By Laura Stroup

(AXcess News) Minneapolis - University of Minnesota and Ohio State University researchers have found that smoking bans do not have a significant impact on bar and restaurant employment. Though the economic effects of smoking bans have been studied in many individual communities, this is the first analysis to compare the economic effects of various smoking ban policies in multiple cities.

"Hospitality industry representatives have argued that smoking bans cause declines in bar and restaurant businesses because of the link between smoking and drinking behaviors," said Jean Forster, professor in the Division of Epidemiology and Community Health at the U of M School of Public Health and a co-author of the study. "They have used that argument to push for exemptions for bars and bar areas of restaurants. We wanted to see if their argument was valid."

Researchers used state-mandated reporting data from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development to track monthly employment in full-service restaurants and bars from 2003 to 2006. Using industry codes established by the North American Industry Classification System, the researchers selected jobs coded for full-service restaurants and free-standing bars from 10 Minnesota cities to include in the study. Limited-service restaurants were not included because of the low likelihood that they would be licensed for alcohol sales.

Of the ban policies examined, some were comprehensive, prohibiting smoking in all workplaces, while others were partial, banning smoking in most public places and businesses but exempting bars. Researchers calculated the bar and restaurant employment on a per capita basis to allow for the different sizes of the communities examined and the varying number of relevant businesses in each community.

The communities studied were found to have relatively little change in total employment in bars and restaurants over the 45 month period studied, showing no significant short- or long-term effects. For example, communities that had a total ban on smoking in public places had 9 fewer employees per 10,000 residents when compared to communities with partial bans on smoking, and 2 fewer employees per 10,000 residents when compared to communities without any ban on smoking. On the other hand, communities with a partial ban had an increase of 7 employees per 10,000 compared to cities with no ban. However, none of these comparisons were statistically relevant.

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, exposure to secondhand smoke increases nonsmokers' risks of developing lung cancer, heart disease, respiratory conditions and other diseases. The American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation cites that 15 states plus Puerto Rico have comprehensive laws in effect that prohibit smoking in workplaces, restaurants, and bars, and three additional states have passed similar laws, or recently added smoke-free bars to their laws, that are not yet in effect. Wisconsin's comprehensive smoke-free law was just signed by the governor. Hundreds of municipalities also have enacted smoking bans of varying levels.

"This study shows that partial smoking bans, which we know do not adequately protect employees, have no economic advantage for hospitality businesses over full bans," Forster said.  "Neither full nor partial bans have a negative economic effect on business, as measured by employment."