Smoking ban
386818
225967750
2008-07-16T06:47:22Z
Nunquam Dormio
1122047
rv - spam
[[Image:No Smoking.svg|right|thumb|No Smoking sign.]]
'''Smoking bans''' are public policies, including [[criminal law]]s and [[occupational safety and health]] [[regulation]]s, which restrict [[tobacco smoking]] in [[workplace]]s and [[public space]]s.
==Rationale==
The rationale cited for smoking bans is the protection of workers, in particular, from the harmful effects of [[passive smoking|second-hand smoke]], which include an increased risk of [[heart disease]], [[cancer]], [[Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease|emphysema]] and other chronic and acute diseases.<ref>{{cite web | title=Smokefree legislation consultation response, The Institute of Public Health in Ireland | url=http://www.publichealth.ie/index.asp?locID=396 | accessdate=2006-09-05 }} {{cite web | title=New health bill will ban smoking in majority of workplaces (UK Health Secretary: The smoking ban "is a huge step forward for public health and will help reduce deaths from cancer, heart disease and other smoking related diseases") | url=http://www.direct.gov.uk/Nl1/Newsroom/NewsroomArticles/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=10027079&chk=5r8ic9 | accessdate=2006-09-05}} See also[http://www.who.int/tobacco/framework/WHO_FCTC_english.pdf WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control]; First international treaty on public health, adopted by 192 countries and signed by 168. See in particular Article 8 ''Protection from exposure to tobacco smoke''.</ref>
Laws implementing bans on indoor smoking have been introduced by many countries in various forms over the years, with [[legislator]]s citing scientific evidence that shows tobacco smoking is often harmful to the smokers themselves and to those inhaling second-hand smoke.
In addition, such laws may affect [[health care]] costs,<ref>{{cite web | title=Jan J. Barendregt, M.A., Luc Bonneux, M.D., and Paul J. van der Maas, Ph.D., "The Health Care Costs of Smoking", N Engl J Med 1998; 338:470-472, Feb 12, 1998 | url=http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/337/15/1052}}</ref> improve work productivity and lower the overall cost of labor in a community, thus making a community more attractive for bringing new jobs into the area and keeping current jobs and employers in an area. In [[Indiana]] for example, the state's economic development agency wrote into its 2006 plan for acceleration of economic growth that it encourages cities and towns to adopt local smoke-free workplace laws as a means of promoting job growth in communities.
Additional rationales for smoking restrictions include reduced risk of fire in areas with explosive hazards or where flammable materials are handled, cleanliness in places where food or pharmaceuticals, semiconductors or precision instruments and machinery are produced, decreased legal liability, potentially reduced energy use via decreased [[HVAC|ventilation]] needs, reduced quantities of litter, helping promote healthier environments, and to make it easier for smokers to quit.<ref>{{cite web | title=New health bill will ban smoking in majority of workplaces | url=http://www.direct.gov.uk/Nl1/Newsroom/NewsroomArticles/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=10027079&chk=5r8ic9 | accessdate=2006-09-05 }}</ref>
==Medical and scientific basis for bans==
{{main|Passive smoking}}
Research has generated evidence that secondhand smoke causes the same problems as direct smoking, including [[lung cancer]], [[cardiovascular disease]] and [[respiratory disease|lung ailments]] such as [[COPD|emphysema]], [[bronchitis]] and [[asthma]].<ref>{{cite journal | author=Boyle P, Autier P, Bartelink H ''et al.'' | title=European Code Against Cancer and scientific justification: third version (2003) | journal=Ann Oncol. | volume=14 | issue=7 | unused_data=|weird pople}}</ref> Specifically, [[meta-analysis|meta-analyses]] show that lifelong non-smokers with partners who smoke in the home have a 20–30% greater risk of lung cancer than non-smokers who live with non-smokers. Non-smokers exposed to cigarette smoke in the workplace have an increased lung cancer risk of 16–19%.<ref>{{cite journal | author=Sasco AJ, Secretan MB, Straif K. | title=Tobacco smoking and cancer: a brief review of recent epidemiological evidence | journal=Lung Cancer | volume=45 | issue=Suppl 2 | pages=S3–9 | year=2004 | pmid=15552776 | doi=10.1016/j.lungcan.2004.07.998}}</ref>
A study issued in 2002 by the [[International Agency for Research on Cancer]] of the [[World Health Organization]] concluded that non-smokers are exposed to the same [[carcinogen]]s as active smokers.<ref>{{cite web | title= Disparity in Protecting Food Service Staff from Secondhand Smoke Shows Need for Comprehensive Smoke-Free Policies, Say Groups | url=http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=28683 }}</ref> Sidestream smoke contains 69 known carcinogens, particularly [[benzopyrene]] and other polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, and radioactive decay products, such as [[polonium 210]].<ref>{{cite web | title=Involuntary smoking | url=http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/vol83/02-involuntary.html | accessdate=2006-07-15}}</ref> Several well-established carcinogens have been shown by the tobacco companies' own research to be present at higher concentrations in secondhand smoke than in mainstream smoke.<ref>{{cite journal | author=Schick S, Glantz S. | title=Philip Morris toxicological experiments with fresh sidestream smoke: more toxic than mainstream smoke | journal=Tob Control. | volume=14 | issue=6 | pages=396–404 | year=2005 | pmid=16319363 | doi=10.1136/tc.2005.011288}}</ref>
Scientific organizations confirming the harmful effects of secondhand smoke include the U.S. [[National Cancer Institute]],<ref>[http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/10/index.html Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke]: A monograph from the U.S. [[National Cancer Institute]]. Accessed [[August 6]] [[2007]].</ref> the U.S. [[Centers for Disease Control]],<ref>[http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/Factsheets/SecondhandSmoke.htm Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet], from the [[Centers for Disease Control]]. Accessed [[August 6]] [[2007]].</ref> the U.S. [[National Institutes of Health]],<ref>[http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleventh/profiles/s176toba.pdf Environmental Tobacco Smoke]. From the 11th Report on Carcinogens of the [[National Institutes of Health]]. Accessed [[August 6]] [[2007]].</ref> the [[United States Surgeon General]],<ref>[http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/ The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke]: A Report of the Surgeon General. Dated [[June 27]] [[2006]]; accessed [[August 6]] [[2007]].</ref> and the [[World Health Organization]].<ref>[http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol83/volume83.pdf Tobacco Smoke and Involuntary Smoking]: A monograph of the [[International Agency for Research on Cancer]] of the [[World Health Organization]]. Accessed [[August 6]] [[2007]].</ref>
===Air quality===
Bans on smoking in bars and restaurants can substantially improve the air quality in such establishments. For example, one study listed on the website of the CDC (Center for Disease Control) states that [[New York]]'s statewide law to eliminate smoking in enclosed workplaces and public places substantially reduced RSP (respirable suspended particles) levels in western New York hospitality venues. RSP levels were reduced in every venue that permitted smoking before the law was implemented, including venues in which only second-hand smoke from an adjacent room was observed at baseline.<ref>{{cite web | title=Indoor Air Quality in Hospitality Venues Before and After Implementation of a Clean Indoor Air Law --- Western New York, 2003 | url=http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5344a3.htm }}</ref> The CDC concluded that their results were similar to other studies which also showed substantially improved indoor air quality after smoking bans.
