Tobacco Free Initiative

Arabic web site

Key areas and groups

Tobacco free public places

The growing determination among people all over the world to make smoking an unacceptable habit is reflected in a phenomenal increase in legislation to restrict smoking in public places. Banned at first from cinemas and theatres, smoking is now increasingly outlawed from public transport, restaurants, offices and the workplaces.

What has triggered this avalanche of legislation at all levels of government, as well as comparable voluntary actions by private organizations? First of all, prohibitions against smoking in cinemas and theatres were seen as fire prevention measures. Banning cigarette smoking where food is prepared was an obvious safety and sanitation measure. Then, more and more voices were raised to protect nonsmokers from the nuisance of tobacco smoke on the basis of their right to breathe clean air.

It was when evidence mounted about the danger to health of passive smoking that legislation for smoke-free public places really took off. Evidence emerged first from Japan, and was then confirmed in other countries, which the nonsmoking wives of smokers had up to three-and-a-half times more lung cancer as compared with the non-smoking wives of non-smokers. This led national governments and local communities to protect the right to breathe clean air not only as a matter of aesthetics but as a principle of public health. Recently, new evidence has emerged from a 20-year longitudinal study of non-smoking wives of smokers which shows an increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease (as well as lung cancer) associated with passive smoking. Finally, this type of legislation has escalated against a backdrop of worldwide concern with the quality of the environment.

LAWS ON SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLACES

Countries have used various legislative approaches to guarantee smoke-free public places. These include:

• Banning smoking in all public places (Belgium);

• Banning smoking in all public places unless specifically allowed, and also specifying places where smoking is prohibited (Finland);

• Combining a general requirement restricting smoking in public places with designation of specific places where smoking is not allowed, such as places where children congregate, or banks and post offices (Iceland);

• Authorizing administrations to designate the places where smoking is prohibited (Malta, Papua New Guinea, Senegal);

• Stating the general objective of banning or reducing smoking in public places, while giving responsibility for doing so to administrators orrelying on voluntary action (Republic of Korea, Sweden);

• Specifying particular public places where smoking is prohibited and authorizing named agencies to prohibit smoking in other public places (Romania);

• Specifying particular types of places where smoking is prohibited (Burkina Faso, Canada, Cyprus, France, Israel, Luxembourg, Saudi Arabia, and Spain).

The most common places where smoking is prohibited are government buildings; hospitals and other health facilities; nurseries, schools and colleges; trains, buses and aircraft; and indoor public places such as cinemas, theatres, libraries, museums, elevators and indoor sports arenas.

As non-smoking in public places has increasingly become the norm, new legislation often extends the range of places where smoking is restricted to include retail and food stores, commercial establishments, banks, airport waiting areas, waiting lines and ticketing areas, and parts of hotels and restaurants.

Restaurants present a special situation because of the strong desire of some customers to smoke and the interest of restaurant owners in accommodating them. The most acceptable solution is for legislation to require the designation of separate areas for nonsmokers and smokers. As for air travel, the requirement for airlines to set aside non-smoking sections of planes is being progressively replaced by a complete ban on smoking (see article entitled "CLEANER AIR AT 30000 FEET’).

PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF LEGISLATION

Statutes to restrict smoking in public places and the workplace have generally been put into effect without difficulty. Even the most comprehensive laws, such as those of Belgium and New York City which ban smoking in virtually all indoor public places, have met little resistance from the public. The statutes often authorize the setting aside of smoking areas, particularly in trains and restaurants, and these provisions have minimized objections from smokers. Where smokers continue to flout the law on smoking in public places, a concerted campaign by the enforcement agency to issue stem warnings generally suffices to ensure compliance. Substantial fines for offenders and an occasional well-publicized case of enforcement yield dividends in harmonious compliance with the laws.

Nevertheless, many obstacles had to be overcome before these laws were placed on the statute books and accepted as the way that non-smokers and smokers could co-exist. The principal obstacle was the opposition of the tobacco industry, which has invested large sums in advertising and publicity to oppose such legislation. In the United States, industry advertisements asked: "Do you want "Big Brother" [the government] looking over your shoulder?" or they suggested to management: "Do you want conflict among people in your workplace?"

Another major obstacle was the inertia that stemmed from a lack of knowledge on the part of the public about the adverse effects on health of involuntary smoking. It was from this issue that the industry sought to divert attention by its specious attacks on legislation to control smoking in public places and the workplace.

STRATEGIES FOR ACHIEVING SMOKE-FREE PUBLIC PLACES AND WORKPLACES

Education and advocacy are essential. No legislation can be fully enacted without educating she public and policy-makers alike on the health dangers of passive smoking and the advantages of creating a smoke-free common environment. Crucial to this effort is the support of the media, but also the mobilization of citizens’ groups, community organizations and professional associations.

Backing up these educational efforts must be effective advocacy. The cooperation of scientists, public health officials and citizens will be needed to convince legislators about the importance and the feasibility of achieving no-smoking public places. Wide community support will strengthen the political will!

BENEFITS OF SMOKE-FREE PUBLIC PLACES

What are the benefits that derive from laws providing for smoke-free public places and workplaces? Such laws:

1. Protect both adults and children against the health hazards of involuntary smoking;

2. Exert a subtle pressure on smokers to stop smoking, and thus help to improve their own health;

3. Help to ensure an agreeable and less hazardous setting for many activities of daily living, public events, travel and work;

4. Lead to a voluntary extension of the no- smoking policy and to the designation of smoking and non-smoking areas, as has happened in airport waiting rooms even in the absence of legislation; and

5. Foster the desirable view that a smoke-free society should be the norm - a norm that is especially influential in preventing young people from smoking.