Informing outdoor smokefree policy: Methods for measuring the proportion of people smoking in outdoor public areas
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)
- et al.
Smoking visibility, perceived acceptability, and frequency in various locations among youth and adults
Preventive Medicine
(2003) - et al.
Adolescent smoking behavior: measures of social norms
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
(2003) - et al.
Smoking in urban outdoor public places: behaviour, experiences, and implications for public health
Health and Place
(2010) - et al.
Are smoke-free policies implemented and adhered to at sporting venues?
Australian New Zealand Journal of Public Health
(1999) - et al.
Street smoking bans in Japan: a hope for smoke-free cities?
Health Policy
(2011) - American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation. Smokefree Lists, Maps, and Data: Outdoor Area Lists. American Nonsmokers'...
- et al.
SMOKES 2007. Smoking Outdoors in a Kids Environment. October 2007. A Pilot Study: Evaluating the Upper Hutt City Council Smokefree Parks Policy
(2007) Methods of Social Research
(2007)- et al.
Nicotine intake and dose response when smoking reduced-nicotine content cigarettes
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
(2006) - et al.
Secondhand smoke drift: examining the influence of indoor smoking bans on indoor and outdoor air quality at pubs and bars
Nicotine and Tobacco Research
(2010)
Social Research Methods
Secondhand smoke exposure (PM2.5) in outdoor dining areas and its correlates
Tobacco Control
Creating smoke-free environments in recreational settings
Health Education and Behavior
Enforcing an outdoor smoking ban on a college campus: effects of a multicomponent approach
Journal of American College Health
Evaluating New York city’s smoke-free parks and beaches law: a critical multiples approach to assessing behavioral impact
American Journal of Community Psychology
Young adult perceptions of smoking in outdoor park areas
Health and Place
Minnesota tobacco-free park policies: attitudes of the general public and park officials
Nicotine and Tobacco Research
Cited by (14)
Mapping the visibility of smokers across a large capital city
2020, Environmental ResearchCitation 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 HealthCitation 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.
Secondhand smoke point-source exposures assessed by particulate matter at two popular public beaches in Thailand
2018, Journal of Public Health (United Kingdom)Smoke-free signage in public parks: Impacts on smoking behaviour
2018, Tobacco ControlCharacteristics Associated with Smoking Among Patrons of Three Philadelphia Parks
2018, Journal of Community Health