A 2004 study showed that in [[New Jersey]], bars and restaurants had more than nine times the levels of indoor air pollution of neighboring [[New York City]], which had enacted its ban.<ref>{{cite web | title= Study Finds That New Jersey Bars and Restaurants Have Nine Times More Air Pollution than Those in Smoke-Free New York | url= http://www.umdnj.edu/about/news_events/releases/04/r041214_bars.htm }}</ref>
Research has also shown that improved air quality translates to decreased toxin exposure among employees.<ref>{{cite web | title= Smoking ban leads to healthier bar staff | url=http://www.rsc.org/Publishing/ChemScience/Volume/2006/04/smoking_ban.asp }}</ref> For example, among employees of the Norwegian establishments that enacted smoking bans, tests showed improved (decreased) levels of nicotine in the urine of both smoking and non-smoking workers (as compared with measurements prior to the ban).<ref>{{cite web | title=Airborne exposure and biological monitoring of bar and restaurant workers before and after the introduction of a smoking ban | url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16528420&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum }}</ref>
==History==
[[Pope Urban VII]]'s 13-day papal reign included the world's first known public smoking ban (1590), as he threatened to [[excommunication|excommunicate]] anyone who "took tobacco in the porchway of or inside a church, whether it be by chewing it, smoking it with a pipe or sniffing it in powdered form through the nose".<ref>''Nicotine: An Old-Fashioned Addiction'', pp 96-98, Jack E. Henningfield, Chelsea House Publishers, 1985</ref> The earliest citywide European smoking bans were enacted shortly thereafter. Such bans were enacted in [[Bavaria]], Kursachsen, and certain parts of [[Austria]] in the late 1600s. Smoking was banned in [[Berlin]] in 1723, in [[Königsberg]] in 1742, and in [[Stettin]] in 1744. These bans were repealed in the [[revolutions of 1848]].<ref>{{cite journal |last= Proctor|first=RN|authorlink= |coauthors= |year= 1997|month= Fall|title= The Nazi war on tobacco: ideology, evidence, and possible cancer consequences|journal=Bull Hist Med|volume=71|issue=3|pages=435–88|pmid=9302840 |url= |accessdate= 2007-10-04 |quote=|doi= 10.1353/bhm.1997.0139 }}</ref> The first building in the world to have a smoke-free policy was the [[Old Government Buildings (Wellington)|Old Government Building]] in [[Wellington, New Zealand]] in [[1876]]. This was over concerns about the threat of fire, as it is the second largest wooden building in the world <ref>[http://www.doc.govt.nz/templates/page.aspx?id=44950 Department of Conservation]</ref>. The first modern, [[Anti-tobacco movement in Nazi Germany|nationwide tobacco ban]] was imposed by the [[NSDAP|Nazi Party]] in every [[Germany|German]] university, post office, military hospital and Nazi Party office, under the auspices of Karl Astel's Institute for Tobacco Hazards Research, created in 1941 under orders from [[Adolf Hitler]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/30/1/31|title=Commentary: Schairer and Schöniger's forgotten tobacco epidemiology and the Nazi quest for racial purity|author=Robert N Proctor, Pennsylvania State University|date=[[2001]]|format=HTML|accessdate=2007-03-07}}</ref> Major anti-tobacco campaigns were widely broadcast by the Nazis until the demise of the regime in 1945.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/313/7070/1450|title=The anti-tobacco campaign of the Nazis: a little known aspect of public health in Germany, 1933-45|author=Robert N Proctor, Pennsylvania State University|date=[[1996-12-07]]|format=HTML|accessdate=2007-03-07}}</ref>
In the latter part of the 20th century, as research on the risks of secondhand tobacco smoke were made public, the tobacco industry launched "courtesy awareness" campaigns. Fearing reduced sales, the industry created a media and legislative program that focused on "accommodation". Tolerance and courtesy were encouraged as a way to ease heightened tensions between smokers and those around them, while avoiding smoking bans. In the USA, states were encouraged to pass laws providing separate smoking sections.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=pmn67d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results|title=Preemption/Accommodation presentation|author=Tina Walls|date=[[1994-06-30]]|format=PDF|accessdate=2006-11-23}}</ref>
In 1975, the US state of Minnesota enacted the ''Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act'', making it the first state to ban smoking in most public spaces. At first, restaurants were required to have No Smoking sections, and bars were exempt from the Act.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/indoorair/mciaa/ftb/index.html |title=Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act - Freedom to Breathe|publisher=Minnesota Department of Health}}</ref> As of 1 October 2007, Minnesota enacted a ban on smoking in all restaurants and bars statewide, called the [[Freedom to Breathe Act]] of 2007.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory?id=3167944&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312|title=Minnesota Lawmakers Pass Smoking Ban|publisher=ABC News}}</ref>
In 1990, the city of [[San Luis Obispo, California]], became the first city in the world to ban indoor smoking at all public places, including bars and restaurants.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tobacco.org/News/010129garth.html |title=Letter to Nebraska Senators from San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce in favor of Smokefree Legislation |work=Tobacco.org |accessdate=2007-04-07}}</ref>
In America, the success and subsequent popularity of the ban enacted by the state of [[California]] in 1998 encouraged other states such as New York to implement bans. California's smoking ban included a controversial ban of smoking in bars, extending the statewide workplace smoking ban enacted in 1994. There are now 35 states with some form of smoking ban.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/mediaordlist.pdf|title=How many Smokefree Laws?|date=[[2006-10-06]]|format=PDF|accessdate=2006-11-23}}</ref> Some areas in California have begun making entire cities smoke-free, which would include every place except residential homes. More than 20 cities in California have enacted park and beach smoking bans.
On [[March 29]] [[2004]], the Irish Government implemented a ban on smoking in the workplace, the first country to do so. In [[Norway]] similar legislation was put into force on [[July 1]] the same year. The whole of the [[United Kingdom]] became subject to a ban on smoking in enclosed public places in [[2007]], when [[England]] became the final province to have the legislation come into effect. The age limit for buying tobacco was also raised from 16 to 18 on [[October 1]] [[2007]]. In 2007, [[Chandigarh]] became the first city in [[India]] to become 'smoke-free'. Smoking was banned in public indoor venues in [[Victoria, Australia|Victoria]], [[Australia]] on [[July 1]] [[2007]].
==Smoking bans by country==
{{main|Smoking bans by country}}
In 1973, [[Arizona]] became the first state in the [[United States]] to pass a comprehensive law restricting smoking in public places. [[California]] enacted a workplace smoking ban in 1994, and a complete smoking ban in enclosed spaces in 1998. [[Florida]] made a workplace smoking ban part of its state constitution in 2002.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?Mode=Constitution&Submenu=3|title=Florida state constitution (1968 revision), focused at Section 20 of Article X.}}</ref> [[Washington]] state passed initiative 901 in 2005, banning smoking within 25 feet of public buildings or places of employment.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.doh.wa.gov/Tobacco/secondhand/secondhand.htm|title=Washington State Dept of Health}} See also: {{cite web|url=http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=70.160.075|title=RCW 70.160.075}}</ref> In 2003, the state of New York banned smoking in most public places, excluding cigar bars, members-only social clubs and Native American gambling parlors.
In March 2004, [[Ireland]] was the first country to establish a nationwide smoking ban in all enclosed workplaces. The ban now extends, voluntarily, outside of buildings. For example, smoking is not allowed at the entrances to buildings at Dublin Airport, but only in areas where signs indicate that smoking is permitted. In 2008, Ireland will ban advertising in shops (advertising is already banned in print and on radio, television, and billboards) and ensure that cigarettes are not visible in stores.
Norway followed Ireland then New Zealand was the third country to follow Ireland on December 10 2004.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/1210/smoking.html|title=New Zealand Introduces New Smoking Ban}}</ref> [[Italy]] introduced a full ban on 10 January 2005. [[Estonia]] had smoking banned on [[5 June]] [[2007]] in all facilities that serve food, including bars and nightclubs. Bar owners were allowed to provide special rooms for smoking without food or beverage service, but few did. Each nation of the [[United Kingdom]] implemented a similar ban: [[Scotland]] on [[26 March]] [[2006]];<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.clearingtheairscotland.com/|title=Smoking Ban Scotland}}</ref> [[Wales]] on [[02 April]] [[2007]];<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.smokingbanwales.co.uk/english/|title=Smoking ban Wales - about the law banning smoking in Wales}}</ref> [[Northern Ireland]] on [[30 April]] [[2007]];<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.spacetobreathe.org.uk/|title=Space to breathe for Northern Ireland: Smoke-free legislation from 30 April 2007}}</ref> [[England]] on [[1 July]] [[2007]]. [[France]] established a ban in January 2008 when the existing ban was extended to cover bars and cafés. [[Denmark]] banned smoking in clubs and restaurants on [[15 August]] [[2007]], although the legislation made exemptions for small bars and restaurants with separate smoking rooms. [[Sweden]] established a similar ban on [[July 1]], [[2005]]. [[The Netherlands]] and [[Romania]] banned smoking in bars and clubs on [[1 July]] [[2008]].<ref>BBC [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7482571.stm Dutch smoking ban goes into force] 1 July 2008 </ref>
[[Spain]] has a law, introduced by the [[Spanish Socialist Party]], which came into force at the start of 2006 and bans smoking in workplaces. It has some restrictions for [[public places]], such as [[airports]] and train stations, but [[Pubs]], [[restaurants]] and other public places smaller than 100 m² are exempted.
[[South Africa]] introduced the [[Tobacco Products Control Act]] in 1993. The act was amended several times and currently smoking is restricted in all public areas, such as the workplace, restaurants and bars, shopping malls, sports venues and airports. The act also bans the advertising of any tobacco product. "<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.acts.co.za/tobacco/index.htm|title=Tobacco Products Control Act 1993}}</ref>
The only country to have banned the sale and smoking of tobacco is [[Bhutan]], in early 2005. In [[2008]], the island nation of [[Niue]] began considering banning smoking and the sale of tobacco in public areas and private homes.<ref>{{cite news|last=Marks|first=Kathy|url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/worlds-smallest-state-aims-to-become-the-first-smokefree-paradise-island-862977.html|title=World's smallest state aims to become the first smoke-free paradise island|publisher=''[[The Independent]]''|date=2008-07-09|accessdate=2008-07-09}}</ref>
===Outdoor smoking bans===
Smoking has been banned on the streets of Tokyo's Chiyoda Ward since October 2002. Ward employees patrol the streets and fine violators ¥2000. According to the cigarette company Japan Tobacco, Inc., 60 municipalities, whose residents comprise 10% of Japan's population, have regulations to ban or discourage smoking on the street. Only three municipalities assess fines for violations.
In April 2007 the City of [[Burbank, California]] joined Calabasas and Santa Monica in restricting smoking in public places [http://www.burbankca.org/planning/smoking.shtml]. The Secondhand Smoke Control Ordinance was supported by Mayor Todd Campbell, Jef Vander Borght and Marsha Ramos following independent requests by 2 Burbank residents, Eric Michael Cap & Robert Phipps Esq.[http://www.smokefreeburbank.com] In May, 2007 the City of Beverly Hills voted to ban smoking in all outdoor dining areas, effective October 1, 2007 [http://www.beverlyhills.org/presence/connect/CoBH/Homepage/For+Residents/News+and+Information/Press+Releases/LG-PD-Press_Release_Smoking_Ban?QUERY=smoking]. Numerous other cities have since initiated their own public smoking restrictions, including Baldwin Park, Belmont and South Pasadena. The City of Los Angeles has banned smoking in its Parks following the 2007 Griffith Park fire, started by a smoker.
In February 2008, the Hawaii County Council voted to ban smoking at county recreation facilities on the island of [[Hawaii (Island)|Hawaii]].<ref>[http://starbulletin.com/2008/03/13/news/story04.html Honolulu Star-Bulletin], February 13, 2008.</ref> Mayor Harry Kim expressed concerns over the bill's failure to allow designated smoking areas,<ref>[http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080405/BREAKING01/80405053/-1/LOCALNEWSFRONT Honolulu Advertiser], April 5, 2008.</ref> and ultimately vetoed the bill. On April 22, 2008, the Council overrode his veto by a 7-2 vote, and smoking was banned in all county recreation facilities, including beach parks, rodeo arenas and the Hilo drag strip.
==Cigarette advertising==
In many parts of the world tobacco advertising and sponsorship of sporting events is prohibited. The ban on tobacco advertising and sponsorship in the [[EU]] in 2005 has prompted Formula One Management to look for venues that permit display of the [[livery]] of tobacco sponsors, and has led to some of the races on the calendar being cancelled in favour of tobacco-friendly markets. Pressure from fans has seen these decisions reversed, and Grands Prix such as the [[Belgian Grand Prix]] have re-appeared on the calendar.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} As of 2008, only one Formula One team, [[Scuderia Ferrari]], receives sponsorship from a tobacco company. Its Marlboro branding appears at 2 of 17 season races, Monaco and China, as neither bans tobacco advertising.
==The effects of bans==
===Effects on health===
In the first 18 months after [[Pueblo, Colorado]] enacted a smoking ban in 2003, hospital admissions for heart attacks dropped 27%. Admissions in neighboring towns without smoking bans showed no change. The [[American Heart Association]] said, "The decline in the number of heart attack hospitalizations within the first year and a half after the non-smoking ban that was observed in this study is most likely due to a decrease in the effect of second hand smoke as a triggering factor for heart attacks."<ref>[http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=3043008 Heart attacks decline after smoking bans] American Heart Association</ref>
Similar findings are beginning to emerge from other areas which have enacted bans. Researchers at the [[University of Dundee]] found significant improvements in the health of bar staff in the two months following the ban. They tested bar workers' [[lung function test|lung function]] and [[inflammation|inflammatory]] markers a month before the ban came in, and again two months after it had been introduced. The number showing symptoms related to passive smoking fell from more than 80% to less than half, with reduced levels of nicotine in the blood and improvements in lung function of as much as 10%.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/tayside_and_central/6037035.stm|title=Scots bar staff health 'improved'}}</ref>
A 2007 study of the effect of the ban in Scotland showed that there was 17% year-on-year drop in heart attack admissions since the ban was introduced in March 2006.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/6986554.stm|title=Scots smoke ban 'improved health'}}</ref> However, another source suggests heart attack admissions declined by 14% in the three months prior to the Scottish smoking ban.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/313756/part_2/has-the-smoking-ban-reduced-heart-attacks.thtml | title=Is the smoking ban good for us? Has the smoking ban reduced heart attacks? | accessdate=2007-11-04 | author=''[[The Spectator]]''}}</ref> Furthermore, the study has not yet been published, nor has the data on which it was based.<ref>BBC News [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7093356.stm The facts in the way of a good story]</ref> An analysis of the saliva of 39 non-smoking workers before and after the Scottish smoking ban came into force found a 75% fall in [[cotinine]], which is a by-product of [[nicotine]]. The level of cotinine is a good indicator of how much cigarette smoke has entered the body.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7022716.stm|title=Ban 'boost for non-smoking staff'}}</ref>
===Effects on tobacco use===
One report stated that cigarette sales in Ireland and Scotland increased after a smoking ban.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/newspapers/sunday_times/scotland/article601421.ece|title=Cigarette sales up 5% despite smoking ban}}</ref> In contrast, another report states that in Ireland, cigarette sales fell by 16% in the six months after the ban's introduction.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article2295859.ece|title=Cigarette sales drop 7% in a month}}</ref>In the UK as a whole, cigarette sales fell by 11% during July 2007, the first month of the smoking ban in England, compared with July 2006.<ref>BBC [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7023841.stm Cigarette sales 'slump after ban'] 2 October 2007</ref>
A 1992 document from [[Altria Group|Phillip Morris]] Impact of Workplace Restrictions on Consumption and Incidence, summarized the results of its long-running research into the effects of a ban: "Total prohibition of smoking in the workplace strongly effects ''[sic]'' [[tobacco]] industry volume. Smokers facing these restrictions consume 11%-15% less than average and quit at a rate that is 84% higher than average."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=qhs55e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results|title=Impact of Workplace Restrictions on Consumption and Incidence|author=John Heironimus|date=[[1992-01-21]]|format=PDF|accessdate=2006-12-26}}</ref>
In the [[United States]], the Center for Disease Control has reported a leveling off of smoking rates in recent years despite a large number of ever more severe smoking bans and large tax increases. Anti-smoking groups claim this is due to funding reasons. It has also been suggested that a "backstop" of hardcore smokers has been reached: those unmotivated and increasingly defiant in the face of further legislation,<ref>Washington Post[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/08/AR2007110801094.html] See also: The Independent[http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/joe-jackson-it-is-social-engineering-and-politicises-a-personal-choice-466528.html Joe Jackson: It is social engineering and politicises a personal choice]</ref>
In [[Sweden]], use of [[snus]], as an alternative to smoking, has risen steadily since the smoking ban.<ref>(sv) [http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/artikel_484687.svd SVD: Folkhälsoinstitutet: Snus ger cancer]</ref>
Smoking bans may make it easier for smokers to quit. A survey suggests 22% of UK smokers may quit in response to a smoking ban in enclosed public places.<ref>BBC News [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4781732.stm A fifth of smokers 'plan to quit'] [[8 March]] 2006</ref>
Restaurant smoking bans help stop young people from becoming habitual smokers. A study of Massachusetts youths, found that those in towns with bans were 35 per cent less likely to be habitual smokers.<ref>[http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19826552.900-restaurant-smoking-bans-stop-teens-getting-the-habit.html Restaurant smoking bans stop teens getting the habit] ''New Scientist'' Issue 2655, [[10 May]] 2008, page 4</ref><ref>Michael Siegel; Alison B. Albers; Debbie M. Cheng; William L. Hamilton; Lois Biener [http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/162/5/477 Local Restaurant Smoking Regulations and the Adolescent Smoking Initiation Process: Results of a Multilevel Contextual Analysis Among Massachusetts Youth] ''Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine'', vol 162, p 477</ref>
===Effects on businesses===
[[Image:Smoking corner on public street in Akihabara.jpg|thumb|Smoking is prohibited on some streets in [[Japan]]. Smokers utilize smoking lounges, such as this one in [[Tokyo]].]]
[[Image:NosmokingwhilewalkingTaitoTokyoJapan.JPG|thumb|A sign stating "No smoking while walking" in [[Taito, Tokyo|Taito]], [[Tokyo]]]]
Many studies using objective measures of economic activity, such as sales taxes, have been done by Smoke Free Groups on the effect of smoke-free policies. The vast majority have found that there is no negative economic impact, with many finding that there may be some positive effects on local businesses.<ref>{{cite journal |journal= CA Cancer J Clin |date=2007 |volume=57 |issue=6 |pages=367–78 |title= The economic impact of clean indoor air laws |author= Eriksen M, Chaloupka F |doi=10.3322/CA.57.6.367 |pmid=17989131 |url=http://caonline.amcancersoc.org/cgi/content/full/57/6/367}}</ref> A 2003 review of 97 studies of the economic effects of a smoking ban on the hospitality industry found that the best-designed studies by anti-smoking groups and their contractors reported no impact or a positive impact of smoke-free restaurant and bars laws on sales or employment.<ref>{{cite journal |author= Scollo M, Lal A, Hyland A, Glantz S |title= Review of the quality of studies on the economic effects of smoke-free policies on the hospitality industry |journal= Tob Control |date=2003 |volume=12 |pages=13–20 |pmid=12612356 |doi= 10.1136/tc.12.1.13}}</ref>
;[[Australia]]
A government study in [[Sydney]] found that the proportion of the population attending pubs and clubs rose after the imposition of a ban on smoking in enclosed places.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/no-smoke-signals-a-boom-for-pubs-clubs/2007/09/01/1188067429767.html |title=No smoke signals a boom for pubs, clubs - National - smh.com.au |accessdate=2007-09-01 |format= |work=}}</ref>
;[[Germany]]
Smoking bans were introduced in German hotels, restaurants and bars in 2007 and early 2008. The restaurant industry has claimed that many businesses in the states which introduced a smoking ban in late 2007 ([[Lower Saxony]], [[Baden-Württemberg]] and [[Hessen]]) witnessed lowered profits. The German Hotel and Restaurant Association (DEHOGA) claimed that the ban deterred people from going out for a drink or meal, stating that 15% of establishments that adopted a smoking ban in [[2007]] saw turnover fall by around 50%.<ref>[http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3058044,00.html/ Germany's Smoking Ban Spreads Through States, ''Deutsche Welle'', [[14 January]], [[2007]]</ref>
;[[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]]
In the [[Republic of Ireland]], the main opposition was from publicans. The Irish workplace ban was introduced with the intention of protecting workers from [[passive smoking]] ("second-hand smoke") and to discourage smoking in a nation with a high percentage of smokers. Many pubs introduced "outdoor" arrangements (generally heated areas with shelters) though many customers now choose to drink at home or at parties, which has had the effect of aiding the off licence trade.{{Fact|date=January 2008}}
