smoking on campus

Smoking Policies and Tobacco Ban

On UT Dallas Campuses

April 29, 2014

Marketing 4340 Consumer Behavior Hunter HockCori FrenchKyle GibsonElara MedlinLauren House

Table Of Contents

Executive Summary 3

Background 4-7

Analysis 7

Recommendation 8-9

Qualtrics Survey Results 9-11

Interview Transcript 12-13

Sources 14

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The objective of this report is to examine the effectiveness of current smoking

policies in place on campus at the University of Texas at Dallas. We will investigate how

these policies are being implemented across campus, if they are at all. Our research

results will come from both an online questionnaire, as well as one-on-one personal

interviews with students and staff.

In 2012 all buildings on UTD’s campus, as well as sidewalks, parking lots and

walkways were declared tobacco free. This ban includes cigarettes, chewing tobacco, and

smokeless vapor cigarettes. This was done due to the fact that our school receives money

from an anti smoking organization called CPRIT. Our purpose is to find out how many

members of our student and facility were even aware that our campus is supposed to be

tobacco free, as well as provide ways to educate individuals on campus about these

policies. We want to a find ways to enforce these rules for the health and well being of

the entire campus community

Our results, which you can find at the back of this report, concluded that only

24% of individuals on campus knew that we even had a non-smoking policy. While few

people where aware that UTD was supposed to be a non-smoking campus. This was

supported by our interviews with 4 students and one faculty member who made it very

clear that they are in support of non-smoking policies on our campus.

While we understand that individuals on our campus are adults and allowed to

make their own choices, as a higher education institution we feel that the effects of

second hand smoke is an infringement of the rights of others to live a healthy lifestyle.

3

BACKGROUND

Almost two years ago, in August of 2012, all buildings on The University of

Texas at Dallas’s campus were declared tobacco free. The ban of tobacco use on campus

was extended to parking lots, sidewalks, walkways and any attached parking structures

that were neighboring to the Natural Science and Engineering Research Lab (NSERL).

The NSERL currently receives funding for research by the Cancer Prevention Research

Institute of Texas (CPRIT). Earlier in 2012, grant requirements mandated by CPRIT

required recipients to adopt a tobacco free workplace. This requirement states that all

recipients of CPRIT funding in amounts greater than $25,000 must be tobacco-free, and

UTD is one such institution that is awarded CPRIT grants. The campaign has been

instigated out of a long-standing concern for a healthier work, research and educational

environment and the new CPRIT requirement.

UT Dallas’ current smoke free policy prohibits smoking within any University

building, and within 30 feet of any building opening through which air can easily travel.

The new policy in 2012 prohibited the use of any tobacco products in campus buildings,

as well as campus advertisement of such products, distribution of tobacco product

samples, and improper disposal of or littering with tobacco products. Employees, students

and visitors are prohibited from using tobacco products such as hookah, electronic

cigarettes, chewing tobacco, smokeless tobacco, cigars, snuff, and cigarettes. Although e-

cigarettes are not allowed, there still are alternatives available for those who want to quit

smoking and other tobacco related activities. The UT System’s Living Well program

offers free tobacco cessation support, including counseling and various nicotine

4

substitution drugs, to UT System employees. Students will be able to obtain online

support through the Student Wellness Center.

“We are going to try and have programs that will try to convince students to not use tobacco. It’s not healthy for you. The awareness has to come gradually, though. You can’t force it on someone.”- Student Government President Rajiv Dwivedi in 2012.

The current policy for enforcing the ban on tobacco use states that Awareness and

education are keys to implementing the policy. The school plans to build awareness of

the policy through electronic notification, signage and informational meetings. The policy

is explained during the admission and enrollment process for new students and during

new hire orientation for faculty and staff. As of now, It is expected that students,

employees and visitors will voluntarily comply with this campus-wide policy. Students,

staff and faculty may respectfully inform others of this policy to enhance awareness and

encourage compliance. For those who continually violate the policy, they may be subject

to disciplinary actions. The University does however; strongly rely on the encouragement

of peers to remind offenders of the policy and encourage them to quit smoking.

