Consumer Opinion On The Effect Of The Illinois Statewide Ban Public Policies On Statewide Ban

Consumer Opinion On The Effect Of The Illinois Statewide Ban Public Policies On Statewide Ban

Introduction

The purpose of this essay is to analyze the potential effect of statewide bans on smoking in public places. This will be done through a review of literature on research done in this field. Some of the articles to be covered include; behaviors of the public after the statewide ban, economic impacts within certain restaurants, effects of ordinances, and how the ban affected dining out experiences. The results will be examined critically and overall analysis conducted thereafter.

Literature review

Biener and Siegel (1997) conducted a study to determine the effects of the smoking ban in restaurants. The researchers collected their data by the random sampling method specifically through telephone lines. They chose telephone numbers by guessing a particular number and then calling it. The people who took part in the survey represented both sexes; however, they were required to be above the age of eighteen. All respondents came from the City of Massachusetts. The total number of respondents was two thousand, three hundred and fifty six. The survey found that a large percentage of the respondents supported smoking bans in public places as they stated that they would increase their restaurant and bar patronage if the latter venues passed those regulations. This is a summary of the results obtained in relation to smoking bans

Respondents’ sentiments

Percentage results (%)

No change in attendance (restaurants)

61

Increased use of restaurants

30

Decreased use of restaurants

8

No change in attendance (bars)

69

Decreased use of bars

11

Increased use of bars

20

Glantz and Smith (1994) conducted research in a number of cities. Their objective was to establish a relationship between restaurant sales and smoking ordinances.

The experiment identified fifteen cities that had implemented smoking ordinances. In order to render the examination valid, the latter authors also identified fifteen cities that had not instituted ordinances so that the latter could act as controls. The research then obtained sales information by examining their tax data. This method of data collection was utilized because it has high reliability. Sales tax data reflects the total restaurant sales within a community. This is more reliable than sampling a small portion of restaurants. The latter method is likely to yield numerous errors because of the criteria used in sampling. The latter authors utilized state agencies; this allowed them to obtain honest information as compared to approaching participants directly. Restaurants normally give accurate information to state agencies because they are aware that it is illegal to lie to them. On the contrary, no restaurant owner is obliged to give information to a researcher; consequently, they might give false information.

It should also be noted that Glantz and Smith (1994) took account of the economic situation in those respective cities. There is no point in making conclusions without looking at surrounding circumstances. The economy adversely affects revenues for any kind of business. Besides this, the researchers also took account of the nature of restaurant’s performance in respective communities since it would be unfair to link different types of restaurants without considering the geographical factors. The economic factor was accounted for by doing the following:

Obtaining the ratio of restaurant sales to total retail sales in the city
Comparing restaurant sales in cities that passed the ordinance with restaurant sales of cities that did not adhere to the ban.

The group conducted regression analysis to establish a link between the two parameters i.e. (restaurant sales and smoking ordinances). They found neither a positive or negative correlation between the proportion of sales and the smoking bans. Consequently, the effect of these ordinances on sales is quite minimal.

There were some exceptional findings in the survey with regard to two cities Bellflower and Beverly Hills. These latter reinforced the conclusions made at the end of the survey. In these two cities, tobacco companies claimed that there was a thirty percent decrease in sales revenue for most restaurants. Consequently, these cities bowed down to pressure from the tobacco industry and reversed their smoking bans. The reversal did not in increase sales in any way. Restaurants still obtained equal amounts of revenue after lifting the ban. It was also found that restaurants in Beverly recorded a slight increase in sales at the time when the City implemented smoking ordinances.

It is also crucial to take note of the fact that most of the cities in the survey were totally different from one another yet results were still consistent in these aspects. The cities included San Francisco, which is an affluent city, Palo Alto; a community based city, Beverly Hills; a well to do city, Davis; a university based city, Lodi; a rural area and many other different varieties.

Hyland and Cummings (1999) sought to find out the effect of the Smoke free air act in New York on restaurant sales. The research involved a total of four hundred and thirty four restaurants in the City. Data was obtained by analyzing six sources. First, Hyland and Cummings (1999) collected tax data from the New York Department of Finance and Taxation. This was spread out over period of seven years; from 1990 to 1997. They accounted for other external factors such as seasonal variations, population six and economic factors. The second source was a telephone survey that randomly selected one hundred and twenty six small restaurants and three hundred and six large restaurants. They talked to restaurant owners about the possible effects of the law in relation to their businesses. Thereafter, Hyland and Cummings (1999) also obtained the opinions of New York City residents with regard to the smoking act. The fourth source was from the New York Department of Labor where they obtained information about total number of restaurants in the region. They also utilized material from the New York Department of Health where they found information about the number of complaints received after passing the Act. Lastly, the latter authors interviewed nine people involved in passing the law.

The results obtained may be summarized as follows; these were the percentage of restaurants that recorded decreasing sales

-Small restaurants-34%

-Small restaurants with bars-36%

-Large restauarants-35%

-Large restaurants without bars-35%

As it can be seen from the above results, the largest percentage (65% and 64%) of restaurants thought that business was still good after the institution of the Smoke free act. Consequently, there is no link between the nature of business and the smoke free act.

Luk, R., Ferrence, R., & Gmel, G. (2006, May) found that there was neither a positive nor negative correlation between the restaurant sales and the smoke free by law in Ottawa. The research was conducted by analyzing sales tax for a variety of restaurants in Ottawa. This information was obtained from the federal state. This result took into account the nature of the economy in Ottawa at that time. However, results were consistent in a large number of those restaurants. The results were consistent with other findings shown in earlier reports.

Roseman (2005) conducted a survey to establish a link between consumer opinion and the ban on smoking. This research focused on consumers located in Kentucky. They were required to give their opinions about the smoking laws passed by the state.

She sought the opinion of three types of people;

-Smokers

-Previous smokers

-Non smokers

All the latter mentioned groups were asked to give their opinions about the new smoking regulations and what they thought would happen in the future after passing the regulation i.e. they were to give their predictions.

Data was collected through telephone interviews. She conducted the interviews among eight hundred and twenty five individuals in the latter parts of 2003. Respondents were asked whether they smoke or not and what their opinions were. The study only considered the opinions of those respondents above eighteen years.

Roseman (2005) found that none of the latter mentioned groups felt that a ban on smoking would affect their dining experience. Almost all of them acknowledged that they would maintain their eating habits despite the new regulations. Additionally, it was also found that there were some significant differences in the nature of responses with regard to demographics. The latter factors were seen to affect public opinion on smoking

Education background
Smoking status
Residential area

Roseman (2005) found that most of the respondents who worried about smoking in restaurants were the non smokers. It was also found that non-smokers frequently considered the smoke free aspect when selecting a particular restaurant. The latter respondents also felt that eating in restaurants with smokers undermines the dining out experience and makes their meals  less enjoyable. In addition to these, she highlighted the fact that most former smokers and non smokers predicted positive results after passing the smoking ban in Kentucky. On the other hand, smokers held dissimilar sentiments. They indicated that they would reduce the number of times they frequent restaurants if the smoking ban was passed. Such respondents would opt to eat in.

Wakefield et al (1999) conducted a study that was designed to indicate the nature of perceptions about impending smoking bans. The research was conducted through questionnaires posted on the internet. They managed to obtain the opinions of two hundred and fifty seven participants. The researchers also obtained data through telephone interviews. In this process, they were able to asses the opinions of thirty one respondents. They asked the respondents about their perceptions before passing the ban on smoking.

It was found that the respondents were not severely affected by the ban on smoking. Most of them felt that they would still continue dining in restaurants even after passing the smoking ban. Additionally, both smokers and non smokers felt that they would not exercise any form of selection when trying to choose particular restaurants. Wakefield et al (1999) also found that there were no significant differences between the amount of money to be spent after the smoking legislations and before. This was true for smokers and non smokers alike. Lastly, it was found that most people favored smoking regulations in public places regardless of one’s smoking status. Some smokers even asserted that they enjoy clear environments while eating without having to inhale another person’s smoke. According to them, this interfered with their meal.

Conclusion

All the latter findings converge to one conclusion; that smoking ordinances have little or no effect on restaurant performance. Biener and Siegel (1997) found that most people would increase their bar and restaurant patronage after the ban on smoking. Glantz and Smith (1994) found that the sales revenue in most restaurants remained constant before and after passing smoking ordinances in fifteen cities. Hyland and Cummings (1999) found that majority of the restaurants in New York City recorded positive results after implanting anti-smoking legislations. Luk, R., Ferrence, R., & Gmel, G. (2006) also shared the same results after passing the smoke free by laws in Ottawa Canada. Roseman (2005) found that there would be no change in dining habits after passing smoking ordinances in Kentucky. Lastly, Wakefield et al (1999) found that most people favored smoking ordinances. This was true for smokers and non-smokers. Overall, restaurant and bar performance is likely to remain the same before and after passing smoke free laws.

Reference:

Biener L, Siegel M. Behavior intentions of the public after bans

on smoking in restaurants and bars. Am J Public Health 1997; 87:2042–4.

Glantz, S.A. & Smith, L.R.A. (1994, July). The effect of ordinances requiring smoke-free restaurants on restaurant sales. American Journal of Public Health, 84(7), 1081-1085

Hyland, A. & Cummings, K.M. (1999, January).Restaurateur reports of the economic impact of the new york city smoke-free air act. Journal of Public Health Management & Practice, 5(1), 37-42

Luk, R., Ferrence, R., & Gmel, G. (2006, May). The economic impact of a smoke-free bylaw on restaurant and bar sales in Ottawa, Canada. Addiction, 101(5), 738-745.

Roseman, M. (2005). Consumer Opinion on Smoking Bans and Predicted Impact on Restaurant Frequency. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration. 6(4), 49-60.

Wakefield, M., Roberts, L., & Miller, C. (1999, July). Perceptions of the effect of an impending restaurant smoking ban on dining-out experience. Preventive Medicine: An International Journal Devoted to Practice and Theory, 29(1), 53-56