Ireland's Office of Tobacco Control website indicates that "an evaluation of the official hospitality sector data shows there has been no adverse economic effect from the introduction of this measure (the March 2004 national ban on smoking in bars, restaurants, etc). It has been claimed that the ban was a significant contributing factor to the closure of hundreds of small rural pubs, with almost 440 fewer licenses renewed in 2006 than in 2005.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1443931.ece|title=Rural pubs will suffer from smoking ban}}</ref>
;[[United Kingdom]]
The ban came into force in Wales on [[2 April]], [[2007]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6410215.stm|title=Third of pubs 'not ready for ban'}}</ref> Six months after the ban's implementation in [[Wales]], the Licensed Victuallers Association (LVA), which represents pub operators across [[Wales]], claimed pubs had lost up to 20% of their trade. The LVA says some businesses were on the brink of closure, others had already closed down, and there was little optimism trade would eventually return to pre-ban levels.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/wales-news/2007/10/12/smoking-ban-has-hit-trade-says-lva-91466-19938086/|title=ic Wales (icwales.icnetwork.co.uk)}}</ref>
In September 2007, [[Japan Tobacco]] announced it would be closing its cigar factory in [[Cardiff]], [[Wales]], resulting in the loss of 184 jobs. It would move its operations to [[Northern Ireland]] with the creation of 95 jobs. The company indicated that a 50% fall in tobacco sales since 1999 had led to the decision to close the factory, and that this fall had been accelerated by the smoking ban.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/7016043.stm | title="184 tobacco jobs go at city plant." - BBC News | accessdate=2007-09-27}}</ref>
Three months after the ban in [[England]] came into force, [[The Rank Group]], owners of Mecca Bingo Halls and Grosvenor Casinos, claimed that coupled with the [[Gambling Act 2005]] which imposed restrictions on the number of £500 jackpot fruit machines, the smoking ban had had a detrimental impact upon its profits.<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/10/13/cnrank113.xml No smoke makes Rank fire off profit warning] [[14 October]] 2007, ''The Daily Telegraph''</ref>
Bingo hall customers have declined by 600,000 since the ban's introduction. Combined with the negative impact on revenue of the smoking ban, and government tax rules, one third of bingo halls are facing closure.<ref>[http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/sunday/2007/10/21/clubs-facing-axe-as-smoking-ban-bites-98487-19984557/ CLUBS FACING AXE AS SMOKING BAN BITES] [[21 October]] 2007, ''The Sunday Mirror''</ref>
The [[British Beer and Pub Association]] (BBPA), an organisation representing breweries across [[United Kingdom]] has claimed beer sales are at their lowest level since the 1930s. The BBPA attributed a fall in sales of 7% during [[2007]] to the smoking ban.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7102937.stm Pub beer sales slump to low point] [[20 November]] 2007, BBC News</ref>
According to a survey conducted by pub and bar trade magazine ''The Publican'', the anticipated increase in sales of food following the smoking ban has not occurred. The trade magazine's survey of 303 pubs in the [[United Kingdom]] found the average customer spent £14.86 on food and drink at dinner in [[2007]], virtually identical to [[2006]].<ref>[http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1294269,00.html Smoke Ban Fails To Boost Pub Meal Sales] [[26 November]] 2007, SKY News</ref>
A survey conducted by [[BII]] (formerly British Institute of Innkeeping) and the [[Federation of Licensed Victuallers' Associations]] (FLVA) concluded that sales had decreased by 7.3% in the 5 months since the smoking ban's introduction on [[1 July]], [[2007]]. Of the 2,708 responses to the survey, 58% of licensees said they had seen smokers visiting less regularly, while 73% had seen their smoking customers spending less time at the pub.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/7147786.stm Smoking ban 'costs pub takings'] [[17 December]] 2007, BBC News</ref>
The smoking ban has been partly blamed for Sports Cafe bars group going into administration.<ref>[http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/business/business-local/2008/01/15/sports-cafe-shuts-doors-as-ban-on-smoking-partly-to-blame-64375-20350102/ Sports Cafe shuts doors as ban on smoking partly to blame] [[15 January]] 2008, ''Liverpool Daily Post''</ref>
Britain's largest pub operator, [[Punch Taverns]], have reported an estimated 5% decline in trading throughout the traditionally busy Christmas period, which the company attributes to diminishing consumer confidence and the effects of the smoking ban.<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/jan/17/smoking.ban.pub.taverns Punch first to report smoke damage] [[17 January]] 2008, ''The Guardian''</ref>
In June 2008, a spokeswoman for Punch Taverns said the change had given the industry the opportunity to attract new customers and concentrate on growth areas such as food - which is more profitable than drink sales. Gerard Tempest, marketing director for Whitbread Hotels and Restaurants, said: "The ban has had no real negative effect. Our staff are happier and we are seeing many more families." Rupert Clevely of Geronimo Inns said drink sales had risen by more than 5%, with a double-digit rise in food sales.<ref>[http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and-markets/article.html?in_article_id=444086&in_page_id=3&in_page_id=3 Smoking ban a success say some pubs]</ref>
;[[United States]]
In the USA, smokers and hospitality businesses initially argued that businesses would suffer from smoking bans. Some [[Restaurant|restaurateurs]] argued that smoking bans would increase the rate of [[dine and dash]]es where patrons declare they are stepping outside to smoke, while their intent is to leave.{{Fact|date=January 2008}} Others have countered that even if this occurred it could decrease the leisure (non-eating) time spent in the restaurants, resulting in increased turn-over of tables, which could actually benefit total sales.{{Fact|date=January 2008}} The experiences of [[Delaware]], [[New York]], [[California]], and [[Florida]] have shown that businesses are generally not hurt, and that many hospitality businesses actually show increased revenues.{{Fact|date=January 2008}} A 2006 [[Surgeon General of the United States|U.S. Surgeon General]] review<ref>{{cite web | title=The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General | url=http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke | accessdate=2006-06-27}}</ref> of studies suggests that business may actually improve.<ref>{{cite web | title=Richard Roesler: Surgeon general: No safe level of secondhand smoke. | url=http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/06/27/involuntary.smoking.ap/index.html | accessdate=2006-06-27}}</ref> Thus, research generally indicates that business incomes are stable (or even improved) after smoking bans are enacted, and many customers appreciate the improved air quality.
In 2003 [[New York City]] amended its anti-smoking law to include all restaurants and bars, including those in private clubs, making it one of the toughest in the United States. The city's Department of Health found in a 2004 study that air pollution levels had decreased sixfold in bars and restaurants after the ban went into effect, and that New Yorkers had reported less second-hand smoke in the workplace. The study also found the city's restaurants and bars prospered despite the smoking ban, with increases in jobs, liquor licenses and business tax payments.<ref>[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990DE2D91E30F93AA15750C0A9629C8B63&sec=health Bars and Restaurants Thrive Amid Smoking Ban, Study Says] [[29 March]] 2003, ''The New York Times''</ref> A 2006 study by the state of New York found similar results.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://pqarchiver.nypost.com/nypost/access/1083006201.html?dids=1083006201:1083006201&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Jul+25%2C+2006&author=CARL+CAMPANILE&pub=New+York+Post&edition=&startpage=025&desc=CIG+BAN+NO+BAR+BURDEN+-+BIZ+UP+DESPITE+LAW |publisher=New York Post |title=Cig ban no bar burden - biz up despite law |date=2006-07-25 |author=Carl Campanile |accessdate=2008-04-07 |format= |work=}}</ref> According to the 2004 ''[[Zagat]]'' Survey, which polled nearly 30,000 New York City restaurant patrons, respondents said by a margin of almost 6 to 1 that they eat out more often now because of the city's smoke-free policy.<ref>{{cite web | title=Disparity in Protecting Food Service Staff from Secondhand Smoke Shows Need for Comprehensive Smoke-Free Policies, Say Groups (inactive as of 4/8/08) | url=http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=28683}}</ref> Similar smoking bans modeled after NYC's were soon implemented in neighboring states; New York State in July 2003, Connecticut in January 2004, and New Jersey in April 2006.
Other studies, however, have found far different results. Michael Pakko of the [[Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis]] has released several studies of the negative economic impact of smoking bans on restaurants and bars, including generally,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/red/2006/02/Pakko.pdf|title=Michael Pakko, "On the Economic Impact of Smoking Bans", ''Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Regional Economic Development'', Volume 2, no. 2 (2006)|format=PDF}}</ref> in [[Columbia, Missouri]],<ref>[http://research.stlouisfed.org/regecon/op/CRE8OP-2007-002.pdf Michael Pakko, "The Economic Impact of a Smoking Ban in Columbia, Missouri: A Preliminary Analysis of Sales Tax Data" ([[Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis]]: December 11, 2007)]</ref> and at [[Delaware]] gambling facilities.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://research.stlouisfed.org/wp/2005/2005-054.pdf|title=Michael Pakko, "No Smoking at the Slot Machines: The Effect of a Smoke-Free Law on Delaware Gaming Revenues" (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis: December, 2005)|format=PDF}} See also: {{cite web|url=http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/15/1/68|title=M R Pakko, "Smoke-free law did affect revenue from gaming in Delaware", ''Tobacco Control'', February 2006, 15(1), pp. 68-9."}}</ref>
===Effects on tourism===
Some areas with a large tourism trade are concerned about the impact of a smoking ban on their tourism market. In [[Hawaii]], for example several tourism monitoring agencies reported that the ban has had a significant negative impact on tourism, based on government numbers and industry feedback.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.send2press.com/newswire/2007-0312-005_Hawaii.shtml|title=Hawaii Tourism Slumps on Heels of Smoking Ban|publisher=Send2Press Newswire|date=Mar 12, 2007}} [http://starbulletin.com/2007/08/28/news/story03.html Tourist office's aloha ashtrays raise a stink], August 28, 2007 </ref>
===Effects on law enforcement===
{{main|Smokeasy}}
Another effect of smoking bans has been the [[smokeasy]]. As the [[speakeasy]] was to [[prohibition of alcohol|alcohol prohibition]] in the early 20th century, so is the smokeasy to smoking bans: it is a business, especially a bar, which allows smoking despite a legal prohibition. Numerous clandestine smokeasies exist in most jurisdictions with smoking bans in bars and restaurants, and have been noted widely, including in [[New York City]],<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/04/nyregion/04SMOK.html?ex=1388552400&en=00adcfb68b653f75&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND "Waiting to inhale"], ''The New York Times'', January 4, 2004 See also: "Lighting-up time: Big Apple meets Big Smoke," ''[[The Times]]'', April 1, 2005. See also "Gangsters will be the real winners in smoking ban," ''Scottish [[Daily Record]]'', January 7, 2005. "Smoked out?" ''The Buffalo News'', February 18, 2004."N.Y. restaurants cutting trans fat from menus," ''The [[Washington Times]]'', December 6, 2006. "The Guide to the Guides," ''[[The Observer]]'' ([[United Kingdom]]), January 30, 2005. "A year after New York smoking ban, debate still rages over effects," ''The [[Philadelphia Inquirer]]'', March 31, 2004. "Late Night Cracks in City's Ban," ''[[New York Post]]'', March 4, 2004. "On The Run," ''The [[New York Times]]'', June 8, 2003.</ref> [[Hawaii]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://pacific.bizjournals.com/pacific/stories/2007/02/19/story2.html?b=1171861200%5E1419319|title="What smoking ban? Some bars defy new law," ''Pacific Business Journal'', February 16, 2007}}</ref> [[Alberta]],<ref>Collette Derworiz, "City to enforce smoking ban: Bylaw officers will charge bar owners flouting rules," ''The [[Calgary Herald]]'', January 11, 2007</ref> [[Arizona]],<ref>"Tempe wants to wipe out its 'smoke-easies,' ''The [[Arizona Republic]]'', August 8, 2002</ref> [[Boston, Massachusetts|Boston]],<ref>"Where there's smoke," ''Boston Magazine'', May, 2005.</ref> [[California]],<ref>[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=travel&res=9C00EFD61331F932A05751C1A961958260 "California's Ban to Clear Smoke Inside Most Bars"] ''The [[New York Times]]'', December 31, 1997 See also: [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1998/05/15/MN80568.DTL "The Land of Smoke-Easies, $500 Barfs"] ''The [[San Francisco Chronicle]]'', May 15, 1998 "Suck It Up," ''SF Weekly'', January 22, 2003</ref> [[Colorado]],<ref>[http://www.gazette.com/onset?id=19674&template=article.html "Bars rebel against smoking ban,"] ''The [[Colorado Springs Gazette]]'', March 28, 2007</ref> [[Columbia, Missouri]],<ref>"Tickets add heat to ban on smoking," ''Columbia Tribune'', March 3, 2007</ref> [[Delaware]],<ref>"Smoking bans burn businesses," ''Delaware News Journal'', December 15, 2002</ref> [[Dublin]],<ref>"Beware of complacency as 'smoke-easies' appear", ''The [[Irish News]]'', June 12, 2007</ref><ref name="scotsman"/> [[Germany]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2243763,00.html|title="'Nazi' claim as Germans rebel over smoking ban," ''The Observer'', January 20, 2008}} {{cite web|url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,527908,00.html|title="German Don Quixotes Tilt against Smoking Ban", ''Der Spiegel'', January 11, 2008}}</ref> [[Illinois]],<ref>Eric Petersen, "Three Schaumburg businesses violate new smoking ban," ''The [[Daily Herald (Arlington Heights)|Arlington Heights Daily Herald]]'', March, 2007 See also: {{cite web|url=http://www.thetelegraph.com/articles/ban_11408___article.html/smoking_bar.html|title="Smoking ban holds up, despite opposition", ''The Telegraph'', February 23, 2008}}</ref> [[Manitoba]],<ref>Michelle MacAfee, "Manitobans smoke it up," ''The [[Canadian Press]]'', October 31, 2004 David Schmeichel, "Smoke cops strike: Treherne hotelier vows to fight 'fascist law,'" ''The [[Winnipeg Sun]]'', November 13, 2004</ref> [[Minnesota]],<ref>G.R. Anderson, Jr., "Busted: The rumor and truth of one club's struggle against the smoking ban," ''[[City Pages]]'', February 17, 2006</ref> [[Ohio]],<ref>Tracy Wheeler, "Smoking ban leaves some bars smoldering," ''The [[Akron Beacon Journal]]'', November 18, 2007 See also: Elaine T. Secora, "Smoke and fire," ''[[Cleveland Scene]]'', January 31, 2007 [http://yellowisthecolor.wordpress.com/2007/03/28/smoke-easies-altoid-tins-blue-moon-janis-joplin-and-vivid-imaginations/ "smoke-easies, altoid tins, blue moon, janis joplin and vivid imaginations"] ''Yellow Is The Color Blog'' {{cite web|url=http://www.marionstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071227/NEWS01/712270318|title="Smoking ban fines about to get bigger", ''The Marion Star'', December 27, 2007}} {{cite web|url=http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/120203113016350.xml&coll=2|title="Underground smokehouses open amid crackdown on smoking, strip clubs", ''Cleveland Plain Dealer'', February 3, 2008}}</ref> [[Philadelphia]],<ref name="bykofsky"/><ref>"New vice, same solutions," ''Philadelphia Daily News'', March 26, 2007 See also: [http://blogs.fortwayne.com/opening_arguments/2007/03/smokeeasies.html "Smoke-easies"], ''[[Fort Wayne News-Sentinel]]'', March 28, 2007 Natalie Pompilio, "Ban hardly a crushing blow," ''The [[Philadelphia Inquirer]]'', November, 2006</ref> [[Qatar]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=192251&version=1&template_id=36&parent_id=16|title="Ban on smoking openly flouted", ''The Gulf Times'', December 27, 2007}}</ref> [[Scotland]],<ref name="scotsman"/> [[Seattle, Washington|Seattle]],<ref name="seattlesmokers"/><ref>"Law or no law, Seattle bars still smoking," UPI, June 1, 2006</ref> [[Toronto]],<ref>[http://torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Warmington_Joe/2006/05/25/1596510.html "Speakeasies? Nah, smoke-easies"], ''The Toronto Sun'', May 25, 2006</ref> the [[United Kingdom]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/local-west-yorkshire-news/2008/01/17/stand-off-86081-20360728/|title="Stand-off!", ''The Huddersfield Daily Examiner'', January 17, 2008}} "Defiant bar owner finds 'loophole' to flout smoking ban," ''The [[Daily Mail]]'', August 3, 2007 {{cite web|url=http://www.newstatesman.com/200802070019|title="My local smoke-easy", ''The New Statesman'', February 7, 2008}} {{cite web|url=http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?storyCode=58732|title="The Big Smoke-easy," ''The Publican'', February 21, 2008}}</ref> [[Utah]],<ref>[http://www.utahstatesman.com/news/2006/12/06/Opinion/Column.Everyone.Head.For.The.smokeEasy-2524825.shtml "Everyone Head for the Smoke-Easy"], ''Utah Statesman'', December 12, 2006</ref> and [[Washington, D.C.]].<ref>"Smoke-easies offer cover from puff police; Aficionados just want a place to light up, relax," ''The [[Washington Times]]'', November 20, 2003</ref>
