Valid and Reliable Scientific Studies Clearly Show That
Smoking Bans in Restaurants and Bars Do NOT Cause an Adverse Economic Impact
Includes List of Studies Found to be Valid and Reliable


Recently, an analysis was made of the large number of studies which have sought to determine whether or not bans on smoking in the “hospitality industry” – restaurants and bars – have a positive, negative, or no significant impact on business.  To see the analysis and the many studies cited in it, click here.

Unfortunately, many such studies – including those generally cited by the tobacco industry and its allies – are based upon subjective impressions or even guesses as to what would happen if such bans were adopted.  Others were poorly designed and did not comply with standard scientific techniques such as applying statistical tests to assess validity, reliability, etc.

Finally, many of the so-called "studies" were funded by the tobacco industry.  This fact alone should raise doubts as to the reliability and even validity of each of the studies, especially in view of the voluminous documentation of the tobacco industry's prior successful efforts to influence “scientific” and “medical” studies (e.g., about the dangers of primary smoking, the addictiveness of nicotine, the dangers of secondhand tobacco smoke, etc.), and to misrepresent such studies.

To find out which of these studies was valid and reliable, a careful analysis of all of the studies was conducted.  The authors of the analysis of these studies concluded: “well-designed studies on the economic impact of policy changes:
1. are based on objective measures [rather than subjective guesses] ;
2. use data several years before and after policy implementation [i.e., over a reasonably long time frame] ;
3. use appropriate statistical tests which test for significance, controlling for underlying trends and fluctuations in data; and
4. control for changes in economic conditions [e.g., general increases or decreases in business/economic activity, inflation, etc.].” [emphasis added]

The conclusions of this extensive analysis are summarized below:

* “ No negative economic impact from the introduction of smoke-free policies in restaurant and bars is indicated by the [26] studies where findings are based on an objective measure such as taxable sales receipts, where data points several years before and after the introduction of smoke-free policies were examined, where changes in economic conditions are appropriately controlled for , and where appropriate statistical tests are used to control for underlying trends and fluctuations in data."

* "Just a few studies using objective measures have found negative effects. [BUT] Each of these is methodologically flawed.”
 
* “Studies concluding a negative economic impact have predominantly based findings on outcomes predicted before introduction of policies, or on subjective impressions or estimates of changes rather than actual, objective, verified or audited data. These studies were funded predominantly by the tobacco industry or organizations allied with the tobacco industry. Almost none of the studies finding a negative impact are published in peer-reviewed journals.” [emphasis added, all of these problems significantly uncut the validity and reliability of these so-called studies]

Below is a listing of the 26 best studies of the economic effects of smoking bans in the hospitality industry.  Each meets the basic criteria set forth above:
1. objective measure such as reported sales or sales taxes, and not subjective impressions of guesstimates,
2. data over several years so as to avoid blips caused by temporary external events, etc.,
3. used appropriate statistical tests to assure the validity and reliability of the data and its conclusions,
4. controlled for changes in general economic conditions such as general business climate, changes in consumer buying generally, etc.
AND none were funded by the tobacco industry or organizations allied with it.

Each of the listed studies shows whether the smoking ban caused a negative economic effect [NEG] or whether the effect was positive or negligible [OK].
The list also shows which of the studies was peer reviewed [i.e., reviewed by independent experts in the field other than the authors prior to publication in a major respected scientific publication to assure the validity of the techniques and analysis used [PEER] – generally a very strong guarantee both of objectivity and scientific validity.

ASH respectfully suggests that legislators, regulators, and others who wish accurate and reliable information about the economic effects of smoking bans in restaurants and bars rely upon these scientifically valid studies, and not on misleading representations by the tobacco industry and by its allies – including restaurant owners and associations – which have largely obtained their information from tobacco-funded so-called "studies":

Studies of the Economic Impact of Smoking Bans in Restaurants and Bars Based Upon Objective Measures (in these cases, tax receipts) Which Were Conducted Over Several Years, Controlled for Other General Economic Changes, and Used Appropriate Statistical Tests.  In Many Cases, They are Also Peer Reviewed: 

