Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

Tobacco marketing and advertising disproportionately targets low-income and minority neighborhoods. Largely, tobacco marketing in these neighborhoods include retail price promotion such as discounts which have been associated with higher smoking rates. More state and local policy activities are focusing on stronger price laws for tobacco products which should limit access to tobacco products and reduce smoking initiation rates. Massachusetts is one of the few states with some restrictions on price promotions including bonus packs or coupon redemption in addition to its state minimum price laws. Following the 2009 Tobacco Control Act, some localities within the state further implemented a ban on the use of discounting strategies of any form that reduce the price of cigarettes below the states approved minimum. Some of these bans include ‘buy one-get-one-free’, ‘but-one-get-the-second-half-off’. These additional restrictions on a local level were initiated to strengthen the influence of the state minimum price laws, limit access to cigarettes and ultimately reduce smoking rates. Using spatial maps, this study intends to assess the impact of these new policies on limiting access to tobacco products in the communities, by measuring differences in smoking rates.

For this study, one of the major advantages of using spatial analysis is its visual presentation which can be presented to varied stakeholders including policymakers, academicians and researchers from different related backgrounds. It is also helpful when data is geographically referenced such as retail stores. Primary data collection includes presence of discounts on tobacco products from approximately 300 retail stores across 30 municipalities within Massachusetts. Results will evaluate health disparities characterized by smoking rates and racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in the tobacco retail environment across all the sampled municipalities. Differences will be highlighted by neighborhoods considering possible threshold effects, such as race or median household income, which may exist on a neighborhood level. Results will aid tobacco advocacy groups, public health departments, states and localities in planning appropriate policy interventions tailored to varying neighborhoods, decision-making, policy development, and enforcement. In the presence of differences, policymakers can also use the results as evidence for adopting stronger pricing laws such a complete ban on discounts and coupons, thereby bridging the gaps in smoking rates across municipalities.