As a result, jurisdictions which have passed smoking ban often unexpectedly find themselves having to use law enforcement to enforce their smoking bans.<ref>"Cig-ban Scofflaws light up Ash-Toria," ''The [[New York Post]]'', May 8, 2006.</ref><ref name=bykofsky>{{cite web|url=http://www.philly.com/philly/columnists/20070326_Stu_Bykofsky___Smoke-easys_ignore_the_tobacco_ban.html|title="'Smoke-easys' ignore the tobacco ban", ''Philadelphia Inquirer'', March 27, 2007}}</ref><ref name=scotsman>{{cite web|url=http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1271792006|title="Warning over 'smoke-easy' lock-ins," ''The Scotsman'', August 29, 2006}}</ref><ref name="seattlesmokers">{{cite web|url=http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/272211_smokeeasy31.html|title="Smokers find refuge in secret nicotine dens", ''Seattlepi.com'', May 31, 2006}}</ref>
According to the Roofie Foundation, a charity said to be the only agency in the [[United Kingdom]] addressing the issues surrounding sex abuse through drink spiking, the number of cases of drink spiking reported to it has risen markedly since the introduction of the smoking ban in [[England]] as a result of smokers leaving their drink unattended while going off for a smoke.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/north_yorkshire/7106467.stm Smoking ban 'increase in spiking'] BBC News, 21 November, 2007</ref>
===Effects on musical instruments===
Bellows-driven instruments – such as the [[accordion]], [[concertina]], [[Diatonic button accordion|melodeon]] and [[Uilleann pipes|Uilleann]] (or Irish) bagpipes – reportedly need less frequent cleaning and maintenance as a result of the Irish smoking ban.<ref>John F. Garvey, Paul McElwaine, Thomas S. Monaghan, and Walter T. McNicholas [http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/335/7619/549?ck=nck Confessions of an accordion cleaner – a marker of improved air quality since the Irish smoking ban] ''BMJ'' [[24 September]] 2007</ref>
==Criticism of bans==
Smoking bans have been criticised on a number of grounds:
===Government interference with personal lifestyle or property rights===
Critics of smoking bans, including artist [[Joe Jackson (musician)|Joe Jackson]]<ref>{{cite web | title=The Official Website of Joe Jackson | url=http://www.joejackson.com/smoking.php | accessdate=2007-04-12 }}</ref> and essayist and political critic [[Christopher Hitchens]], claim that bans are misguided efforts of retrograde [[Puritan]]s. Typically, this argument is based on [[John Stuart Mill]]'s [[harm principle]], arguing that the damage to public health through [[passive smoking]] is insufficient to warrant government intervention; however, in On Liberty, Mill himself wrote "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant." This rationale only has validity if passive smoking is proven to be absolutely 100% harmless.{{Or|date=April 2008}}
Other critics emphasize the property rights of business owners, drawing a distinction between public places (such as government buildings) and privately-owned establishments (such as bars and restaurants). Citing economic efficiency, some economists suggest that the basic institutions of private property rights and contractual freedom are capable of resolving conflicts between the preferences of smokers and those who seek a smoke-free environment - without government intrusion.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iedm.org/uploaded/pdf/avril05_en.pdf|title=Valentin Petkantchin, "Should cigarettes be banned in public places?" (Montreal Economic Institute: April, 2005)|format=PDF}}</ref>
===Economic loss===
Another claim is that smoking bans hurt the business in the hospitality sector (bars, restaurants, hotels, casinos, etc.), especially those near a border with a jurisdiction that does allow smoking. There are media reports of individual establishments which have suffered reduced revenue since the ban came into effect.<ref>{{cite web | title= N.J.'s Smoking Ban Hurts Restaurant, Bar Sales| url=http://wcbstv.com/local/local_story_098185934.html}}</ref> Other studies have found no such loss, or even that restaurants' revenue increased after the smoking ban.<ref>{{cite web | title= Smoke-Free Environments Law Project| url=http://www.tcsg.org/sfelp/economic.htm}}</ref>
===Questions over health costs of smoking===
The main arguments against smoking being a "victimless crime" are the health risks of [[passive smoking]] and increased health costs borne by society. On the latter point, a study suggests that, although health care costs for smokers at a given age are as much as 40 percent higher than those for non-smokers, complete smoking cessation might actually result in an ''increase'' in total health care costs after 15 years because people would live longer.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Health Care Costs of Smoking| url=http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/337/15/1052}}</ref>
===Bans may move smoking elsewhere===
Bans on smoking in offices and other enclosed public places often result in smokers going outside to smoke, frequently congregating outside doorways. Many jurisdictions that have banned smoking in enclosed public places have extended the ban to cover areas within a fixed distance of entrances to buildings.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.no-smoke.org/learnmore.php?dp=d14%7Cd35%7Cp210|title=Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights – Australia}}</ref>
The former [[Cabinet of the United Kingdom|British Cabinet Member]] [[John Reid (UK politician)|John Reid]] claimed that bans on smoking in public places may lead to more smoking at home.<ref name="MPs to challenge...">{{cite web | title=MPs to challenge ministers' veto on total smoking ban | url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/smoking/Story/0,,1669527,00.html | accessdate=2006-10-07 }}</ref> However, both the [[British House of Commons|House of Commons]] Health committee and the [[Royal College of Physicians]] disagreed, with the former finding no evidence to support Reid's claim after studying Ireland,<ref name="MPs to challenge..."/> and the latter finding that smoke-free households increased from 22% to 37% between 1996 and 2003.<ref>{{cite web | title=Smoking ban in public places also cuts smoking at home | url=http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/331/7509/129-b | accessdate=2006-10-07 }}</ref>
==Alternatives to bans==
===Incentives for voluntarily smoke-free establishments===
Some smoking ban opponents nonetheless concede that in many localities, the number of smoke-free bars and restaurants is insufficient to meet the needs and wants of residents who prefer a smoke-free environment. In order to encourage the creation of more smoke-free businesses, some experts and politicians support tax credits and other financial incentives for businesses that enact non-smoking policies. During the debates over the Washington, DC smoking ban, city council member Carol Schwartz proposed legislation[http://www.dccouncil.washington.dc.us/SCHWARTZ/smoke-free_workplaces_statement_june14_2005_rls.htm] that would have enacted either a substantial tax credit for businesses that chose to ban smoking or a significant additional licensing fee for bars and restaurants that wished to allow smoking. Proponents of such policies claim that they would help to increase the options for customers and employees who prefer a smoke-free bar or restaurant without infringing on the rights of business owners. Opponents of such tax measures counter that only a complete ban can fully protect patrons and employees.
