). Before and after study of bar workers’ perceptions of the impact of smoke-free workplace legislation in the Republic of Ireland. Biomed Central Public Health, 7, 131.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Pyles, M., Mullineaux, D. J., Okoli, C. T., & Hahn, E. J. (2007). Economic effect of a smoke-free law in a tobacco-growing community. Tobacco Control, 16, 66–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rehm, J., & Gmel, G. (2001). Aggregate time-series regression in the field of alcohol. Addiction, 96, 945–954.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ritch, W., & Begay, M. E. (2001). Strange bedfellows: The history of collaboration between the Massachusetts Restaurant Association and the tobacco industry. American Journal of Public Health, 91, 598–603.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Room, R. (2004). Smoking and drinking as complementary behaviours. Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy, 58, 111–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. SAS Institute Inc (2001). PROC MIXED (Version 9.1.3). Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.Google Scholar
  26. Sayrs, L. (1989). Pooled time series analysis (Vol. 70). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Scollo, M., Lal, A., Hyland, A., & Glantz, S. (2003). Review of the quality of studies on the economic effects of smoke-free policies on the hospitality industry. Tobacco Control, 12, 13–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Siegel, M. (1992). Economic impact of 100% smoke-free restaurant ordinances. In Smoking and restaurants: A guide for policy makers. Berkeley, CA: UC Berkley/UCSF Preventative Medicine Residency Program, American Heart Association, California Affiliate, Alameda County Health Care Services Agency, Tobacco Control Program.Google Scholar
  29. Skeer, M., Land, M. L., Cheng, D. M., & Siegel, M. B. (2004). Smoking in Boston bars before and after a 100% smoke-free regulation: An assessment of early compliance. Journal of Public Health Management Practice, 10, 501–507.Google Scholar
  30. Tsoukalas, T., & Glantz, S. A. (2003). The Duluth clean indoor air ordinance: Problems and success in fighting the tobacco industry at the local level in the 21st century. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1214–1221.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Summary File 1: http://www.census.gov.
  32. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2006). The health consequences of involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke: A report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Coordinating Center for Health Promotion, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health.Google Scholar
  33. Weber, M., Bagwell, D. A., Fielding, J. E., & Glantz, S. A. (2003). Long term compliance with California’s Smoke-Free Workplace Law among bars and restaurants in Los Angeles County. Tobacco Control, 12, 269–273.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Williams, B. (2005a). Hennepin County poised to alter smoking ban. Minnesota Public Radio. July 27.Google Scholar
  35. Williams, B. (2005b). How many jobs lost due to smoking ban? Minnesota Public Radio.Google Scholar
  36. Zacny, J. (1990). Behavioral aspects of alcohol-tobacco interactions. Recent Developments in Alcoholism, 8, 205–219.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Prevention Research 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. G. Klein
    • 1
  • J. L. Forster
    • 2
  • D. J. Erickson
    • 2
  • L. A. Lytle
    • 2
  • B. Schillo
    • 3
  1. 1.Health Behavior & Health PromotionOhio State University College of Public HealthColumbusUSA
  2. 2.Division of Epidemiology & Community HealthUniversity of Minnesota School of Public HealthMinneapolisUSA
  3. 3.ClearWay MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations