BRIEF REPORT

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

Mark K Pyles¹, Donald J Mullineaux², Chizimuzo T C Okoli³, Ellen J Hahn⁴

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:
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

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.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Lee, K., Hahn, E. J., Robertson, H. E., Lee, S., Vogel, S. L., Travers, M. J. (2009). Strength of smoke-free air laws and indoor air quality. Nicotine Tob Res 0: ntp026v1-ntp026 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Pyles, M K, Hahn, E J (2009). Smoke-free legislation and charitable gaming in Kentucky. Tobacco Control 18: 60-62 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Rayens, M. K., Hahn, E. J., Langley, R. E., Hedgecock, S., Butler, K. M., Greathouse-Maggio, L. (2007). Public Opinion and Smoke-Free Laws. Policy Politics Nursing Practice 8: 262-270 [Abstract]  
• Eriksen, M., Chaloupka, F. (2007). The Economic Impact of Clean Indoor Air Laws. CA Cancer J Clin 57: 367-378 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• York, N. L., Hahn, E. J. (2007). The Community Readiness Model: Evaluating Local Smoke-Free Policy Development. Policy Politics Nursing Practice 8: 184-200 [Abstract]