Smoking bans, maternal smoking and birth outcomes

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. www.econstor.eu An important externality of smoking is the harm it might cause to those who do not smoke. This paper examines the impact on birth outcomes of children of female workers who are affected by smoking bans in the workplace. Analyzing a 2004 law change in Norway that extended smoking restrictions to bars and restaurants, we find that children of female workers in restaurants and bars born after the law change saw significantly lower rates of being born below the very low birth weight (VLBW) threshold and were less likely to be born pre-term. Using detailed data on smoking status during pregnancy, we find that relative to the control group, most of the benefits arise from changes in smoking behavior of the mother; the effect of second hand smoke exposure on birth outcomes in this formulation appears to be quite small. However, we find suggestive evidence of substituting behavior, i.e. a greater likelihood of smoking at home among fathers, since children born to male workers in restaurants and bars after this law change appear to have slightly worse outcomes. Using individual tax data, we find that the law change did not result in changes in earnings or employment opportunities for those affected, thus suggesting that the effects seen are likely a direct result of changes in smoke exposure in utero. Using a twins based analysis, we link very low birth weight status to adult labor force participation and suggest that via the improvements in birth weight alone, the smoking restriction law in Norway could result in a 0.2 percentage point increase in full time employment by age 28. Terms of use: Documents in D I S C U S S I O N P A P E R S E R I E SJEL Classification: D62, J13, I38

The intergenerational transmission of inequality: Maternal disadvantage and health at birth

“…Other studies based on natural experiments or sibling comparisons have also found that smoking has a negative impact on newborn health and that this does not simply reflect other adverse circumstances affecting mothers who happen to smoke (14–16). For example, researchers using data from 1.5 million births in New Jersey between 1989 and 2003 compared the birth weights of sibling pairs in which the mother smoked during one pregnancy but not the other.…”

Do mergers of large local governments reduce expenditures? – Evidence from Germany using the synthetic control method

“…The 295 districts (Landkreise) constitute the upper-level local governments and roughly correspond with US counties in terms of population. Districts are mainly responsible 5 Most public economics studies using the synthetic control method evaluate regulations of tobacco (Abadie et al 2010, Bharadwaj et al 2014) and alcohol (Marcus and Siedler 2015).…”

Policy Options to Promote Smokefree Environments for Children and Adolescents

“…152 There is a limited body of research that suggests paradoxical effects can result from tobacco control measures due to compensatory smoking behaviors such as substituting behaviors (displacement of smoking from public places to private spaces, such as from work to home) and/or increased smoking intensity (extracting more nicotine per cigarette). [153][154][155] Although these paradoxical findings have not been universally supported by the research, 156 they raise concerns about potentially increased SHS exposure of children in these "private spaces" (home and private vehicles). This potential increase in SHS exposure further heightens the need to pursue options that promote smokefree environments for children.…”