The Effects:

As of January 2, 2014, at least 1,182 college or university campuses in the U.S.

have adopted 100% smoke free campus policies that eliminate smoking in indoor and

outdoor areas across the entire campus, including residences (Americans for Nonsmokers

Rights). This number has grown from the 586 campuses in 2012 and 446 campuses in

2011. The Americans for Nonsmokers Rights believes this number will continue to climb

rapidly as a result of the growing social norm supporting smoke free environments, and

5

support from within the academic community for such policies for campus health and

well-being.

Tobacco control and inhibition exertions are usually aimed at current and

probable tobacco users, but so much more needs to be done than that. Although the health

effects for smokers are detrimental and extremely toxic, it is also known that second hand

smoke can directly affect everyone surrounded by it. The college campus can be a

dangerous environment for students, staff, and visitors since there are many locations

where those can be exposed to second hand smoke. Common places on campus for high

traffic and smoking are places like residence halls, dorms, building entrances, outside

student centers and parking lots.

Second Hand Smoke Facts: o Secondhand smoke kills 53,000 non-smoking Americanso Secondhand smoke contains more than 43 cancer-causing agents and many other

toxins, including formaldehyde, cyanide, carbon monoxide and arsenic.o Secondhand smoke exposure causes heart disease and lung cancer in adults and

respiratory problems in children.o There is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke exposure; even brief exposure

adversely affects the cardiovascular and respiratory systems.o Secondhand smoke can trigger immediate health effects for people with asthma,

allergies, COPD or other medical conditions. oMany people are misinformed about the use of tobacco, and are influenced by their

peers to believe that smoking could improve their performance in school, drive more

focus and increase their concentration. However, smoking is actually correlated with

lower academic performance, as smoking becomes a crutch for students who “chase a

baseline of performance that non-smokers don’t need to try to reach.” While smokers

have a hard time living without a cigarette, people who do not smoke tend to study longer

and more efficiently and do better in school overall.

6

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the effects of smoking

include increased chance of lung cancer, coronary heart disease, stroke, respiratory

diseases, lung diseases and other health risks. Tobacco accounts for nearly 443,000

deaths in the United States each year, which are one in five deaths. Despite the

consequences, smoking among college students is still prevalent, but due to the growing

awareness on college campuses, the trend is now declining. Using the ABC approach to

attitudes we hope to help continue this decline of smoking on college campuses

ANALYSIS

Through our research we confirmed our assumption that many students and staff

at UTD never even knew our campus was smoke free. If you refer to the results at the end

of this report 76% of individuals that took our online survey were unaware that the school

receives money and a requirement of these grants is that campuses be tobacco free. Our

survey also showed that a small population of our campus community, only 8% is

affecting a rather large portion, of those surveyed smoking on campus bothers 66% of

individuals.

We also found through our random interviews with students and faculty that all

but one felt like it was important that if smoking was to take place on campus it should be

far from a door way or other area where it can’t easily come in contact with non-smoking

individuals. Shelby made a good point that “while people who choose to smoke are

making the choice to adversely affect their health I should not have to deal with the

consequences of these choices.” This feeling seemed to be wide spread throughout those

that we talked to, many people felt like while it was ok for someone to be a smoker they

7

shouldn’t have to deal with the adverse health effects of second hand smoke and that they

should not have to be exposed to it against their will.

We believe that these results support our position that efforts need to be made to

better inform the campus community on current policies that are in place. We feel that by

educating individuals about the non-smoking efforts at UTD this can continue to help

lower the number of persons smoking while on campus. Making sure there are

consequences for failure to adhere to these rules also helps reinforce how important the

university takes the non-smoking policies, as well as the health and well being of our

campus community as a whole.

