Policy vs Business: Well-Designed Health-Related Food Policy Should Not Let Industry Marketing Undermine its Intended Effects Comment on "Understanding Marketing Responses to a Tax on Sugary Drinks: A Qualitative Interview Study in the United Kingdom, 2019".

Health-related food policies, such as taxes on unhealthy food and drink, can act as catalysts for food industry to take action which may or may not align with the policy goal of improving population health. This commentary discusses the framework proposed by Forde et al in analysing the food industry marketing responses to the Soft Drink Industry Levy (SDIL), implemented in the United Kingdom in 2018. We suggest and discuss ways which may help broaden the use of the framework to other relevant policies. This includes widening the framework to cover strategies that may have not come up within the SDIL context but have been studied in other contexts. It would also be important to consider interactions between the strategies and with external factors influencing company decisions. Going forward, comprehensive evaluations of health-related policies should consider likely interactions with industry marketing strategies to fully understand potential impacts.

The impact of price promotions on sales of unhealthy food and drink products in British retail stores.

We study the health impact of food and beverage price promotion strategies-multi-buy offers and price discounts, typically biased toward unhealthy product categories-in British consumer retail. We are the first to employ econometric models from the marketing literature to analyze the impact of price promotions with a focus on population health. Our dynamic, reduced form demand model incorporates endogenous inventory (stock piling), consumption rates imputed from repeat purchases and allows for unobserved household heterogeneity. We find that removing price discounts is more effective for reducing purchase volume compared to removing multi-buy offers for 10 out of 12 food and drink groups, particularly those products for which price reduction is more common than multibuy. We find that price promotions induce consumption-and waste -through behavioral effects, associated with increased household inventory (stockpiling).

The health, cost and equity impacts of restrictions on the advertisement of high fat, salt and sugar products across the transport for London network: a health economic modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Policies aimed at restricting the marketing of high fat, salt and sugar products have been proposed as one way of improving population diet and reducing obesity. In 2019, Transport for London implemented advertising restrictions on high fat, salt and sugar products. A controlled interrupted time-series analysis comparing London with a north of England control, suggested that the advertising restrictions had resulted in a reduction in household energy purchases. The aim of the study presented here was to estimate the health benefits, cost savings and equity impacts of the Transport for London policy using a health economic modelling approach, from an English National Health Service and personal social services perspective. METHODS: A diabetes prevention microsimulation model was modified to incorporate the London population and Transport for London advertising intervention. Conversion of calorie to body mass index reduction was mediated through an approximation of a mathematical model estimating weight loss. Outcomes gathered included incremental obesity, long-term diabetes and cardiovascular disease events, quality-adjusted life years, healthcare costs saved and net monetary benefit. Slope index of inequality was calculated for proportion of people with obesity across socioeconomic groups to assess equity impacts. RESULTS: The results show that the Transport for London policy was estimated to have resulted in 94,867 (4.8%) fewer individuals with obesity, and to reduce incidence of diabetes and cardiovascular disease by 2,857 and 1,915 cases respectively within three years post intervention. The policy would produce an estimated 16,394 additional quality-adjusted life-years and save £218 m in NHS and social care costs over the lifetime of the current population. Greater benefits (e.g. a 37% higher gain in quality-adjusted life-years) were expected to accrue to individuals from the most socioeconomically deprived groups compared to the least deprived. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that there are considerable potential health and economic gains from restricting the advertisement of high fat, salt and sugar products. The population health and economic impacts of the Transport for London advertising restrictions are likely to have reduced health inequalities in London.

