Gambling/substance-free zones

Section title

Gambling/substance-free zones

Brief definition of policy approach

Statutory measures that ban (young) people from participating in addictive behaviours in certain locations. For restrictions on where alcohol and tobacco may be sold and gambling services offered, see the section on control and regulation of supply. For voluntary (smoking) bans, see the sections on prevention (for schools) and harm reduction (for self-imposed restrictions at home).

Description of policy approaches

Statutory smoking bans in public places are the most obvious example of this type of approach, but they can also be of relevance with regard to alcohol (e.g., restrictions placed on drinking in public places) and illegal drugs (e.g., defining high-drug-use areas as ‘drug free’ zones from which drug offenders can be ‘banished’). No examples of relevant approaches in relation to gambling were identified. Measures specific to young people include the establishment of ‘smoke free’ schools and schoolyards.

Typical measures included under this approach

  1. Restrictions on participating in addictive behaviours in certain locations
    • Alcohol – Restrictions on drinking in public places
    • Tobacco – Restrictions on smoking in indoor/outdoor public places accessible to the general public or places of collective use, regardless of ownership or right to access
    • Illegal Drugs – Drug-free zones (offender movement restrictions)
    • Gambling – No approaches identified
  2. Specific delivery structures and quality assurance measures
    • Alcohol – Enforcement authorities
    • Tobacco – Enforcement authorities; Community mobilisation/education
    • Illegal Drugs – No approaches identified
    • Gambling – No approaches identified

Summary of available evidence for interventions and policies

  1. Beneficial
    • No evidence identified
  2. Likely to be beneficial
    • No evidence identified
  3. Mixed evidence
    • No evidence identified
  4. Unknown effectiveness
    • Smoking bans specifically targeting young people’s smoking behaviour
  5. Ineffective
    • No evidence identified

Key Reviews