Should college campuses become tobacco free without an enforcement plan?

Components in tobacco-free school policies-A coding tool for assessment

OBJECTIVE

To develop an instrument to examine tobacco-free campus policy components.

PARTICIPANTS

Missouri two- and four-year, specialized/technical, and religious colleges and universities (N = 76). Methods: The instrument was informed via literature review and expert interviews. Coder agreement was strong (κ = .80). Qualitative policy language examples were identified.

RESULTS

Model policy components including consideration for population, prohibited products, location restrictions, enforcement, consequences, promotions, communications, cessation, designated smoking areas and exemptions; comprehensive policies included all populations, for all tobacco products, and at all locations on the campus. Nineteen campuses had comprehensive tobacco-free policies, five had comprehensive smoke-free policies (cigarettes and e-cigarettes), and no policy included all model components. Fifty-two were non-comprehensive.

CONCLUSIONS

This instrument can allow campuses to identify components for comprehensive and model tobacco-free campus policies and assist officials in improving policy language. Future research can use this instrument to examine the effectiveness of components and their impact on tobacco use outcomes.

Five overlooked dimensions of campus wellness: Qualitative lessons from a Health Sciences Center's wellness program evaluation

Objective: Successful university wellness programs approach wellness holistically and regularly assess for improvements to program offerings. This case-study reports five lessons learned from a university wellness program evaluation that must be considered when developing wellness programming. Participants: Faculty, staff, and students at a public university health sciences center. Methods: A 23-question electronic survey with open-ended questions was administered to measure feedback on current and future wellness programming. Responses were analyzed with an open coding approach into five themes for program improvement to more holistically address wellness. Results: The five improvements to wellness programming identified by respondents were: wellness offering awareness, workplace culture and environment, racial representation, wellness programming policy enforcement, and creating an environmentally friendly campus. Conclusions: Themes identified in this case-study require additional attention by university wellness programs to ensure they are equitably accessible and comprehensive in their offerings.

Lessons learned about post-secondary institution tobacco policy change by Tobacco-Free Generation Campus Initiative Grantees, 2018-2020

OBJECTIVE

The Tobacco-Free Generation Campus Initiative (TFGCI) granted funding to U.S. post-secondary institutions to assist with creating 100% smoke- and tobacco-free campus policies to prevent young adult tobacco use. This study assessed grantee experiences working on campus tobacco policy change. Participants: Sixty U.S. post-secondary institutions completing TFGCI funded work between 2018 and 2020. Methods: An online survey assessment was completed by each institution at the end of their 18-month grant period to share facilitators and barriers to policy change, lessons learned, and advice for future efforts. Results: Many institutions faced challenges of time and capital constraints and pushback from campus constituents. Collaboration, diverse constituent engagement, and educational efforts throughout the advocacy process were important facilitators of policy change. Conclusions: Adopting and implementing comprehensive tobacco policy on college campuses is challenging. Regardless of institution type, commitment to the long-term goal and diverse stakeholder support guided movement toward 100% smoke- and tobacco-free campus policies.

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2021.1953032 .

Non-compliance with university tobacco-free policies: A qualitative exploration

INTRODUCTION

Though university smoke-free and tobacco-free campus policies have been proliferating across the US, compliance and enforcement remain challenges. This study examined perceptions and behaviors of employees and students who used tobacco products on tobacco-free campuses, to better understand policy non-compliance.

METHODS

Students (n=56) and employees (n=20) from two tobacco-free 4-year public universities in Southern California who self-reported using tobacco products on campus participated in focus groups, stratified by university and student or employee (faculty and staff) status, to discuss attitudes toward campus tobacco policies and on-campus smoking. Focus group discussions were transcribed and analyzed after structured coding and subcoding.

RESULTS

Participants were generally aware that smoking and vaping were not allowed on campus, though few could correctly identify their campus as tobacco-free. Attitudes toward the policy varied by subgroup and by campus, with students and employees at different universities expressing varying levels of support. Non-compliance was a unique interaction of individual, institutional, and interpersonal factors including a desire to smoke or vape to reduce stress, lack of formal enforcement or penalty for violating the policy, and efforts to smoke or vape in ways that reduce harm to others as a way of rationalizing non-compliance.

CONCLUSIONS

Attitudes toward university tobacco-free policies are campus- and constituency-specific, with similarities in individual, institutional, and interpersonal factors underlying non-compliance. Interventions to increase compliance should address individual, institutional, and interpersonal influences on non-compliance through efforts tailored to specific campus constituencies based on their particular knowledge and attitudes towards tobacco-free policies.