Changes in household food and drink purchases following restrictions on the advertisement of high fat, salt, and sugar products across the Transport for London network: A controlled interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Restricting the advertisement of products with high fat, salt, and sugar (HFSS) content has been recommended as a policy tool to improve diet and tackle obesity, but the impact on HFSS purchasing is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of HFSS advertising restrictions, implemented across the London (UK) transport network in February 2019, on HFSS purchases. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Over 5 million take-home food and drink purchases were recorded by 1,970 households (London [intervention], n = 977; North of England [control], n = 993) randomly selected from the Kantar Fast Moving Consumer Goods panel. The intervention and control samples were similar in household characteristics but had small differences in main food shopper sex, socioeconomic position, and body mass index. Using a controlled interrupted time series design, we estimated average weekly household purchases of energy and nutrients from HFSS products in the post-intervention period (44 weeks) compared to a counterfactual constructed from the control and pre-intervention (36 weeks) series. Energy purchased from HFSS products was 6.7% (1,001.0 kcal, 95% CI 456.0 to 1,546.0) lower among intervention households compared to the counterfactual. Relative reductions in purchases of fat (57.9 g, 95% CI 22.1 to 93.7), saturated fat (26.4 g, 95% CI 12.4 to 40.4), and sugar (80.7 g, 95% CI 41.4 to 120.1) from HFSS products were also observed. Energy from chocolate and confectionery purchases was 19.4% (317.9 kcal, 95% CI 200.0 to 435.8) lower among intervention households than for the counterfactual, with corresponding relative reductions in fat (13.1 g, 95% CI 7.5 to 18.8), saturated fat (8.7 g, 95% CI 5.7 to 11.7), sugar (41.4 g, 95% CI 27.4 to 55.4), and salt (0.2 g, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.2) purchased from chocolate and confectionery. Relative reductions are in the context of secular increases in HFSS purchases in both the intervention and control areas, so the policy was associated with attenuated growth of HFSS purchases rather than absolute reduction in HFSS purchases. Study limitations include the lack of out-of-home purchases in our analyses and not being able to assess the sustainability of observed changes beyond 44 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: This study finds an association between the implementation of restrictions on outdoor HFSS advertising and relative reductions in energy, sugar, and fat purchased from HFSS products. These findings provide support for policies that restrict HFSS advertising as a tool to reduce purchases of HFSS products.

Have socio-economic inequalities in sugar purchasing widened? A longitudinal analysis of food and beverage consumer data from British households, 2014-2017.

OBJECTIVE: To examine socio-economic inequalities in decreases in household sugar purchasing in Great Britain (GB). DESIGN: Longitudinal, population-based study. SETTING: Data were obtained from the GB Kantar Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) panel (2014-2017), a nationally representative panel study of food and beverages bought and brought into the home. We estimated changes in daily sugar purchases by occupational social grade from twenty-three food groups, using generalised estimating equations (household-level clustering). PARTICIPANTS: British households who regularly reported food and beverages to the GB Kantar FMCG (n 28 033). RESULTS: We found that lower social grades obtained a lower proportion of sugar from healthier foods and a greater proportion of sugar from less healthy foods and beverages. In 2014, differences in daily sugar purchased between the lowest and the highest social grades were 3·9 g/capita/d (95 % CI 2·9, 4·8) for table sugar, 2·4 g (95 % CI 1·8, 3·1) for sugar-sweetened beverages, 2·2 g (95 % CI 1·5, 2·8) for chocolate and confectionery and 1·0 g (95 % CI 0·7, 1·3) for biscuits. Conversely, the lowest social grade purchased less sugar from fruits (2·1 g (95 % CI 1·5, 2·8)) and vegetables (0·7 g (95 % CI 0·5, 0·8)) than the highest social grade. We found little evidence of change in social grade differences between 2014 and 2017. These results suggest that recent overall declines in sugar purchases are largely equally distributed across socio-economic groups. CONCLUSIONS: This suggests that recent population-level policy activity to reduce sugar consumption in GB does not appear to exacerbate or reduce existing socio-economic inequalities in sugar purchasing. Low agency, population-level policies may be the best solution to improving population diet without increasing inequalities.

Framing and signalling effects of taxes on sugary drinks: A discrete choice experiment among households in Great Britain.

Taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are in place in many countries to combat obesity with emerging evidence that these are effective in reducing purchases of SSBs. In this study, we tested whether signalling and framing the price increase from an SSB tax explicitly as a health-related, earmarked measure reduces the demand for SSBs more than an equivalent price increase. We measured the demand for non-alcoholic beverages with a discrete choice experiment (DCE) administered online to a randomly selected group of n = 603 households with children in Great Britain (GB) who regularly purchase SSBs. We find a suggestive evidence that a price increase leads to a larger reduction in the probability of choosing SSBs when it is signalled as a tax and framed as a health-related and earmarked policy. Respondents who did not support a tax on SSBs, who were also more likely to choose SSBs in the first place, were on average more responsive to a price increase framed as an earmarked tax than those who supported the tax. The predictive validity of the DCE, to capture preferences for beverages, was confirmed using actual purchase data. The findings imply that a well-signalled and earmarked tax on SSBs could improve its effectiveness at reducing the demand.