===Tradable smoking pollution permits===
One solution to the problem of smoking [[Externality|externalities]] favoured by some economists is a system of [[tradable smoking pollution permits]], similar to other [[emissions trading]] (cap-and-trade) pollution permits systems used by the [[United States Environmental Protection Agency|Environmental Protection Agency]] in recent decades to curb other types of pollution. The proposal has been suggested by Profs. [[Robert Haveman]] and [[John Mullahy]] of the [[University of Wisconsin-Madison]].[http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?ref=/madison.com/html/archive_files/wsj/2005/09/25/0509240280.php]
Emissions trading systems are generally favored by economists as a market-based alternative to direct regulation, because they yield a given reduction in pollution at lower cost, and may permit a reduction in administrative costs.
Tradable pollution permits as a market-based alternative to smoking bans can be applied as follows: Lawmakers decide the optimal level of smoking establishments for an area. Permits are then auctioned off or otherwise allocated. Nonsmoking establishments with unused permits can sell them on the open market to smoking establishments. In essence, businesses are required to purchase the property rights over the clean air space of their business before their customers can smoke.
===Ventilation===
Critics of bans suggest ventilation is a means of reducing the harmful effects of [[passive smoking]]. A study conducted by the School of Technology of the [[University of Glamorgan]] in [[Wales]], [[United Kingdom]], published in the ''[[Building Services Journal]]'' stated that ventilation systems can dramatically improve indoor air quality.<ref>Building Services Journal [http://www.bsjonline.co.uk/story.asp?storyType=85§ioncode=95&storyCode=3047478 ''No ifs or butts''] March 2005</ref>
A study by Repace titled "Can Displacement Ventilation control SecondHand ETS?". The conclusion is a resounding no, ventilation is no subsitute for a smoking ban.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rwjf.org/pr/product.jsp?id=15600|title=Can Displacement Ventilation Control Secondhand ETS?}}</ref>
The tobacco industry has focused on proposing ventilation as an alternative to smoking bans, though this approach has not been widely adopted in the U.S. due to the cost and complexity of widespread implementation of ventilation devices.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Drope J, Bialous SA, Glantz SA |title=Tobacco industry efforts to present ventilation as an alternative to smoke-free environments in North America |journal=Tobacco control |volume=13 Suppl 1 |issue= |pages=i41–7 |year=2004 |pmid=14985616 |doi=}}</ref> The Italian smoking ban permits dedicated smoking rooms with automatic doors and smoke extractors. Nevertheless, few Italian establishments are creating smoking rooms due to the additional cost.<ref>BBC News [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4159587.stm Italians fume over cigarette curb] 10 January, 2005</ref>
===Hardship exemptions===
In some communities, establishments were able to prove that they did in fact suffer substantial financial loss as a direct result of a smoking ban and received hardship waivers from the governing entity which passed the ban.<ref>
[http://www.wauwatosanow.com/story/index.aspx?id=707979 Hector's wants longer exemption] See also: [http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1007/465748.html D.C. Grants First Exemption to Smoking Ban] [http://www.gazette.net/stories/011108/businew181403_32357.shtml] The Gazette, Gaithersburg, MD,</ref>
==See also==
* [[Coronary heart disease]]
* [[Indoor air quality]]
* [[List of smoking bans in the United States]]
* [[List of smoking bans]] worldwide
* [[Smoke-free restaurant]]
* [[World No Tobacco Day]]
* [[Tobacco fatwa]]
* [[Harm principle]]
* [[Prohibition]]
* [[Smokeasy]]
Organizations:
* [[Action on Smoking and Health]] (A UK antismoking and non-smokers' rights organization)
* [[Airspace Action on Smoking and Health]]
* [[FOREST]] (A UK pro-tobacco group)
==References==
{{reflist|2}}
==External links==
{{commonscat|Smoking ban}}
*[http://www.cctc.ca/ Canadian Council for Tobacco Control]
*[http://www.clearingtheairscotland.org.uk/ Clearing the Air Scotland] Scottish Executive site established to provide information on Scotland's smoke-free legislation
*[http://www.tobaccocontrol.gov.hk/eng/loadframe.html?id=181 Hong Kong Tobacco Control Office]
*[http://www.otc.ie/ Irish Government's Office of Tobacco Control]
*[http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_12_State_Legislated_Actions_on_Tobacco_Issues.asp?sitearea=PED State Tobacco Laws] from the American Cancer Society
* [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/ Legacy Tobacco Documents Library] from the [[University of California, San Francisco]]
* [http://www.pmdocs.com/ Philip Morris USA Document Archive]
[[Category:Health risks]]
[[Category:Medical regulation]]
[[Category:Public health]]
[[Category:Tobacco control]]
[[cs:Zákaz kouření]]
[[da:Rygeforbud]]
[[de:Rauchverbot]]
[[fr:Interdiction de fumer]]
[[it:Legge antifumo]]
[[nl:Rookverbod]]
[[ja:禁煙]]
[[ru:Запрет на курение]]
[[sk:Zákaz fajčenia]]
[[sv:Rökförbud]]
[[zh:禁煙]]