Evaluation of a smoke- and tobacco-free campus policy: The issue of displacement

Objective This study evaluates the effectiveness of a smoke- and tobacco-free campus policy by examining the volume, density, and location of discarded cigarette butts before and after the implementation of the policy. Participants: Student, staff, and faculty volunteers collected and recorded the location of discarded cigarette butts in April 2017 and October 2018. Methods: The Smoke and Tobacco Free Environment policy was effective September 1, 2017. A campus-wide collection of cigarette butts was conducted 5 months before, and 13 months after it came into effect. Results: The number of cigarette butts on campus decreased after policy implementation, especially in areas with formal enforcement. There was evidence of displacement of smoking behavior from the campus center to its periphery where parking lots and staff buildings are located. Conclusions: Formal enforcement is key to increasing the efficacy of the policy. Interventions should be directed to the locations where smoking behavior is concentrated.

Effects of a campus-wide tobacco-free policy on tobacco attitudes, norms and behaviors among students, staff and faculty

Objective: In 2016 a private Missouri university implemented a campus-wide tobacco-free policy to change social norms and prevent tobacco use among students, staff and faculty. This study assesses impact on tobacco and policy-related perceptions and behaviors. Methods: Before the policy went into effect and again one year later, all university students, staff and faculty were invited to participate in an online survey. Missouri Assessment of College Health Behaviors survey findings supplement results for students. Results: Policy support and norms disapproving tobacco use on campus increased, and self-reported use of any tobacco decreased after the ban was enacted. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the policy led to an increase in the proportion of university community members who agree that smoking on campus is unacceptable, which contributed in turn to a decline in tobacco use on campus, consistent with our theory of effects.

Prevalence of and factors associated with violations of a campus smoke-free policy: a cross-sectional survey of undergraduate students on a university campus in the USA

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to estimate the prevalence of smoking behaviour on campus and to identify the key factors that influence adherence to a campus smoke-free policy.

DESIGN & PARTICIPANTS

This study employed a cross-sectional, self-administered survey of undergraduate students at the University of Mississippi. A random sample of all available undergraduate classes was recruited for data collection. Students were provided a survey that included questions on demographics, alcohol use, smoking status, policy awareness, policy attitudes, smoking attitudes, policy support, barriers to policy success and policy violations.

RESULTS

The prevalence of past 30-day smoking was 23%. More than 63% of current smokers report ever smoking on campus, but less than 10% ever received a warning or a ticket for their violation. Nearly all respondents (92.5%) reported witnessing someone smoking on campus, and 22% reported witnessing someone receiving a ticket. Barriers to policy success include lack of reminders about the policy, lack of support from students and University administrators, and insufficient fines. Smoking behaviour (OR: 7.96; 95% CI: 5.13 to 12.36), beliefs about policy adherence (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.69), support for the policy (OR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.91) and attitudes against smoking behaviour (OR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.49) were all significantly associated with self-reported policy violations.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that violations of the campus smoke-free policy were fairly frequent and the policy has been largely ineffective, indicating a need for other interventions. Approaches to improve adherence to the policy should address barriers such as reminders about the policy, better policy enforcement and support from the administration.

A multimodal assessment of tobacco use on a university campus and support for adopting a comprehensive tobacco-free policy

Many college campuses now prohibit tobacco use. At a private U.S. university, the current study assessed cigarette and e-cigarette use and characterized the climate for adopting a comprehensive tobacco-free policy. Data were gathered January-August 2018 via an: environmental scan; cigarette-urn audit; and representative surveys with campus community members. Despite low prevalence of tobacco (0.5%-8%) and e-cigarette use (0.9%-6%) among all groups, campus cigarette clean-up costs exceeded $114,000 for an estimated >1 million butts left on campus annually. A majority of respondents (63% of N = 2218) favored a campus-wide tobacco-free policy, 16% opposed, and 21% abstained. Most respondents endorsed benefits of supporting health (93%), ensuring tobacco-free air to breathe (92%), reducing litter (88%), preventing tobacco use (84%) and fires (83%), and helping tobacco users quit (65%). Identified challenges included policy enforcement (69%) and stigmatization of smoking (57%); 30% viewed a policy as compromising personal freedoms. In a model explaining 35% of variance in policy support, those more likely to favor comprehensive tobacco-free campus policy were Asian respondents; diagnosed with asthma; exposed to secondhand smoke on campus; who viewed campus cigarette butt litter as problematic; and identified health, prevention, and cessation benefits of a tobacco-free campus. Those less likely in favor were students, those who smoke, and those perceiving impingement upon personal freedoms, stigmatization, and broader (slippery slope) implications. Findings indicate low tobacco use prevalence among the campus community, yet a large volume of butt litter and high tobacco clean-up costs. Predictors of policy support can inform campus outreach efforts.