Reducing consumption of unhealthy foods and beverages through banning price promotions: what is the evidence and will it work?

OBJECTIVE: Increasing prevalence of overweight and obese people in England has led policymakers to consider regulating the use of price promotions on foods high in fat, sugar and salt content. In January 2019, the government opened a consultation programme for a policy proposal that significantly restricts the use of price promotions that can induce consumers to buy higher volumes of unhealthy foods and beverages. These proposed policies are the first of their kind in public health and are believed to reduce excess purchasing and, therefore, overconsumption of unhealthy products. This study summarises evidence relating price promotions to the purchasing of food and drink for home consumption and places it in the context of the proposed policy. DESIGN: Non-systematic review of quantitative analyses of price promotions in food and drink published in peer-reviewed journals and sighted by PubMed, ScienceDirect & EBSCOhost between 1980 and January 2018. RESULTS: While the impact of price promotions on sales has been of interest to marketing academics for a long time with modelling studies showing that its use has increased food and drink sales by 12-43 %, it is only now being picked up in the public health sphere. However, existing evidence does not consider the effects of removing or restricting the use of price promotions across the food sector. In this commentary, we discuss existing evidence, how it deals with the complexity of shoppers' behaviour in reacting to price promotions on foods and, importantly, what can be learned from it in this policy context. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence base supports the notion that price promotions increase purchasing of unhealthy food, and while the proposed restriction policy is yet to be evaluated for consumption and health effects, there is arguably sufficient evidence to proceed. This evidence is not restricted to volume-based promotions. Close monitoring and proper evaluation should follow to provide empirical evidence of its intended and unintended effects.

The impact of UK soft drinks industry levy on manufacturers' domestic turnover.

In March 2016, the UK government announced the Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL) which came into effect in April 2018. In common with the reaction to sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes in other countries, the SDIL announcement was met with strong industry opposition, with claims that it would harm their profits. The SDIL was designed to incentivise reformulation of SSBs by providing a 2-year delay between the announcement and the enforcement of the levy, and adopting a two-tiered rate based on the sugar content of the drinks. Using interrupted time series analysis, this paper examines how the domestic turnover of UK soft drinks manufacturers changed after the announcement and the implementation of the SDIL. Our results show some evidence of a short-term negative impact of the SDIL announcement on the domestic turnover of the UK soft drinks manufacturers. This effect, however, did not continue post-implementation. These findings suggest that manufacturers were, to a large extent, able to mitigate the effects of levy before it came into effect.

An analysis of the stock market reaction to the announcements of the UK Soft Drinks Industry Levy.

On 16th March 2016, the government of the United Kingdom announced the Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL), under which UK soft-drink manufacturers were to be taxed according to the volume of products with added sugar they produced or imported. We use 'event study' methodology to assess the likely financial effect of the SDIL on parts of the soft drinks industry, using stock returns of four UK-operating soft-drink firms listed on the London Stock Exchange. We found that three of the four firms experienced negative abnormal stock returns on the day of announcement. A cross-sectional analysis revealed that the cumulative abnormal returns of soft drink stocks were not significantly less than that of other food and drinks-related stocks beyond the day of the SDIL announcement. Our findings suggest that the SDIL announcement was initially perceived as detrimental news by the market but negative stock returns were short-lived, indicating a lack of major concerns for industry. There was limited evidence of a negative stock market reaction to the two subsequent announcements: release of draft legislation on 5th December 2016, and confirmation of the tax rates on 8th March 2017.

Is the rise of crowdfunding for medical expenses in the United Kingdom symptomatic of systemic gaps in health and social care?

Crowdfunding for medical care is a new phenomenon but increasingly used by individuals to seek financial help to cover the costs of health care. Ethical concerns have been raised about medical crowdfunding, including implications for equity, resource allocation, medical decision-making, the promotion of non-evidence based therapies, platforms' lack of transparency and corporate interests. Medical crowdfunding efforts may point to shortcomings in health service provision, but they tend to have wider motivations and implications. However, there is no firm evidence base for establishing answers to even the most basic questions, such as who is seeking funds, for what, where and why. In this Essay, we provide an introduction to medical crowdfunding in the United Kingdom (UK). We synthesize what is currently known and the insights that might be gained from an exploratory review of 400 medical crowdfunding campaigns on the GoFundMe UK website: for instance, whether medical crowdfunding occurs in response to gaps in service provision, supports 'queue jumping' and how it relates to 'medical tourism'. We conclude with a call for research on medical crowdfunding in the UK (and elsewhere) as a means to better understand patients' perceived or actual unmet need for health and social care and inform policy development.

