How important to dairies is selling tobacco? Views of dairy owners and managers on tobacco retailing.

AIM: Given the Government's commitment to reducing tobacco availability to minimal levels by 2025, finding ways to decrease the number of tobacco retailers is an important task. We assessed the perceived importance of selling tobacco among dairy owners and managers. METHOD: We conducted a face-to-face survey to explore retailers' views on selling tobacco products, tobacco retailer licensing and tobacco-free retailing. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Of the 112 individuals invited to participate, 62 (55.4%) completed the survey. Most respondents felt that selling tobacco was important for their business, and almost two-thirds had concerns about tobacco products being a security risk. Twice as many respondents thought tobacco retail outlet licensing was a potentially viable option as those who expressed caution. Almost one-third of respondents were potentially interested in becoming a tobacco-free retailer. CONCLUSION: Selling tobacco products is perceived as important for many dairies, and just over half were not interested in becoming a tobacco-free retailer. However, there is some support among dairy owners/managers for tobacco product licensing. These findings strengthen the case for regulatory measures to decrease tobacco availability, as voluntary adoption of tobacco-free retailing is unlikely to result in substantial reductions in outlet numbers.

Smokefree outdoor areas in New Zealand: how far have we come?

AIM: This research examined 1) the extent and nature of smokefree outdoor area (SFOA) policies in New Zealand, and 2) the process of developing, implementing and promoting compliance with a SFOA policy. METHOD: An online survey was carried out with 43 of the 67 Local and District Councils, supplemented by other means. The survey assessed whether the council had a smokefree policy and if so, what locations the policy covered, the process of developing, implementing and promoting compliance with a smokefree policy, the challenges associated with policy development, and plans for future policies. RESULTS: SFOA policies had been enacted by a total of 47 councils, 31 of which responded to the survey, covering a combination of playgrounds, sports grounds, parks, and council run events. Lack of public health priorities, and resources were common issues preventing other councils from developing a policy. Letters from health advocacy groups strongly influenced councils to introduce SFOA policies. The biggest barriers to implementation of SFOA policy were time and resource commitment required from staff, and the financial cost for signage. Voluntary compliance was used to ensure compliance with the policies; no councils used active enforcement. Few councils have evaluated their policies, but most felt that it had been successful. CONCLUSION: Health groups can take heart that their advocacy is resulting in policy change within local government. However, continued efforts are required to undertake evaluations of current SFOA policies which may provide evidence to extend SFOAs, to assist those councils without a SFOA policy to develop one, and to increase funding for implementation.