Australian university smoke-free policy implementation: a staff and student survey

Issue addressed Universities represent important settings for the implementation of public health initiatives such as smoke-free policies. The study aimed to assess staff and student attitudes towards policy enforcement and compliance as well as the acceptability of the provision of cessation support in this setting. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted following the introduction of a designated-areas partial smoke-free policy at two campuses of one Australian university in 2014. Staff (n=533) and students (n=3060) completed separate online surveys assessing attitudes towards smoke-free policy enforcement and compliance, and acceptability of university-provided cessation support. Results Students held significantly stronger beliefs than staff that the smoke-free policy required staff enforcement (69% vs 60%) and violation penalties (67% vs 60%; both P's <0.01); however, most staff (66%) did not believe enforcement was part of their role. Only 55% of student smokers were aware that the university provided any cessation support. 'Free or cheap nicotine replacement therapy' (65%) and 'free stop smoking counselling service' (60%) were the most popular strategies student smokers thought the university should provide. Conclusions University staff and students hold conflicting views over the need for policy enforcement and who is responsible for enforcement roles. Students view the university as an acceptable setting for the provision of smoking cessation support. So what? Where staff are expected to enforce smoke-free policies, specific education and training should be provided. Ongoing monitoring of compliance and enforcement behaviour appears necessary to avoid the pervasive kind of non-compliance to smoke-free policies that have been seen in other settings.

Evaluation of the Process of Implementing an Outdoor School Ground Smoking Ban at Secondary Schools

BACKGROUND

Although outdoor smoking bans at school are becoming important, it remains unclear whether successful implementation is feasible and what conditions promote it. Therefore, this study evaluates the implementation process by identifying important factors.

METHODS

Interviews were held with directors of 24 secondary schools that had decided to implement an outdoor school ground smoking ban, to identify important factors during implementation. Additionally, observations were made before and (about 4 weeks) after implementation to evaluate adherence to guidelines. Data were analyzed using a thematic approach.

RESULTS

During implementation, the following items were important: smoking ban (eg, guidelines), school (eg, policy, enforcement, environmental factors, resources, etc), and external factors (eg, social environment). Four schools were unable to implement the ban, 20 schools implemented the ban but student adherence was low, and at 4 schools, staff members still smoked on school grounds.

CONCLUSIONS

Although implementation is feasible, there are challenges. Schools need to apply a phased/dynamic process with ample lead time and clear communication of the policy. Directors should deal with offenders by strictly enforcing the ban and helping them stop smoking. This study offers information to help institutes implement an outdoor smoking ban to further protect adolescents from the harm of smoking.

Predicting students' noncompliance with a smoke-free university campus policy

The adoption of university campus smoke-free and tobacco-free policies has risen dramatically, but research on effective implementation is scant. Significant challenges exist regarding policy implementation, particularly enforcement. This study examined college students' noncompliance with a recently implemented smoke-free campus policy at a public university. The sample included students who reported past-month smoking of tobacco or e-cigarettes in a 2013 web-based survey, 9 months after a smoke-free campus policy took effect. Ordinal logistic regression was used to examine predictors of students' having smoked on campus since the policy began (n = 1055). Predictor variables included past-month use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, and non-cigarette tobacco products, secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure, support for a smoke-free campus, tobacco-related social norms, use of strategies to deal with smoking urges, and other variables. In multivariate analysis, policy violation was positively associated with past-month use of cigarettes and non-cigarette combustible tobacco, SHS exposure on campus, living on campus, and use of nicotine gum/patches to handle urges. Violation was negatively associated with smoke-free campus support, age, estimates of student policy support and cigarette smoking, and self-reported absence of smoking urges. Results suggest that nicotine dependence may be an underlying influence on policy violation. Several recommendations are offered. First, upon policy adoption, campuses should ensure student smokers' access to cessation support and assistance with dealing with nicotine cravings. Second, campus information campaigns should focus particularly on younger students and those living on campus. Third, campuses should establish strong anti-tobacco norms, monitor SHS exposure, and communicate levels of students' policy support.