Potential impact on prevalence of obesity in the UK of a 20% price increase in high sugar snacks: modelling study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the potential impact on body mass index (BMI) and prevalence of obesity of a 20% price increase in high sugar snacks. DESIGN: Modelling study. SETTING: General adult population of the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: 36 324 households with data on product level household expenditure from UK Kantar FMCG (fast moving consumer goods) panel for January 2012 to December 2013. Data were used to estimate changes in energy (kcal, 1 kcal=4.18 kJ=0.00418 MJ) purchase associated with a 20% price increase in high sugar snacks. Data for 2544 adults from waves 5 to 8 of the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (2012-16) were used to estimate resulting changes in BMI and prevalence of obesity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The effect on per person take home energy purchases of a 20% price increase for three categories of high sugar snacks: confectionery (including chocolate), biscuits, and cakes. Health outcomes resulting from the price increase were measured as changes in weight, BMI (not overweight (BMI <25), overweight (BMI ≥25 and <30), and obese (BMI ≥30)), and prevalence of obesity. Results were stratified by household income and BMI. RESULTS: For income groups combined, the average reduction in energy consumption for a 20% price increase in high sugar snacks was estimated to be 8.9×103 kcal (95% confidence interval -13.1×103 to -4.2×103 kcal). Using a static weight loss model, BMI was estimated to decrease by 0.53 (95% confidence interval -1.01 to -0.06) on average across all categories and income groups. This change could reduce the UK prevalence of obesity by 2.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval -3.7 to -1.7 percentage points) after one year. The impact of a 20% price increase in high sugar snacks on energy purchase was largest in low income households classified as obese and smallest in high income households classified as not overweight. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the price of high sugar snacks by 20% could reduce energy intake, BMI, and prevalence of obesity. This finding was in a UK context and was double that modelled for a similar price increase in sugar sweetened beverages.

Socio-economic patterning of expenditures on 'out-of-home' food and non-alcoholic beverages by product and place of purchase in Britain.

While most food is consumed at home, food eaten out-of-home plays an important role in diets and it has been associated with higher energy intake and higher body weight. Beyond prepared meals, there is limited understanding of what foods people buy out-of-home and where they buy them from. This study analyses out-of-home food purchases by food groups and food outlet types, and estimates socio-economic differences in these expenditure patterns. We used a nationally representative product-level dataset of expenditures (n=2,734,987) on foods and non-alcoholic beverages for out-of-home consumption for 9,704 respondents in Great Britain (June 2015-December 2017). Population weighted estimates of per capita weekly expenditures and shares of expenditure were derived for four outlet types and eight food groups. We used linear multi-level modelling to determine differences in expenditure patterns by socio-economic status (SES) characterised via occupational social grade. Out-of-home purchases make up 25-39% of total food and beverage expenditures. Mid- and high-SES respondents spent nearly twice as much (£17.76 and £15.11 weekly), compared to low-SES respondents (£9.69) for out-ofhome food consumption. A third of expenditures across SES (36-37%) were spent in venues other than restaurants or fast-food and takeaway outlets. Meals accounted for 60% of expenditures, but a third was spent on beverages (10-12% non-alcoholic cold beverages, 17-18% hot beverages) and 9-10% on snacks. Mid- and low-SES respondents had a greater share of expenditure in takeaway and fast-food outlets, supermarkets and convenience stores, and on cold non-alcoholic beverages. Overall, low-SES respondents spent less on out-of-home foods but the share of this expenditure across different foods or outlets varied less. While restaurants, fast-food and takeaway outlets were a major source of out-of-home purchases, a significant proportion was spent in other outlets. Policies targeting out-of-home consumption should therefore consider the full range of foods as well as the diversity of places where they are sold.

Are sweet snacks more sensitive to price increases than sugar-sweetened beverages: analysis of British food purchase data.

