Elsevier

Health & Place

Volume 20, March 2013, Pages 19-24
Health & Place

Informing outdoor smokefree policy: Methods for measuring the proportion of people smoking in outdoor public areas

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2012.11.006Get rights and content

Abstract

Introduction

To advance the design and implementation of outdoor smokefree area policies, we aimed to develop simple, low-cost methods for measuring smoking in a variety of public places.

Methods

Two methods were developed and were used by solo observers during March 2011–February 2012 to measure the proportion of people smoking at a variety of sites.

Results

Both methods performed well (n=5553 people observed); the first at 58 sites in the UK and New Zealand (n=3191 observed); the second at 33 sites in New Zealand (n=2362 observed), with significant differences found between the smoking at types of sites and between countries. For the two countries combined, the proportions of people smoking (amongst those over 12 years) in children’s play areas was significantly lower compared to all the other sites combined (risk ratio=0.39; 95%CI: 0.20 to 0.76; p=0.002).

Conclusions

Solo observers can establish the proportion of people smoking in a range of outdoor sites. Such methods can inform outdoor smokefree area policymaking by providing baseline and post-policy data to enable location targeting and policy evaluation.

Section snippets

Background

There has been an international increase in smokefree outdoor area policies over the last ten years (Thomson et al., 2009, American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation, 2011, Ueda et al., 2011, New South Wales Parliament, 2012). The drivers for the increase include the denormalisation of smoking to protect health, reducing nuisance effects, reducing littering, fire risk and improving the image of localities (Klein et al., 2007, Tay and Thomson, 2008, Klein et al., 2012, Russell et al., 2012).

Methods

The criteria adopted in order to obtain simplicity, low-cost and effectiveness in a method were that: (i) one observer could conduct the method, (ii) obtain good inter-observer correlation with minimal training, (iii) and minimal equipment, (iv) remaining unobtrusive, (v) obtain up to 20 person-observations per minute, and (vi) determine the ‘adult’ denominator for the observations of smoking. Two methods were successively developed and trialled during March 2011–February 2012.

The social

Results

Although the two researchers using the first method in the field were asked once each what they were doing, there were no major difficulties in completing the observations. Both the methods, when tested in their final form, appeared to work well, with 5553 people observed, 3191 by the first method at 58 sites in England, Scotland and New Zealand, and 2362 people by the second method at 33 sites in New Zealand. Essential to the successful operation was the limiting of the observation area to a

Discussion

We were able to successfully measure the proportion of people smoking in a range of outdoor public places across different cities and in two countries. We confirmed the feasibility of both our structured observation methods for measuring the proportion of people smoking in outdoor areas where people may be moving. The methods can be used by one observer with minimal training, although a high degree of inter-observer reliability should ideally be shown before solo observations are conducted. By

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Gordon Purdie and Tak Ikeda for statistical advice and support. Health Research Council of New Zealand (Smokefree Kids Policy Project 07/090) Regional Public Health, Lower Hutt, and the New Zealand Centre for Sustainable Cities.

References (41)

  • A. Bryman

    Social Research Methods

    (2008)
  • M. Cameron et al.

    Secondhand smoke exposure (PM2.5) in outdoor dining areas and its correlates

    Tobacco Control

    (2010)
  • Cancer Society of New Zealand. Smokefree councils and outdoor areas [in New Zealand]. Cancer Society of NZ. Wellington....
  • Children and Young People Now. 7 days: Your speed-read roundup of the week. Children and Young People Now. July 23,...
  • Fallin, A. Implementation effectiveness of campus tobacco-free policies. University of Kentucky. PhD thesis. January...
  • B. Giles-Corti et al.

    Creating smoke-free environments in recreational settings

    Health Education and Behavior

    (2001)
  • K.J. Harris et al.

    Enforcing an outdoor smoking ban on a college campus: effects of a multicomponent approach

    Journal of American College Health

    (2009)
  • M. Johns et al.

    Evaluating New York city’s smoke-free parks and beaches law: a critical multiples approach to assessing behavioral impact

    American Journal of Community Psychology

    (2012)
  • E.G. Klein et al.

    Young adult perceptions of smoking in outdoor park areas

    Health and Place

    (2012)
  • E.G. Klein et al.

    Minnesota tobacco-free park policies: attitudes of the general public and park officials

    Nicotine and Tobacco Research

    (2007)
  • Cited by (14)

    • Mapping the visibility of smokers across a large capital city

      2020, Environmental Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      Previous studies conducted in Spain (Sureda et al., 2015), and also in other countries (Sureda et al., 2013; Navas-Acien et al., 2016; Kaplan et al., 2019), showed that smoking was most reported in bars and restaurants in comparison to other outdoor places. Furthermore, public transportation stops were places where we also observed visibility of smokers in accordance to other international studies (Wilson et al., 2014; Thomson et al., 2013), and should be considered in future interventions. This approach has been adopted in setting such as Queensland, Australia, where smoking is banned within 5 m of public transportation waiting areas (Government of Queensland, 2016).

    • Implementation phase of the Tobacco-Free Parks Ordinance: a policy evaluation using photographic data

      2019, Public Health
      Citation Excerpt :

      Evaluation studies of indoor smoking bans have shown that comprehensive laws improve overall air quality, reduce exposure to secondhand smoke,11–13 and improve health outcomes.14 The indoor smoking bans also promoted stronger quit attempts and reductions in tobacco use.15–18 Such studies provide evidence supportive of smoking and tobacco bans as a public health strategy that influences social norms regarding smoking and thus prevents individuals from initiating tobacco use.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text