Smoking in Restaurants:Who Best to Set the House Rules?

Henderson David R. ()

Econ Journal Watch, 2007, vol. 4, issue 3, pages 284-291

Abstract: Alamar and Glantz interpret smoking in restaurants as a market failure, and they claim that restaurants should welcome government laws that disallow smoking in all restaurants. Contrary to their claims, restaurant owners do have an incentive to eliminate smoking if doing so raises the value of their restaurants. In restaurants, smokers do not impose negative externalities on non-smokers because restaurant owners have well-defined property rights that cause them to internalize the costs and benefits of smoking. Alamar and Glantz claim to show that non-smoking ordinances increase the capital value of restaurants, but their own data do not, in fact, show that. Finally, if it were true that eliminating smoking in restaurants raises the value of restaurants, then the proper approach would be, not to coerce restaurant owners, but to inform them of that fact.

Keywords: Smoking; smoke-free; externalities; restaurants. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C10 D62 H23 J83 K32 L51 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2007
View citations in EconPapers

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.econjournalwatch.org/pdf/HendersonCommentSeptember2007.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ejw:volone:20073-45

Access Statistics for this article

Econ Journal Watch is edited by Daniel Klein

More articles in Econ Journal Watch from Atlas Economic Research Foundation
Series data maintained by Kevin Rollins ().