OBJECTIVES: Taxing sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) is now advocated, and implemented, in many countries as a measure to reduce the purchase and consumption of sugar to tackle obesity. To date, there has been little consideration of the potential impact that such a measure could have if extended to other sweet foods, such as confectionery, cakes and biscuits that contribute more sugar to the diet than SSBs. The objective of this study is to compare changes in the demand for sweet snacks and SSBs arising from potential price increases. SETTING: Secondary data on household itemised purchases of all foods and beverages from 2012 to 2013. PARTICIPANTS: Representative sample of 32 249 households in Great Britain. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in food and beverage purchases due to changes in their own price and the price of other foods or beverages measured as price elasticity of demand for the full sample and by income groups. RESULTS: Chocolate and confectionery, cakes and biscuits have similar price sensitivity as SSBs, across all income groups. Unlike the case of SSBs, price increases in these categories are also likely to prompt reductions in the purchase of other sweet snacks and SSBs, which magnify the overall impact. The effects of price increases are greatest in the low-income group. CONCLUSIONS: Policies that lead to increases in the price of chocolate and confectionery, cakes and biscuits may lead to additional and greater health gains than similar increases in the price of SSBs through direct reductions in the purchases of these foods and possible positive multiplier effects that reduce demand for other products. Although some uncertainty remains, the associations found in this analysis are sufficiently robust to suggest that policies-and research-concerning the use of fiscal measures should consider a broader range of products than is currently the case.

Effect of increasing the price of sugar-sweetened beverages on alcoholic beverage purchases: an economic analysis of sales data.

BACKGROUND: Taxing soft-drinks may reduce their purchase, but assessing the impact on health demands wider consideration on alternative beverage choices. Effects on alcoholic drinks are of particular concern, as many contain similar or greater amounts of sugar than soft-drinks and have additional health harms. Changes in consumption of alcoholic drinks may reinforce or negate the intended effect of price changes for soft-drinks. METHODS: A partial demand model, adapted from the Almost Ideal Demand System, was applied to Kantar Worldpanel data from 31 919 households from January 2012 to December 2013, covering drink purchases for home consumption, providing ~6 million purchases aggregated into 11 groups, including three levels of soft-drink, three of other non-alcoholic drinks and five of alcoholic drinks. RESULTS: An increase in the price of high-sugar drinks leads to an increase in the purchase of lager, an increase in the price of medium-sugar drinks reduces purchases of alcoholic drinks, while an increase in the price of diet/low-sugar drinks increases purchases of beer, cider and wines. Overall, the effects of price rises are greatest in the low-income group. CONCLUSION: Increasing the price of soft-drinks may change purchase patterns for alcohol. Increasing the price of medium-sugar drinks has the potential to have a multiplier-effect beneficial to health through reducing alcohol purchases, with the converse for increases in the price of diet-drinks. Although the reasons for such associations cannot be explained from this analysis, requiring further study, the design of fiscal interventions should now consider these wider potential outcomes.

Change in non-alcoholic beverage sales following a 10-pence levy on sugar-sweetened beverages within a national chain of restaurants in the UK: interrupted time series analysis of a natural experiment.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates changes in sales of non-alcoholic beverages in Jamie's Italian, a national chain of commercial restaurants in the UK, following the introduction of a £0.10 per-beverage levy on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and supporting activity including beverage menu redesign, new products and establishment of a children's health fund from levy proceeds. METHODS: We used an interrupted time series design to quantify changes in sales of non-alcoholic beverages 12 weeks and 6 months after implementation of the levy, using itemised electronic point of sale data. Main outcomes were number of SSBs and other non-alcoholic beverages sold per customer. Linear regression and multilevel random effects models, adjusting for seasonality and clustering, were used to investigate changes in SSB sales across all restaurants (n=37) and by tertiles of baseline restaurant SSB sales per customer. RESULTS: Compared with the prelevy period, the number of SSBs sold per customer declined by 11.0% (-17.3% to -4.3%) at 12 weeks and 9.3% (-15.2% to -3.2%) at 6 months. For non-levied beverages, sales per customer of children's fruit juice declined by 34.7% (-55.3% to -4.3%) at 12 weeks and 9.9% (-16.8% to -2.4%) at 6 months. At 6 months, sales per customer of fruit juice increased by 21.8% (14.0% to 30.2%) but sales of diet cola (-7.3%; -11.7% to -2.8%) and bottled waters (-6.5%; -11.0% to -1.7%) declined. Changes in sales were only observed in restaurants in the medium and high tertiles of baseline SSB sales per customer. CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of a £0.10 levy on SSBs alongside complementary activities is associated with declines in SSB sales per customer in the short and medium term, particularly in restaurants with higher baseline sales of SSBs.