Student Experiences With Community-Based Enforcement of a Smoke-Free University

A common approach to enforcing a university smoke-free policy is through “community-based” enforcement, in which the entire campus community is responsible for asking smokers in violation to abide by the policy. The purpose of the study was to explore university students’ experiences with this strategy of enforcing a smoke-free policy. A total of 43 undergraduate students were interviewed regarding their experiences and opinions of community enforcement. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using phenomenological methods, in which six major themes emerged from the data: Fear (alarm that smokers might respond with verbal insults or physical violence), Situational (enforcing the policy depended on violators’ distance, group settings, strangers vs. peers), Protect Image (not wanting to be viewed as annoying, judgmental, or offensive), Lack of Authority (feeling a lack of authority to enforce the smoking policy), Compassion (empathy that violators smoke due to physical/emotional needs), and Enforcer (willingness to confront a policy violator). These findings reflected previous studies regarding people’s fear to ask a smoker to extinguish a cigarette, feelings of a lack of authority, and so on. The study demonstrated that using only a community-based approach to enforcement may not be a realistic responsibility to impose on an entire campus community.

Healthy universities: mapping health-promotion interventions

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to map out and characterize existing health-promotion initiatives at Florida International University (FIU) in the USA in order to inform decision makers involved in the development of a comprehensive and a long-term healthy university strategy.

Design/methodology/approach

This study encompasses a narrative literature review on health promotion in higher education institutions and the identification and characterization of the various health-promotion initiatives associated with the subject of healthy universities at FIU. The characterization of health-promoting initiatives relied on the stakeholder analysis approach. Using the information obtained from this study, a map for promoting health initiatives with their location, capacities, leadership, and resources was established.

Findings

Most publications on health-promoting universities are limited to partial experiences’ reproduction. Self-financing health-promoting initiatives foster competition and work in silos. Gains of health-promotion interventions require governance, participation, and academic considerations. This study highlights the need for standards and minimum requirements for the mapping and characterization of health-promoting initiatives within institutions of higher education. The health-promotion strategy should fall within the university’s social responsibility policy.

Originality/value

This study helps identify organizational strengths and weaknesses and can inform decision makers seeking to establish policies and strategies as well as defining priorities and courses of action for healthy universities.

A cross sectional evaluation of a total smoking ban at a large Australian university

BACKGROUND

Total smoking bans have been found to contribute positively to the health of non-smokers by reducing exposure to second-hand smoke, and to enhance the likelihood of cessation among smokers.

METHODS

Two cross-sectional electronic surveys of staff and students at a large Australian university were conducted prior (n = 969) and 1 year post (n = 670) the implementation of a smoke free campus policy. Demographics, tobacco use, intention to quit, attitudes towards smoking and smoking restrictions and awareness of and attitudes towards the campus smoking policy were measured.

RESULTS

Exposure to second-hand smoke (SHS) reduced significantly (p < 0.001) one year after policy implementation. Smoking prevalence was similar at both time periods (T1 9.3 %; T2 8.4 %) and over half of smokers indicated they were planning to quit smoking in the future (T1 65.5 vs T2 62.3 %). There was a significant increase in positive responses to the statement the campus should be totally smoke free including all outdoor areas at T2 compared to T1 (T1 60.8 vs T2 71.4 %; p < 0.001), however respondents felt there should be places on campus for smokers to smoke (T1 53.6 vs T2 47 %; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found a significant positive difference in exposure SHS after implementation of the total ban. Although prevalence of smoking in this study was low, the proportion of respondents who were contemplating smoking cessation suggests support for smokers would be beneficial. Continued awareness raising, education and enforcement is likely to enhance the long term outcomes of the total ban.

Smoke-free policies in New Zealand public tertiary education institutions

The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control mandates the creation of smoke-free environments to protect non-smokers from second-hand smoke and reduce demand for tobacco. We aimed to examine the extent and nature of smoke-free campus policies at tertiary education institutions throughout New Zealand, and examine the policy development process. Stage one comprised an audit and content analysis of smoke-free policies. In stage two, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted to investigate the process of developing and implementing policies. Qualitative content analysis was undertaken on interview notes. Policies were identified for most institutions (n = 26/29), though varied widely in nature. Only nine mandated 100% smoke-free campuses without exceptions and few prohibited the sale of tobacco on campus, or connections with the tobacco industry. During interviews (n = 22/29), cited barriers to developing a 100% smoke-free policy included enforcement challenges and anticipated opposition from staff and students. However, participants from institutions with 100% smoke-free policies reported having encountered few challenges. Varying levels of compliance with 100% smoke-free policies were reported yet, overall, these policies were viewed as being effective. Smoke-free campus policies could be strengthened to better reflect a completely tobacco-free organization. Other institutions and workplaces could use these findings to develop 100% smoke-free policies.

