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 Pyles, M. K Articles by Hahn, E. J Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pyles, M. K Articles by Hahn, E. J

Economic effect of a smoke-free law in a tobacco-growing community

¹ School of Business and Economics, College of Charleston, Charleston, South Carolina, USA
² School of Management, Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of Lexington, Kentucky, USA
³ Lexus Group, University of British Columbia, British Columbia, Canada
⁴ University of Kentucky, College of Nursing and College of Public Health, Lexington, Keutucky, USA

Correspondence to:
Dr M Pyles
School of Business and Economics, College of Charleston, 5 Liberty Street, Suite 400, Charleston SC 29401, USA; pylesm{at}cofc.edu

ABSTRACT
Objective: To determine whether Lexington, Kentucky’s smoke-free law affected employment and business closures in restaurants and bars. On 27 April 2004, Lexington-Fayette County implemented a comprehensive ordinance prohibiting smoking in all public buildings, including bars and restaurants. Lexington is located in a major tobacco-growing state that has the highest smoking rate in the US and was the first Kentucky community to become smoke-free.

Design: A fixed-effects time series design to estimate the effect of the smoke-free law on employment and ordinary least squares to estimate the effect on business openings and closings.

Subjects and settings: All restaurants and bars in Lexington-Fayette County, Kentucky and the six contiguous counties.

Main outcome measures: ES-202 employment data from the Kentucky Workforce Cabinet; Business opening/closings data from the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department, Environmental Division.

Results: A positive and significant relationship was observed between the smoke-free legislation and restaurant employment, but no significant relationship was observed with bar employment. No relationship was observed between the law’s implementation and employment in contiguous counties nor between the smoke-free law and business openings or closures in alcohol-serving and or non-alcohol-serving businesses.

Conclusions: No important economic harm stemmed from the smoke-free legislation over the period studied, despite the fact that Lexington is located in a tobacco-producing state with higher-than-average smoking rates.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. K. Rayens, E. J. Hahn, R. E. Langley, S. Hedgecock, K. M. Butler, and L. Greathouse-Maggio Public Opinion and Smoke-Free Laws Policy Politics Nursing Practice, November 1, 2007; 8(4): 262 - 270. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Eriksen and F. Chaloupka The Economic Impact of Clean Indoor Air Laws CA Cancer J Clin, November 1, 2007; 57(6): 367 - 378. [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]