HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Drope, J Articles by Glantz, S Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Drope, J Articles by Glantz, S

British Columbia capital regional district 100% smokefree bylaw: a successful public health campaign despite industry opposition

Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, Institute for Health Policy Studies and Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA

Correspondence to:
Professor Stanton Glantz, University of California, San Francisco, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, 530 Parnassus Avenue, Room 366, San Francisco, CA 94143-1390, USA;
glantz{at}medicine.ucsf.edu

Objective: To describe how the British Columbia Capital Regional District successfully passed, implemented, and enforced a 100% smokefree bylaw in all public places, including restaurants and bars, despite an aggressive campaign by the tobacco industry (acting through the hospitality industry) to stop it.

Methods: Information was obtained from news reports, internal tobacco industry documents, reports, public documents, and interviews with key players. Tobacco industry documents were accessed between February and April 2002. This project was approved by the University of California San Francisco committee on human research.

Results: As in the USA and elsewhere in the world, the tobacco industry in British Columbia, Canada, recruited and created hospitality associations to fight against the district smokefree bylaw. They used the classic industry rhetoric of individual rights and freedoms, economic devastation, and ventilation as a solution. Public health authorities were able to counter industry strategies with a strong education campaign, well written bylaws, and persistent enforcement.

Conclusion: It is possible to overcome serious opposition orchestrated by the tobacco industry and develop and implement a 100% smokefree bylaw in Canada. Doing so requires attention to detail in drafting the bylaw, as well as a public education campaign on the health dangers of secondhand smoke and active enforcement to overcome organised resistance to the bylaw. Jurisdictions considering smokefree bylaws should anticipate this opposition when developing and implementing their bylaws.

Keywords: British Columbia; smokefree bylaw; tobacco industry

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. M Sebrie and S. A Glantz "Accommodating" smoke-free policies: tobacco industry's Courtesy of Choice programme in Latin America Tob. Control, October 1, 2007; 16(5): e6 - e6. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. L. York and E. J. Hahn The Community Readiness Model: Evaluating Local Smoke-Free Policy Development Policy Politics Nursing Practice, August 1, 2007; 8(3): 184 - 200. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L L Mandel and S A Glantz Hedging their bets: tobacco and gambling industries work against smoke-free policies Tob. Control, September 1, 2004; 13(3): 268 - 276. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. K. Ong and S. A. Glantz Free Nicotine Replacement Therapy Programs vs Implementing Smoke-Free Workplaces: A Cost-Effectiveness Comparison Am J Public Health, June 1, 2005; 95(6): 969 - 975. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]