[OK]Bartosch W, Pope G. Preliminary analysis of the economic impact of Brooklines smoking ban. Massachusetts: Health Economics Research Inc; 1995.
[OK][PEER]Bartosch W, Pope G. The economic effect of smoke-free restaurant policies on restaurant businesses in Massachusetts. Journal of Public Health Management Practices 1999;5(1):53-62.
[OK][PEER]Bartosch W, Pope G. The effect of smoking restrictions on restaurant business in Massachusetts, 1992-1998. Tobacco Control 2002;11(Suppl II):ii38-42.
[OK]Bialous S, Glantz S. Tobacco Control in Arizona. 1997 Accessed 9 August 2005; www.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/az.
[OK]Dresser L. Clearing the Air. Wisconsin: Tobacco-Free Wisconsin Coalition; 1999.
[OK]Ferrence R, Luk R, Gmel G. The economic impact of a smoke-free bylaw on restaurant and bar sales in Ottawa, Canada: Ontario Tobacco Research Unit; 2003.
[OK][PEER]Glantz S, Charlesworth A. Tourism and hotel revenues before and after passage of smoke-free restaurant ordinances. Journal of the American Medical Association 1999;281(20):1911-1918.
[OK][PEER]Glantz S, Smith L. The effect of ordinances requiring smoke-free restaurants on restaurant sales. American Journal of Public Health 1994;84(7):1081-1085.
[OK][PEER]Glantz S, Smith L. The effect of ordinances requiring smoke-free restaurants and bars on revenues: A follow up. American Journal of Public Health 1997;87(10):1687-1693.
[OK]Glantz S. Effect of smokefree bar law on bar revenues in California. Tobacco Control 2000;9(1):111-2.
[OK]Glantz S, Wilson-Loots R. No association of smoke-free ordinances with profits from bingo and charitable games in Massachusetts. Tob Control 2003;12:411-413.
[OK][PEER]Goldstein A, Sobel R. Environmental tobacco smoke regulations have not hurt restaurant sales in North Carolina. North Carolina Medical Journal 1998;59(5):284-287.
[OK]Hayslett J, Huang P. Impact of clean indoor air ordinances on restaurant revenues in four Texas cities: Bureau of Disease, Injury and Tobacco Prevention. Texas Department of Health.; 2000.
[OK]Huang P. Impact of Smoking Ban on Restaurant and Bar Revenues - El Paso, Texas, 2002. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 2004;53(07):150-152.
[OK][PEER]Huang P, Tobias S, Kohout S, Harris M, Satterwhite D, Simpson D, et al. Assessment of the impact of a 100% smoke-free ordinances on restaurant sales - West Lake Hills, Texas, 1992-1994. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 1995;44(19):370- 372.
[OK][PEER]Hyland A, Cummings K, Nauenberg E. Analysis of taxable sales receipts: was New York City's Smoke-free Air Act bad for business? Journal of Public Health Management Practices 1999;5(1):14-21.
[OK]Hyland A. Before and After Smoke-free Regulations in New Taxable Sales from Eating and Drinking Places in New York State. New York: Roswell Park Cancer Institute; 2002 June.
[OK][PEER]Hyland A, Puli V, Cummings KM, Sciandra R. New York's smoke-free regulations: effects on employment and sales in the hospitality industry. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 2003.
[OK]Maroney N, Sherwood D, Stubblebine W. The impact of tobacco control ordinances on restaurant revenues in California. Claremont, California: The Claremont Institute for Economic Policy Studies; 1994.
[OK]Moseley F, Schmidt K. The Economic Impact of Minot's Smoke-free Restaurant Ordinance: Minot State University; 2003.
[OK]Pacific Analytics Inc. The economic impacts of the proposed amendment to the ETS regulation. 2001 Accessed 9 September 2005; http://www.worksafebc.com/news/campaigns/ets/assets/pdf/ecoimpact.pdf.
[OK]Pope G, Bartosch W. Effect of Local Smokefree restaurant policies on restaurant revenue in Massachusetts: Center for Health Economics Research; 1997 April.
[OK][PEER]Sciacca J, Ratliff M. Prohibiting smoking in restaurants: Effects on restaurant sales. American Journal of Health Promotion 1998;12(3):176-184.
[OK]Styring W. A study of the Fort Wayne (IN) Restaurant smoking ban: has it impacted the restaurant business? Indianapolis: Hudson Institute; 2001.
[OK]Taylor Consulting Group. The San Luis Obispo smoking ordinance: A study of the economic impacts of San Luis Obispo restaurants and bars. San Luis Obispo, California; 1993.
[OK][PEER]Wakefield M, Siahpush M, Scollo M, Lal A, Hyland A, McCaul K, et al. The effect of a smoke-free law on monthly restaurant retail turnover in South Australia. Aust NZ J Public Health 2002;26(4):375-382.

Below are links to other important economic impact studies:

Critical Analysis of So-Called Economic Impact Studies Circulated by the Tobacco Industry

Smokefree Law Did Not Affect Revenue From Gaming in Delaware

Smoke-Free Ordinances Increase Restaurant Profit and Value

Cardiovascular Health and Economic Effects of Smoke-Free Workplaces

Review of the Quality of Studies on the Economic Effects of Smoke-Free Policies on the Hospitality Industry

footer

Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)
701 4th St. NW / Washington, DC 20001 / (202) 659-4310
A national nonprofit, scientific and educational organization founded in 1967.
All donations are fully tax deductible.