The economic impact of a smoke‐free bylaw on restaurant and bar sales in Ottawa, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: On 1 August 2001, the City of Ottawa (Canada's Capital) implemented a smoke-free bylaw that completely prohibited smoking in work-places and public places, including restaurants and bars, with no exemption for separately ventilated smoking rooms. This paper evaluates the effects of this bylaw on restaurant and bar sales. DATA AND MEASURES: We used retail sales tax data from March 1998 to June 2002 to construct two outcome measures: the ratio of licensed restaurant and bar sales to total retail sales and the ratio of unlicensed restaurant sales to total retail sales. Restaurant and bar sales were subtracted from total retail sales in the denominator of these measures. DESIGN AND ANALYSIS: We employed an interrupted time-series design. Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) intervention analysis was used to test for three possible impacts that the bylaw might have on the sales of restaurants and bars. We repeated the analysis using regression with autoregressive moving average (ARMA) errors method to triangulate our results. FINDINGS: Outcome measures showed declining trends at baseline before the bylaw went into effect. Results from ARIMA intervention and regression analyses did not support the hypotheses that the smoke-free bylaw had an impact that resulted in (1) abrupt permanent, (2) gradual permanent or (3) abrupt temporary changes in restaurant and bar sales. CONCLUSIONS: While a large body of research has found no significant adverse impact of smoke-free legislation on restaurant and bar sales in the United States, Australia and elsewhere, our study confirms these results in a northern region with a bilingual population, which has important implications for impending policy in Europe and other areas.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".