Health Promotion International Advance Access originally published online on November 8, 2004
Health Promotion International 2004 19(4):482-488; doi:10.1093/heapro/dah410
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HEALTH PROMOTION INTERNATIONAL Vol. 19. No. 4 © Oxford University Press 2004; All rights reserved.
PERSPECTIVES |
National legislation on school smoking restrictions in eight European countries
1Research Centre for Health Promotion, University of Bergen, Norway, 2Child and Adolescent Health Research Unit, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK and 3Health Promotion Division, Welsh Assembly Government, Wales
Address for correspondence: Bente Wold, University of Bergeb, Research Centre for Health Promotion, Christiesgate 13, N-5015 Bergen, Norway E-mail: Bente.wold{at}psych.uib.no
Objective: To review and compare national legislation addressing smoking at school in eight European countries during the late 1990s.
Design: The data are from the EC-funded Control of Adolescent Smoking (CAS) study in eight European countries. The information on national legislation was gathered during the period 19981999, through a review of scientific and official documents and interviews with key informants in each country.
Results: Four of the participating countries (Austria, French-speaking Belgium, Finland and Norway) had legislation specifically restricting smoking at school, while the remaining countries (Denmark, North Rhein Westphalia region of Germany, Scotland and Wales in the UK) did not have such legislation in place. In those countries with legislation in place, smoking among students aged 15 years and younger was not permitted. The position with regard to teacher smoking varied considerably among countries, but with the exception of Finland, there was no legislation regulating outdoor smoking by teachers during school hours.
Conclusions: The findings suggest that there were inconsistencies within countries in terms of legislation that had been developed and the enforcement, compliance and monitoring practices that were in place. Further work is required to develop and resource such mechanisms, although it may be possible to build on existing practice, such as increasing the involvement of school health services, school inspectorate services or working through health promoting school networks already established in many countries.
Key words: tobacco control legislation; adolescents; teachers; school smoking restrictions
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
H. Yuksel and K. K. Corbett Mixed messages: a qualitative study of the meanings and context of high school students' tobacco use in Turkey Health Promot. Int., December 1, 2005; 20(4): 360 - 366. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