What Happens to Patterns of Food Consumption when Food Prices Change? Evidence from A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Food Price Elasticities Globally.

Recent years have seen considerable interest in examining the impact of food prices on food consumption and subsequent health consequences. Fiscal policies targeting the relative price of unhealthy foods are frequently put forward as ways to address the obesity epidemic. Conversely, various food subsidy interventions are used in attempts to reduce levels of under-nutrition. Information on price elasticities is essential for understanding how such changes in food prices affect food consumption. It is crucial to know not only own-price elasticities but also cross-price elasticities, as food substitution patterns may have significant implications for policy recommendations. While own-price elasticities are common in analyses of the impact of food price changes on health, cross-price effects, even though generally acknowledged, are much less frequently included in analyses, especially in the public health literature. This article systematically reviews the global evidence on cross-price elasticities and provides combined estimates for seven food groups in low-income, middle-income and high-income countries alongside previously estimated own-price elasticities. Changes in food prices had the largest own-price effects in low-income countries. Cross-price effects were more varied and depending on country income level were found to be reinforcing, undermining or alleviating own-price effects.

Why fat taxes won't make us thin.

Increasing prevalence of overweight and obesity has led policy-makers to consider health-related taxes to limit the consumption of unhealthy foods and beverages. Such taxes are currently already in place in countries in Europe (e.g. Hungary, France and Finland) and in various states in the USA. Although these taxes are possibly efficient in reducing by a small amount the consumption of targeted products if the tax is fully transmitted to the consumer, there is too little available evidence on what will be consumed instead and whether these food substitutions undermine the hoped-for health benefits of the tax. We also know very little on how the food supply side will respond and what overall impact this will have. Without a proper appreciation of the potential indirect impacts we do not know the overall impact of taxes foods on unhealthy foods and beverages and further that there is a very real possibility that they may not be beneficial for health after all.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the economic impact of smoking bans in restaurants and bars.

AIMS: To review systematically the literature on the economic impact of smoking bans in bars and restaurants and provide an estimate of the impact size using meta-analysis. METHODS: Studies were identified by systematic database searches and screening references of reviews and relevant studies. Google and web-pages of tobacco control agencies were also searched. The review identified 56 studies using absolute sales, sales ratio or employment data and employing regression methods to evaluate the impact of smoking bans in the United States, Australia or in countries in South America or Europe. The meta-analysis included 39 comparable studies, with 129 cases identified based on the outcome measure, scope of the ban, type of establishment and geographical location. Methodological quality was assessed based on four pre-determined criteria. Study and case selection and data extraction were conducted independently by two researchers. RESULTS: Random-effects meta-analysis of all cases showed no associations between smoking bans and changes in absolute sales or employment. An increase in the share of bar and restaurant sector sales in total retail sales was associated with smoking bans [0.23 percentage-points; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08-0.375]. When cases were separated by business type (bars or restaurants or wider hospitality including bars and restaurants), some differential impacts emerged. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of the economic impact of smoking bans in hospitality sector showed overall no substantial economic gains or losses. Differential impacts were observed across individual business types and outcome variable, but at aggregate level these appear to balance out.

Impact of the Irish smoking ban on sales in bars using a large business-level data set from 1999 to 2007.

BACKGROUND: Ireland introduced comprehensive smoke-free workplace legislation in 2004. This study evaluates the economic impact of the workplace smoking ban on the value of sales in bars. METHODS: Data on the value of bar sales were derived from a large, nationally representative, annual business-level survey from 1999 to 2007. The economic impact of the smoking ban was evaluated according to geographical region and bar size. Analysis was based on an econometric model which controlled for background changes in population income and wealth and for investments made by the bars during this period. RESULTS: The overall impact of the Irish smoking ban on bar sales appears to be very small. The ban was associated with an increase in sales among medium to large bars in the Border-Midland-West (more rural) region of Ireland, and a small reduction in sales among large bars in the more urban, South-East region. We failed to find any evidence of a change in bar sales in the remaining categories studied. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that although some bars saw positive effects and some negative, the overall impact of the smoking ban on the value of sales in bars was negligible. These findings provide further supporting evidence that comprehensive smoke-free workplace legislation does not harm hospitality businesses while having positive health effects.