Preferences and practices among renters regarding smoking restrictions in apartment buildings

Abstract

Objective:This study assessed renters’ preferences for official smoking policies in their buildings and their practices concerning restricting tobacco smoking in their apartments.Design:Renters (n = 301) living in large apartment complexes in a suburb of Minneapolis, Minnesota, completed a mail survey.Main outcome measures:The survey asked about the official smoking policies in place in their apartment buildings, their preferences for policies, whether they had smelled tobacco smoke coming into their apartments from without, and, if so, what they had done about it.Results:The majority of non-smokers (79%) preferred that their building be smoke-free. When asked to identify the current smoking policy in their buildings, residents disagreed substantially. Most renters (60%) reported smoke-free policies in their own apartments and another significant proportion (23%) restricted smoking to certain areas or occasions or persons. 75% thought that enforcing a smoke-free policy for guests would not be difficult. 53% of those in non-smoking households had smelled tobacco smoke in their apartments; most of these reported being bothered by it. However, very few complained to the building owner or manager (15.5%) or to the smoker (6.9%).Conclusions:The majority of non-smokers preferred that their buildings be smoke-free. A failure to report problems to apartment managers might be an impediment to instituting smoke-free policies in apartment buildings. The considerable disagreement among residents within apartment complexes about the current official smoking policy in their buildings suggests that policies are lacking or are not well communicated.

Assessment of Residents’ Attitudes and Satisfaction Before and After Implementation of a Smoke-Free Policy in Boston Multiunit Housing

“…Support for a smoke-free policy was high among both BHA participants as well as those of our comparator site. These results are comparable to the hypothetical support of nonsmokers found at other public and subsidized housing sites elsewhere in the United States, including Minnesota (79% preferred a smoke-free building), 15 New York (61.6% would favor the implementation of a smoke-free policy), 16 and Tacoma, Washington (82% of nonsmokers agreed with policies that would ban smoking in homes). 17 In Portland, Oregon, where a smoke-free rule was actually implemented along with an informational campaign, 85% of former smokers and 92% of never smokers were "very" or "somewhat" happy with the smoke-free policy.…”

“…Unsurprisingly, existing research suggests that attitudes among smokers are substantially more negative about smoke-free policies. 15,18 We also did not assess e-cigarette use, which is becoming increasingly prevalent. Although we assessed comparability of BHA to CHA on a number of building and individual characteristics, we were not able to ascertain comparability on other potentially important characteristics such as proportion of residents who are smokers.…”

Prevalence and predictors of smoke-free policy implementation and support among owners and managers of multiunit housing

“…Although there is currently an extensive amount of literature documenting smoke-free policy support and implementation in public areas (ANR, 2009;Borland et al, 2006;Hyland et al, 2009), literature assessing these issues with respect to homes, and more specifically MUH, is limited (Hennrikus et al, 2003;Hewett et al, 2007). To our knowledge, only one study has assessed MUH owners' and managers' preferences and practices regarding smoke-free building policies.…”

“…Population-based surveys of MUH residents previously conducted by Hennrikus et al (2003) and Hewett et al (2007) have shown high demand for smoke-free buildings, with 64% and 72% of respondents reporting that they were either strongly or somewhat interested in living in a smoke-free building, respectively. Therefore, advocacy efforts should focus on promoting smoke-free building policies among MUH tenants and urging these individuals to request that such policies are implemented in their buildings.…”

“…Nearly half of MUH residents report that SHS has entered their unit from somewhere else in or around their building (Hennrikus, Pentel, & Sandell, 2003;Hewett, Sandell, Anderson, & Neibuhr, 2007), and detectable levels of nicotine, a biomarker of SHS, have also been documented in smoke-free units within MUH buildings in which smoking is permitted (Kraev et al, 2009). Therefore, implementing a smoke-free building policy would be the most effective method for reducing SHS exposure.…”