Tuesday, July 31, 2007

WebQuest Report: Cigarette Consumption

The ban of smoking in various premises aims to dissuade people from smoking. This policy hopes to inconvenience smokers causing them to feel that it is easier to quit smoking then to put up with the inconveniences posed, such as, not being able to smoke whenever and wherever they want as well as having to be conscious of not lighting a cigarette in the wrong area. By implementing this policy, not only would the government be able to influence the mind of a smoker giving some them an inkling of quitting smoking, non-smokers would also benefit. Non-smokers would no longer have to bear with the unbearable smoke in public places which causes detrimental harm to their health if exposed in large amount. Even in small amount, it may cause people with sensitive noses to be irritated. Furthermore, the amount of smoke inhaled by a smoker in one puff is less then that of a passive smoker. Smoking is therefore a negative externality (MSC>MSB).

Marginal Private Cost (MPC):
- Cost of buying the cigarettes for the smoker.
- Harm to smoker’s body, i.e. lung cancer, stroke.

External Cost:
- Discomfort of passive smokers around the smoker.
- Harm to passive smoker’s body, risk of getting smoking related diseases.
- As these passive smokers seek medical attention, bills and loss of man hours also result.

Marginal Social Cost (MSC):
- Cost to smoker + Cost to those affected by the cigarette smoke.
- MSC = MPC + External Cost

From the statistics (http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/statistics.aspx?id=5526), it is obvious that the diseases that smoking causes are one of the main causes of death in Singapore. An example is cancer. It has been on the top of the chart over the years. Smoking might have been the main cause of such a high percentage of people dying due to cancer (28.5% in 2006). Other diseases on the chart caused by smoking include heart disease, cerebrovascular disease.

Footnotes:

From 1st July 2007, smoking will be prohibited in
- Entertainment outlets e.g. pubs, bars, discotheques, lounges (including KTV lounges), nightclubs, etc.

Areas Covered By Smoking Ban (1 July 2007)
- With effect from 1 July 2007, all areas of the premises, including any outdoor refreshment area (ORA), will come under the smoking ban.
- However, the licensee of the premises may designate up to 10 per cent of the indoor refreshment area (IRA) as smoking room(s).
- For outlets with ORA, the licensee may designate up to 20 per cent of the ORA as a smoking corner. This is in addition to the smoking room(s) in the IRA.

Source: http://app.nea.gov.sg/cms/htdocs/article.asp?pid=2822

Credits: Zoe Wong, Toh Hao Li and Xu Lu

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

So, which ministry is in charge of the policy? The report done is concise, however, it would be better if more information is added.:-) Png Hui En

Anonymous said...

i agree with their report.
however they did not talk abt the effectiveness of the government's implementations.

-aretha

Anonymous said...

The group mentioned that to disuade people from smoking, the government has banned smoking in various premises. This is a form of government intervention. The group could mention that the government also places a tax on producers to internalise the external cost.

Anonymous said...

Because of the implementation of this policy, it decreases social marginal cost (passive smoking) and returns consumption to social optimum output? So which is more effective, a ban or tax increase?

Anonymous said...

this article about smoking makes me think that yes, the marginal social costs are huge because of many reasons(that are stated).

however, i wonder about the benefits that smoking brought to many people. many people say that smoking is bad. but, for everything, there must be an enjoyment that people derived from it.

is that the reason why the demand for cigarettes are still high?

Anonymous said...

Well, i think there is also some more examples of the externalities of smoking such as these 3 components:

• Direct
-- Payments for hospitalization and health care due to smoking
• Morbidity
-- refers to the lost production due to illnesses associated with smoking
• Mortality costs
-- The lost production from people who died early due to smoking related causes of death
-- Xu Lu, 1SC5

Anonymous said...

Personally I feel that the policy that has been implemented hasn’t been enforced strictly as many smokers still continue to smoke in the designated “no-smoking” areas. For example, coffee shop stall owners are always in a difficult position if they find themselves having to go against the convenience of smokers by asking them to shift.

It will not be easy for the government to make sure all smokers abide to the policy, as it requires much manpower and costs. I believe it will take the society some time before this negative externality is removed.

-chanel 1SC5

Anonymous said...

yo yo. yeah man who is incharage of the ban? Affiliated firms? hmm..i feel that your entire post is totally neutral? you all give the good points and elaborations of this ban, but do you all agree with it? haha..i think there is no stand point in the post? Hmm..what are some possible drawbacks and negative externalities from this ban? May less people patronize these area with the ban? Will this affect businesses?..

r1n9o

Anonymous said...

i agree with what the government has done. though there may be some drawbacks from this ban it kinda cuts down the negative externalities of smoking. yea the group didnt elaborate much on the effectiveness of govt's implementation.

Anonymous said...

I find the government's act of implementing a smoking ban in various areas a good one. However, such would not be effective unless monitored. For example. i still see people smoking at non smoking areas in hawker centre. Maybe patrol officers should be put in place to catch people breaking the non smoking rules? Like how there a ticketing officers. I find this would make the smoking ban more effective in a shorter time.

-Jeanette