我国公共场所禁烟政策及其执行状况分析

目的了解我国各级城市公共场所禁烟政策及其执行情况，为制定适合我国国情的公共场所禁烟政策提供借鉴与依据，并为我国政府提交《烟草控制框架公约》履约报告提供素材。方法采用文献回顾及现场观察的方法，收集公共场所禁烟相关法律法规及其执行情况的相关信息。调查包括了全国31个省、自治区、直辖市，并将新疆生产建设兵团作为一个单独的地区纳入到此次调查。在32个项目地区中，各选取省、市、县3个不同级别的地区，共96个地区作为项目点。结果在所调查的96个地区中，77个地区有公共场所禁烟的相关政策法规。32个地级市中，28个（87．5％）市有公共场所禁烟政策；而在32个县市（县级市）中，只有18个（56．3％）县市有公共场所禁烟政策。77个有公共场所禁烟规定的城市中有18个城市的政策是在2004年以后制定或修订的。共观察公共场所1364个，83．2％的公共场所有不同程度的禁烟规定，但禁烟规定的执行情况不尽人意，在禁烟区吸烟的比例：交通工具等候室为83．4％，疾病预防控制中心办公楼为76．3％，医院门诊大楼为72．9％，卫生厅（局）办公楼为72．5％，政府对外办公楼为68．6％，商场为59．0％，学校教学楼为53．7％，平均为68．6％。结论现有相关公共场所禁烟法规涉及公共场所范围过少，缺乏统一的法规执行监督机构，且各地法规执行力度小，效果欠佳。

Analysis of policies on banning smoking in public places and their implementation in China

Objective To understand the existing policies on banning smoking in public places and their current implementation in Chinese cities at various levels, to offer references and evidences for the Chinese Government to promote smoking ban in public places and to provide materials for the report submitted to Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Methods The information on the laws and regulations related to banning smoking in public places and their implementation was acquired through literature review and field observation. All the 31 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the Central Government and the region of Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps were included in the investigation. Among the 32 surveyed regions, three areas at different levels were selected, including the provincial capital, the city level, and the county level. Totally, 96 areas were included. Results Among the 96 surveyed areas, 77 had policies, laws and regulations related to banning smoking in public places. 28 cities （ 87. 5% ） and 18 counties （56. 3% ） had policies, laws and regulations in public places. In the 77 areas, 18 had their policies constituted or amended after 2004. Among 1354 public places which had been observed in this survey, 83. 2% had regulations related to banning smoking in different grades, however, the condition of implementation was not so well. The smoking rates in the smoke-free zones were respectively： 83.4% in the transport waiting rooms, 75. 3 % in the CDC office buildings, 72. 9% in the out-patient department of hospitals, 72. 5% in the health bureau buildings, 68.6% in the government office buildings, 59.0% in the marketplaces, 53.7% in the school buildings, and the average smoking rate was 68.6%. Conclusion The existing smoke-free laws only covered limited public places, and uniform organizations which in charge of implementation and supervision were absent, in addition, the strength of enforcement was weak and not so effective.