RECOMMENDATION

Implementation is key when it comes to enforcing the non-smoking policies on

UTD’s campus. Our recommendation has multiple parts to it. We feel that educating

individuals about campus policies should be the number one priority. By educating

individuals we hope to change the lax attitude about smoking at UTD. This goes along

with the first component in the ABC approach to attitudes. We propose using this

education initiative in a few different ways. First we believe that there needs to be more

signage put up around campus to make sure people know that this is a smoke free

location. Just as Mr. Polze said in his interview “we can’t plaster signs all over campus”

but we feel that a major portion of the solution to the issue is making the community

aware. Another recommendation we have is to move all of the ashtrays on campus away

from doorways where they are currently located. Since technically no one is supposed to

smoke within 30 feet of any building on campus. We feel that these subtle but effective

reminders will help reinforce that smoking on campus comes with serious restrictions.

8

Our final recommendation reinforces the non-smoking policies in a less subtle

way. We feel that UTD should start ticketing individuals that break the non-smoking

policies on campus. It will be at officer discretion but our survey found that 92% of

people would be less likely to smoke on campus if there was a monetary fine attached to

being caught. This is done on all Community College campuses run by Collin County

and has seen tremendous success. We hope that these changes in the overall attitude of

UTD will help change on campus behavior, which will eventually lead to a change in the

thought process pertaining to smoking, of all individuals on campus.

While we are aware that individuals have the right to smoke we feel that our

policy is not a violation of their rights or freedoms. Mr. Polze made a great point in our

interview with him “there are lots of things we do to take away people’s rights or

freedoms, particularly when they impinge on others. Its taking away someone’s right to

say “you can’t drive an automobile if your BAC is above a certain amount”, or

jurisdiction with no texting and driving. The reason they are taking it away is because

it’s dangerous and can harm other people. “

In recent years there has been a lot of push for no smoking in public places due to

the negative effects of second hand smoke. Places such as bars and restaurants as well as

parks and event venues all have nonsmoking ordinances. Our group feels that the next

logical step is making college campuses non-smoking and we hope that with the use of

the recommendations provided in this report we can continue to make UTD a better,

healthier campus community for all involved.

9

Initial ReportLast Modified: 04/07/2014

1. Do you smoke?# Answer Response %1 Yes 3 8%2 No 35 92%

Total 38 100%

Statistic ValueMin Value 1Max Value 2Mean 1.92Variance 0.07Standard Deviation 0.27Total Responses 38

2. Does smoking on college campuses bother you?# Answer Response %1 Yes 25 66%2 No 13 34%

Total 38 100%


3. Did you know UTD currently receives funds from an anti-smoking organization (Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas) to be a tobacco free campus?

# Answer Response %1 Yes 9 24%2 No 29 76%

Total 38 100%

10


4. Would knowing you could be ticketed for smoking on campus discourage you from doing so?

# Answer Response %1 Yes 35 92%2 No 3 8%

Total 38 100%


One on one Interview

Dr. Polze- JSOM Professor, Non-smoker

Chris – Business Administration Major, Junior, Non-smoker

Dan- Marketing Major, Senior, Smoker: Cigarettes

Shelby- Physiology Major, Junior, Non-smoker

Dena- Criminal Justice Major, Junior, Non-Smoker

11

Interview Transcript with Mr. Polze

Briefly explained our project to Mr. Polze..

Well, UT Arlington and San Antonio are completely 100% tobacco free, like you can smoke in your car with the windows up, but that is it.

What policy would you prefer?

From an administration standpoint, like administering a policy, the 30 ft is really hard to police because really it falls on: If you don’t like someone who is smoking tobacco 20 ft next to the door, do you call the campus police? By the time they get there, they’re already done with their cigarette and are gone. Do you issue them a citation? It’s really up to you to say, “hey the ashtrays are out there, its 30 ft”.

Now, if they moved the ashtrays out, or designated the area on the ground, but that looks kind of corny, then it would be easier to maintain the policy. That’s what they do some places. They have a designated smoking area in the Salt Lake City airport. It has a designated smoking section in the airport, enclosed in glass, mostly in international terminals. Administration of the policy if it’s completely tobacco free makes it much easier to control. You avoid concerns such as, “How close am I?” “What do I do if it’s raining?”

If I’m not a smoker, I don’t want to walk in to a building to someone else’s secondhand smoke. But, they smoke right near the doors, and it gets sucked into doors. So, whatever the policy is, it has to be enforced and I think that will be the hardest part.

Do you smoke?

