Talking Stick - March/April 2010 - 41

REPORTING OUT Enforcing Smoking Bans The antismoking movement has made great strides in recent years, which have led to indoor smoking bans in 25 states in the U.S. In recent years, over 365 college and university campuses have followed suit, implementing restrictions of some kind. However, ofﬁcials on these campuses are running into difﬁculty enforcing these restrictions near campus buildings, like residence halls and libraries. A study, “Enforcing an Outdoor Smoking Ban on a College Campus: Effects of a Multicomponent Approach,” published in the Journal of American College Health in October 2009, explored approaches to enforcement. Researchers Kari Jo Harris, Julee Stears, Rachel Kovach, and Solomon Harrar assigned 39 observers to record the compliance of 709 outside smokers at the University of Montana in Missoula, where outdoor smoking must take place 25 feet away from buildings. Before the researchers enforced the rule, 33 percent of students complied with the regulations. Compliance increased to 74 percent during the enforcement period and fell to 54 percent afterwards. Enforcement strategies were implemented at a residence hall, a library, an academic building, and the student union. The techniques included moving cigarette receptacles outside the 25-foot smoke-free zone with prominent ground markings, adding signs about the outdoor smoking ban, and distributing positive reinforcement cards to compliant smokers and reminder cards to noncompliant smokers. The reward cards were redeemable for a free beverage at the student union building, and the reminder cards detailed the smoking policy. Both cards provided information about cessation resources on campus. In order for enforcement to be most effective, the authors suggest environmental changes, such as positioning signs or moving cigarette receptacles. “Installation of permanent ground markings deﬁning the smoke-free areas can be as simple as spray paint on the sidewalk to more elaborate efforts such as installing plaques or changing the hardscape around the building,” the authors explain. “Efforts such as moving structures behind benches, cigarette receptacles, and fence lines provide an easy and potentially effective way of encouraging compliance.” However, this type of passive reinforcement is not enough on its own, as it can easily become routine. The authors suggest combining active enforcement, which is likely more effective. Active enforcement includes handing out cards or offering incentives to smokers and recruiting student leaders, such as resident advisors, to explain and discuss the ban to their peers. “The direct human interaction provides the opportunity to educate the community about policies and emphasizes the importance of compliance,” the authors conclude. “Interactions between peers can be an effective educational tool and motivator.” To learn more and view the entire study, visit heldrefpublications.metapress.com/ index/40H5325325872M21.pdf.

http://heldrefpublications.metapress.com/index/40H5325325872M21.pdf http://heldrefpublications.metapress.com/index/40H5325325872M21.pdf http://www.webebi.com http://www.webebi.com

Talking Stick - March/April 2010

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Talking Stick - March/April 2010