[Thinking of Seoul While Walking] Solutions for Temporary Smoking Areas on the Streets

Installation of Smoking Booths Throughout Tokyo Streets
Strict Control of Street Smoking
Public Investment for Smokers Instead
Prevents Harm to Non-Smokers and Encourages Quitting
More Sophisticated Policies Needed Than Smoking Bans

During the recent year-end and New Year holidays, I stayed near Gwanghwamun in Korea. Whenever I passed by the restaurant I frequented for meals, it was crowded with people smoking. The cigarette smoke was so intense that my steps would naturally quicken when passing by. One relatively quiet moment, I noticed a 'No Smoking' sign in front of the restaurant. It was surprising that despite the clear no-smoking sign, people still gathered there to smoke. Come to think of it, this phenomenon was not limited to just that restaurant. I often saw many no-smoking zones turning into 'temporary smoking areas.' Hastily concluding, one might dismiss this as low civic awareness or disorderly behavior, but is it really that simple?

At the end of last year, I visited Omotesando Street in Tokyo, where smoking booths were installed in various places. Since the sidewalks were wide, I thought there was enough space to set up booths, and smoking booths or designated smoking areas were easily spotted on other streets in Tokyo as well. While Seoul also has some, comparing the two cities, it was clear that Tokyo had many more smoking booths.

At the end of January, I left Seoul and traveled around Spain for about a week. C?rdoba in the south is a large city with many alleys, and like other Spanish cities, there are almost no outdoor no-smoking zones, nor are there smoking booths or designated areas. Although indoor smoking is prohibited in restaurants, outdoor tables allow smoking, but surprisingly, not many people were seen smoking. Each trash bin in the alleys also had an ashtray for smokers.

Since Tokyo and C?rdoba differ greatly in city size and function, simple comparisons are difficult, but focusing on attitudes toward smokers, there are significant differences as well as notable similarities. Tokyo strictly controls street smoking, whereas C?rdoba fully permits outdoor smoking. This is the biggest difference. On the other hand, Tokyo designates most outdoor spaces as no-smoking zones but installs many separate smoking booths or areas. C?rdoba places many ashtrays throughout the streets. Both cities install and manage public facilities for smokers. Although the forms differ, this shows that the cities actively invest public resources for smokers.

Public investment for smokers may seem contradictory to policies encouraging smoking cessation for public health, which vary somewhat by country in content and method. So why do they invest public resources for smokers?

No smoking sign in downtown Seoul. The sign states that a fine will be imposed for smoking. Photo by Jo Yongjun

The core of no-smoking policies is, of course, to reduce smoking rates. However, since tobacco sales are legally permitted, there are limits to prohibiting or controlling smoking. Therefore, it is necessary to support smokers in quitting while also preventing younger generations from starting to smoke. Achieving these two goals requires efforts to build social consensus on smoking cessation rather than relying solely on strict control. Instead of treating smokers like criminals, it is necessary to gain their cooperation and gradually guide them to quit smoking.

Looking back at Seoul, the behavior of smokers gathering in groups to smoke in front of no-smoking warning signs may appear as resistance to excessive control. Those who smoke in front of no-smoking signs likely do not smoke inside the restaurant or other indoor spaces. Indoor smoking bans already have social consensus. In contrast, outdoor smoking bans have a shorter history, and consensus on smoking while walking or in crowded places is incomplete. In such circumstances, there are far too few places where smokers can smoke freely. As a result, people end up creating 'temporary smoking areas' by force or courage.

Seoul does have smoking areas, but compared to Tokyo, public places are less equipped, and most are created by building owners with less appealing spatial arrangements and designs. Since the number of smokers does not decrease and there is insufficient space for them to smoke, 'temporary smoking area' phenomena arise unexpectedly in places lacking smoking zones. To control this, CCTV is installed for stronger and more detailed surveillance, but it does not seem that 'temporary smoking areas' will disappear immediately. So what is the best approach? Increasing public smoking booths or designated smoking areas like Tokyo could be a solution. It should not be misunderstood as catering to smokers' convenience. Paradoxically, by accommodating them, it helps prevent unauthorized street smoking and supports future smoking cessation efforts. Considering designs suitable for the local atmosphere, it would not spoil the aesthetics. Tokyo's Omotesando smoking booths blend well with the street scenery without standing out.

Spain, which introduced a democratic constitution in 1978 following accelerated democratization after dictator Franco's death in 1975, was late in democratization compared to other European countries but is very sensitive to strong government regulation and control over citizens. Therefore, it takes a cautious approach to individual smoking control. The method chosen by this country is to set high cigarette prices. Although Spain's per capita GDP and income are lower than Korea's, a pack of cigarettes costs about 6,400 won, much more expensive than in Korea.

Drawing on methods from Tokyo and Spain to apply to Seoul and Korea more broadly, one approach could be to raise cigarette prices and invest part of the tax revenue in installing smoking booths on major roads in Seoul and other large cities. This would not only solve the problem of 'temporary smoking areas' that harm non-smokers but also help reduce smoking rates.

Controlling citizens' behavior within the urban space of a democratic society inevitably has limits. Instead of outright banning smoking to promote cessation, more sophisticated and forward-looking policy considerations and approaches are needed. Shouldn't we stop the excessive resistance of groups smoking in front of Gwanghwamun restaurants?

Robert Fauzer, Former Professor at Seoul National University