No. I have never have been a smoker. I really appreciate the smoking ordinances and smoking bans in restaurants and bars. I use to quit going out because I hated coming home smelling like smoke, all in my hair and clothes. Now, Dallas has ordinances, Plano is that way, Austin is that way, so now it’s easier for me to not worry about it. I know there are people that like to smoke, and they have a right to smoke, so there is definitely some balance that goes on.

Having an attorney background, do you see any conflict with trying to enforce public smoking policy on public grounds being in Richardson, a city that does not have many smoking ordinances?

The university can set its own policy on it without going through the city of Richardson. UTD as a state institution can set that policy. The only challenge I see is like education or enforcement, whenever there are basketball games or weekend soccer tournaments that are not UTD affiliated. So people come on campus and don’t know the rules, they go behind the concession stand to smoke a cigarette and they end up getting a ticket? Maybe it would alleviate the situation if police can have leeway to give warnings instead of first-

12

time citations. It would be weird to put signs up ALL over the place making aware of the policy, but some places do that. But then you get into the questions, is it smoke free or tobacco free? Are e-cigs allowed? What about chewing tobacco? Or, maybe its nicotine free all over. But then what about somebody who is wearing the patch? It’s not probable, but what if it did happen? Should they be subject to a citation? What about Nicorette gum? It depends on what exactly you’re trying to limit.

It sounds like you are probably trying to get at the invasion of one’s health by breathing in secondhand smoke. Or, maybe you’re getting at promoting healthier lifestyles for students? Also, does this apply to apartments and residence halls? Can I go on my patio and smoke a cigarette, or an e-cig? That’s where it gets even harder, with those residing on campus.

My guess is that residence halls have their own policies and are already tobacco free, but who knows. There are a lot of challenges ahead. The biggest part of the policy is the mission and goal you are trying to accomplish.

What if we narrowed it down to JSOM?

What if you put chalk to demonstrate the current policy length? It will wash away easy and be used to educate people. I would especially move the ashtrays away from the building. Do they expect people to hold their hand underneath and collect all the ash and walk to the tray 30ft away? Probably not.

People use cigarettes to counter stress. Is this taking away one of their personal rights?

Sure, yes it is. But there are lots of things we do to take away people’s rights or freedoms, particularly when they impinge on others. Its taking away someone’s right to say “you can’t drive an automobile if your BAC is above a certain amount”, or jurisdiction with no texting and driving. The reason they are taking it away is because it’s dangerous and can harm other people.

There are tons of areas where, in New York you can’t buy a certain size of soda because of the sugar level, and a city ordinance which states that business owners can’t use trans-fat in restaurants. Why shouldn’t a vendor be able to sell hotdogs and hamburgers cooked in trans-fat? Because it has negative consequences and it harms other people. The best reasoning with someone in this type of argument would be willing to admit that the other person is right, this is taking away some freedoms that you have, but those are sacrifices that we all make. Question is, what is best for most people.

13

SOURCES: American for Non-Smokers rights"Going Smoke Free: Colleges and Universities." Americans for Non-Smokers Rights. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Apr. 2014. <http://www.nosmoke.org/goingsmokefree.php?id=447 >. Secondhand Smoke“The Health Consequence of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General.” April 6thh, 2014. <www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/ Stanford Outdoor Tobacco Smoke Study. www.tobaccosmoke.org/outdoor-tobacco-smoke>. The University of Texas at Dallas Policy"Tobacco Free Policy." The University of Texas at Dallas. The University of Texas at Dallas, n.d. Web. 4 Apr. 2014. <http://www.utdallas.edu/tobaccofree/faq/ >. Center for Disease Control and Prevention"Smoking and Tobacco Use." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. USA.GOV, 10 Feb. 2014. Web. 5 Apr. 2014. <http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/>. UTDallas Tobacco Bans Go UnenforcedHaseeb, Manar . "Tobacco Bans Go Unenforced." The Mercury. The University of Texas at Dallas, 26 Feb. 2014. Web. 3 Apr. 2014. <http://utdmercury.com/tobacco-bans-go-unenforced/>.

14

smoking on campus

Documents