Smoke-free Zone in Indonesia: Who is Doing What Now

Wahyu Sulistiadi; Meita Veruswati; Al Asyary; Maria Holly Herawati; Ririn Arminsih Wulandari; Budi Haryanto

doi:10.3889/oamjms.2020.4091

Authors

Wahyu Sulistiadi Department of Health Administration and Policy, Faculty of Public Health, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia; Center for Educational and Community Services, Faculty of Public Health, Universitas Indonesia (P3M FKM UI), Depok, Indonesia
Meita Veruswati Center for Educational and Community Services, Faculty of Public Health, Universitas Indonesia (P3M FKM UI), Depok, Indonesia; Department of Public Health Sciences, Universitas Muhammadiyah Prof Dr Hamka (UHAMKA), Jakarta, Indonesia
Al Asyary Center for Educational and Community Services, Faculty of Public Health, Universitas Indonesia (P3M FKM UI), Depok, Indonesia; Department of Environmental Health, Faculty of Public Health, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
Maria Holly Herawati Center for R and D of Health Resources Services, National Institute of Health Research and Development, Ministry of Health, Jakarta, Indonesia
Ririn Arminsih Wulandari Department of Environmental Health, Faculty of Public Health, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
Budi Haryanto Department of Environmental Health, Faculty of Public Health, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2020.4091

Keywords:

tobacco use, government regulation, social control policies, environmental health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although all environments whom applied smoke-free zones (SFZs) have sufficient compliance rate (over 80%) in Indonesia particularly in Bogor City, it is still unclear who is doing what now on SFZs activities to assess the effectivity and efficiency of this tobacco control program.

OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to present the evidence of tobacco control on SFZs programs and activities of these zones based on the several indicators set by the local government’s regulation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A review was held to observe the SFZs local regulation archives. Data were derived from secondary sources and observation data of law enforcement teams’ generic activities and programs in Bogor City in the Province of Jawa Barat, Indonesia.

RESULTS: There were eight (eight) zones designated as SFZs according to the local regulation, namely: (1) Public places, (2) workplaces, (3) places of worship, (4) children’s playgrounds and/or other gathering places, (5) public transportation, (6) teaching and learning environments, (7) health facilities, and (8) sports facilities. It resulted that 55% of these zones still uncomplied to SFZs regulation. It is still a tobacco control homework in Indonesia while it is remembering that Indonesia has the only largest country of six developing countries that have not ratified Framework Convention on Tobacco Control of the World Health Organization.

CONCLUSION: The role of the SFZs’ enforcement team is crucial and consists of relevant stakeholders to optimize activities and programs of SFZs regulations with clear targeting, rewards, and punishments. However, further studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of non-smoking areas specifically.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Dinas Kesehatan Kota Bogor. Profil Dinas Kesehatan Kota Bogor Tahun 2014. Bogor: Dinas Kesehatan Kota Bogor, Pemerintah Kota Bogor, Provinsi Jawa Barat; 2015. https://doi. org/10.36787/jsi.v2i2.133

Ministry of Health, Republic of Indonesia. Guideline for Smoke-free Zones Implementation. Jakarta: Ministry of Health, Republic of Indonesia; 2011.

Dinas Kesehatan Kota Bogor. Survey Kepatuhan Terhadap Kawasan Tanpa Rokok Di Tatanan Sekolah Kota Bogor. Bogor: Dinas Kesehatan Kota Bogor; 2014. https://doi.org/10.30997/ jgs.v3i1.809

Setiawan NP, Hermawan D, Salbiah E. Evaluasi kebijakan peraturan daerah Kota Bogor No 12 tahun 2009 tentang Kawasan Tanpa Rokok (studi kasus pelaksanaan Kawasan Tanpa Rokok Pada Sekolah Menengah Atas Negeri Di Kota Bogor). Governansi. 2017;3(12):13-22. https://doi.org/10.30997/ jgs.v3i1.809

Kurniasih Y. Strategi Meningkatkan Kapasitas Fiskal (Pajak Daerah) di Pemerintah Daerah Kota Bogor (Studi Kasus Dispenda Kota Bogor). Indonesia: Bogor Agriculture Institute; 2011. https://doi.org/10.29244/jurnal_mpd.v8i2.24824

Veruswati M, Asyary A, Nadjib M, Achadi A. Current activities in smokes-free zone policy: A tobacco control care reviews in Indonesia. Fam Med Prim Care Rev. 2018;20(4):10-3. https:// doi.org/10.5114/fmpcr.2018.79352

Pemerintah Kota Bogor. Peraturan Daerah Kota Bogor Nomor 12 Tahun 2009 Tentang Kawasan Tanpa Rokok. Indonesia: Pemerintah Kota Bogor; 2009. p. 328-52. https://doi. org/10.30997/jgs.v3i1.809

Fong GT, Hyland A, Borland R, Hammond D, Hastings G, McNeill A, et al. Reductions in tobacco smoke pollution and increases in support for smoke-free public places following the implementation of comprehensive smoke-free workplace legislation in the republic of Ireland: Findings from the ITC Ireland/UK survey. Tob Control. 2006;15 Suppl 3:iii51-8. https:// doi.org/10.1136/tc.2005.013649 PMid:16754947

Weber MD, Bagwell DA, Fielding JE, Glantz SA. Long term compliance with California’s smoke-free workplace law among bars and restaurants in Los Angeles county. Tob Control. 2003;12(3):269-73. https://doi.org/10.1136/tc.12.3.269 PMid:12958386

Asyary A, Veruswati M. Compliance study of hotel and nightclub smoke-free zones in Bogor city, Indonesia. Tob Prev Cessat. 2018;4(25):1-3. https://doi.org/10.18332/tpc/92483

Asyary A, Veruswati M, Sulistiadi W. Hotel and nightclub development: A reflected perspective of smoke-free zone (SFZ) implementation in Bogor city, Indonesia. Public Health Indones. 2017;3(4):142-4. https://doi.org/10.36685/phi.v3i4.138

Tobacco Control and Support Center IAKMI. Pedoman, Pengawasan/Penegakan Hukum Perda Kawasan Tanpa Rokok. Jakarta: Tobacco Control and Support Center IAKMI; 2011.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Smoking-attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and productivity losses--United States, 2000-2004. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2008;57(45):1226. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.301.6.593 PMid:19008791