Predictors of support among students, faculty and staff for a smoke-free university campus

OBJECTIVES

Students, faculty, and staff at a Pacific Northwest public university were surveyed one year after enactment of a smoke-free campus policy. Objectives were to assess levels of support for a smoke-free campus, ascertain exposure levels to outdoor tobacco smoke, and identify correlates of policy support.

METHOD

A 2013 Web-based survey included 5691 students (response rate 26%) and 2051 faculty/staff (response rate 43%). Measures included support for a smoke-free campus, smoking status, exposure to secondhand smoke, and perceptions of levels of policy support and campus smoking. Logistic regression was used to examine predictors of support.

RESULTS

Seventy-two percent of students and 77% of faculty/staff supported a smoke-free campus. Respondents reported limited exposure to smoke near building entrances, but exposure near campus boundaries was reported by majorities of students (77%) and faculty/staff (55%). Predictors of students' policy support included never-smoker status, perceived support by peers, perceived student smoking prevalence, campus smoke exposure, and female gender, among others. Predictors of faculty/staff support included never-smoker status, perceived policy support by students and peers, campus smoke exposure, female gender, and age.

CONCLUSION

Students, faculty, and staff were strongly supportive of the existing smoke-free campus policy. However, the policy led to smoking activity shifting to the campus periphery.

A tobacco-free campus ambassador program and policy compliance

OBJECTIVE

Assess impact and feasibility of a Tobacco-Free Ambassador Program on campus policy compliance.

PARTICIPANTS

Trained Ambassadors made 253 visits to campus sites over 15 months to observe and/or approach violators.

METHODS

Policy violators were observed at 23 locations during Wave 1 (April-June 2012) and/or Wave 2 (April-June 2013). For locations with at least 5 visits, average violators per visit were compared between the 2 waves using a paired t test. Attributes of violators were summarized. Cigarette butts were collected over 3-day periods in 4 campus hotspots during each wave. Personnel time and cost to implement the program were determined.

RESULTS

There were declines in observed violators per Ambassador visit and number of cigarette butts over time. Rate of violators per visit declined from 5.47 to 1.93, a 65% decrease. Personnel time was equal to 1.5 full-time equivalents annually.

CONCLUSIONS

The Ambassador Program was a feasible and potentially effective strategy to increase policy compliance.

Enforcing a tobacco-free campus through an ambassador-based program: a phenomenology

OBJECTIVE

This phenomenology explored the experiences of those involved in a campus-based Ambassador program that enforced a tobacco-free policy at a public university in Montana.

PARTICIPANTS

During the program's initial implementation (spring 2014), researchers observed and interviewed 21 Ambassadors and 19 policy violators.

METHODS

Researchers observed and recorded field notes of Ambassadors promoting the policy to the campus community and interacting with policy violators. Researchers invited Ambassadors and violators to be interviewed regarding their experiences with the program.

RESULTS

Although Ambassadors enjoyed promoting the policy and sensed an increase in recognition by others, they also felt uncomfortable and had mixed feelings regarding their level of authority. Violators also felt uncomfortable, yet the majority described the experience with the program as positive.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from the study can be used to inform those considering the implementation of an Ambassador program on their campus.

Evaluating California campus tobacco policies using the American College Health Association guidelines and the Institutional Grammar Tool

OBJECTIVE

To measure comprehensiveness of California campus tobacco policies.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixteen campuses representing different regions, institution types, and policies. Research occurred June-August 2013.

METHODS

Comprehensiveness was scored using American College Health Association's (ACHA) Position Statement on Tobacco. The Institutional Grammar Tool was used to breakdown policy statements into Strategies, Norms, or Rules. Differences in ACHA score and number of Strategies, Norms, and Rules were assessed by region, policy, and institution type.

RESULTS

Median ACHA score was 0.35 (scale of 0-1). Schools with 100% tobacco-free policies had highest ACHA scores, but failed to address relationships between schools and tobacco companies. Less than half the schools assessed (7/16) had Rules (enforceable penalties related to policies). In 67% of the policy statements, individuals doing the action were implied (not specifically stated).

CONCLUSION

Campuses should address ACHA recommendations related to campus relationships with tobacco companies, include enforceable rules, and specify individuals and entities covered by policy.

An exploratory study of smokers' and stakeholders' expectations of the implementation of a smoke-free policy in a university setting

ISSUES ADDRESSED

Smoke-free policies restricting tobacco use in public places are common in many middle- and high-income countries. Implementation of a smoke-free policy does not automatically result in a smoke-free environment, and appropriate enforcement procedures must be clearly communicated and implemented. Safety and restrictions in private spaces, especially student housing, are also issues that need to be explored. This research explored perceptions and attitudes of staff and student smokers and key stakeholders before the implementation of a complete campus ban on smoking at a large Australian university.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with staff and student smokers (n=9) and stakeholders (n=9). The interviews explored attitudes towards a completely smoke-free policy in the university environment, perceptions relating to enforcement of and compliance with a completely smoke-free policy, and support needed from the university for smokers.

RESULTS

Participants generally supported a complete smoke-free policy. Key themes associated with the policy implementation included health implications, stigmatisation and labelling, liberty, and enforcement.

CONCLUSION

Smoke-free policies require careful planning, evaluation, and appropriate enforcement to ensure maximum impact. Further research is needed to improve compliance with smoke-free policies in outdoor environments and diverse spaces. SO WHAT? A better understanding of attitudes and intentions towards a smoke-free policy before implementation may provide useful insight into the potential challenges and provide guidelines for the development of strategies to improve policy readiness and adherence. University support for smokers to quit is essential when implementing a smoke-free policy.

No smoking here: examining reasons for noncompliance with a smoke-free policy in a large university

INTRODUCTION

A large Australian university introduced a campuswide smoke-free policy in 2012. Almost 1 year after implementation, reasons for noncompliance among people observed smoking on campus were examined.

METHODS

Six smoking locations on campus were identified after a campuswide audit of smoking indicators (i.e., discarded cigarette butts packets and people observed smoking). At these locations, those observed smokers were interviewed. Interview responses were examined to elicit underlying themes.

RESULTS

Fifty people were seen smoking during the observation period. Those smokers interviewed comprised staff (27%) and students (73%) aged between 18 and 24 (45.9%). The majority of the students were international students (51.8%). All respondents acknowledged their awareness of the smoke-free policy. Five explanatory themes for noncompliance emerged: defiance against the policy's perceived threat to self-governance; inconvenience to travel off campus to smoke; smoking as a physiological necessity; unintentional noncompliance through unawareness or confusion of policy boundaries; and ease of avoidance of detection or exposing others to cigarette smoke.

CONCLUSIONS

Creating a culture of compliance at the university remains a significant challenge, especially considering the size of the campus, the high proportion of international students, and the logistics associated with monitoring smoking behavior in outdoor areas and on-campus student housing.

Perceptions of college and university presidents regarding tobacco-free campus policies

OBJECTIVE

To identify college presidents' support for tobacco-free campus policies (TFCP), perceived barriers and benefits to implementing such policies, and activities that might initiate policy adoption.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were 405 presidents (51% of 796 delivered surveys) from a national sample of eligible 4-year institutions in summer 2012.

METHODS

A 4-page, 24-item cross-sectional questionnaire was mailed to potential participants in 4 waves to maximize the response rate.

RESULTS

The vast majority of presidents support TFCP (84%) and believed they should play a key role in establishing TFCP (80%). A majority agreed advocacy by campus groups was necessary to establishing TFCP. Presidents with an existing policy were twice as likely to believe advocacy was necessary for policy establishment. Presidents most commonly selected creating policy drafts and designating a committee as important to initiating TFCP.

CONCLUSION

Advocates would benefit from focusing on presidential involvement and solutions to personnel barriers in establishing TFCP.

Policy compliance of smokers on a tobacco-free university campus

OBJECTIVES

To explore factors influencing compliance with campus tobacco policies and strategies to increase compliance.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty tobacco smokers (April 2012).

METHODS

A 22-item intercept-interview with closed- and open-ended questions was conducted with smokers in adjacent compliant and noncompliant areas at 1 university with a 100% tobacco ban. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis.

RESULTS

Most reported that the smoking policy was not enforced. Noncompliant smokers had less knowledge of locations where tobacco use was permitted and were more likely to identify their smoking location as compliant and had knowingly violated the policy. Choice of location to smoke was related to convenience and a desire to follow the policy. Smokers recommended consequences for noncompliance and structures that accommodated smoking to increase adherence to the tobacco ban.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional education, environmental, and contingency strategies are needed to increase compliance with the policy banning tobacco use on this campus.