35
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A qualitative analysis of New Zealand retailers’ responses to standardised packaging legislation and tobacco industry opposition

      research-article
      , , ,
      BMJ Open
      BMJ Publishing Group
      PUBLIC HEALTH, QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          Many of the approximately 8000 New Zealand retailers selling tobacco are small stores that tobacco companies have represented as victims of policy measures designed to reduce smoking. Despite this depiction, many retailers experience considerable ambivalence in selling tobacco, a product they know harms their customers. We explored how retailers perceived the proposed introduction of standardised (or ‘plain’) packaging and their assessment of arguments made by tobacco companies in submissions on proposed standardised packaging legislation.

          Participants

          Using qualitative in-depth interviews, we recruited and interviewed 23 retailers of dairies (small convenience stores), small supermarkets, and service stations.

          Analyses

          Data were analysed using a protocol-driven approach; this stance enabled direct analysis of tobacco companies’ arguments, particularly those purporting to represent retailers’ concerns.

          Results

          Retailers were concerned about the financial implications of standardised packaging and the effects it may have on their ability to provide rapid and efficient customer service. However, few thought standardised packaging would foster illicit trade or spawn further regulation; most placed public health goals ahead of tobacco companies’ ‘rights’, and many supported government intervention to protect population health.

          Conclusions

          Retailers held ambivalent views on standardised packaging; while they were concerned about short-term effects on their business, they recognised the harm smoking causes. Policymakers and health researchers could collaborate more effectively with retailers by assisting them to create financially viable roles more compatible with public health objectives.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Tobacco taxes as a tobacco control strategy.

          Increases in tobacco taxes are widely regarded as a highly effective strategy for reducing tobacco use and its consequences. The voluminous literature on tobacco taxes is assessed, drawing heavily from seminal and recent publications reviewing the evidence on the impact of tobacco taxes on tobacco use and related outcomes, as well as that on tobacco tax administration. Well over 100 studies, including a growing number from low-income and middle-income countries, clearly demonstrate that tobacco excise taxes are a powerful tool for reducing tobacco use while at the same time providing a reliable source of government revenues. Significant increases in tobacco taxes that increase tobacco product prices encourage current tobacco users to stop using, prevent potential users from taking up tobacco use, and reduce consumption among those that continue to use, with the greatest impact on the young and the poor. Global experiences with tobacco taxation and tax administration have been used by WHO to develop a set of 'best practices' for maximising the effectiveness of tobacco taxation. Significant increases in tobacco taxes are a highly effective tobacco control strategy and lead to significant improvements in public health. The positive health impact is even greater when some of the revenues generated by tobacco tax increases are used to support tobacco control, health promotion and/or other health-related activities and programmes. In general, oppositional arguments that higher taxes will have harmful economic effects are false or overstated.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Tobacco smoking and all-cause mortality in a large Australian cohort study: findings from a mature epidemic with current low smoking prevalence

            Background The smoking epidemic in Australia is characterised by historic levels of prolonged smoking, heavy smoking, very high levels of long-term cessation, and low current smoking prevalence, with 13% of adults reporting that they smoked daily in 2013. Large-scale quantitative evidence on the relationship of tobacco smoking to mortality in Australia is not available despite the potential to provide independent international evidence about the contemporary risks of smoking. Methods This is a prospective study of 204,953 individuals aged ≥45 years sampled from the general population of New South Wales, Australia, who joined the 45 and Up Study from 2006–2009, with linked questionnaire, hospitalisation, and mortality data to mid-2012 and with no history of cancer (other than melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer), heart disease, stroke, or thrombosis. Hazard ratios (described here as relative risks, RRs) for all-cause mortality among current and past smokers compared to never-smokers were estimated, adjusting for age, education, income, region of residence, alcohol, and body mass index. Results Overall, 5,593 deaths accrued during follow-up (874,120 person-years; mean: 4.26 years); 7.7% of participants were current smokers and 34.1% past smokers at baseline. Compared to never-smokers, the adjusted RR (95% CI) of mortality was 2.96 (2.69–3.25) in current smokers and was similar in men (2.82 (2.49–3.19)) and women (3.08 (2.63–3.60)) and according to birth cohort. Mortality RRs increased with increasing smoking intensity, with around two- and four-fold increases in mortality in current smokers of ≤14 (mean 10/day) and ≥25 cigarettes/day, respectively, compared to never-smokers. Among past smokers, mortality diminished gradually with increasing time since cessation and did not differ significantly from never-smokers in those quitting prior to age 45. Current smokers are estimated to die an average of 10 years earlier than non-smokers. Conclusions In Australia, up to two-thirds of deaths in current smokers can be attributed to smoking. Cessation reduces mortality compared with continuing to smoke, with cessation earlier in life resulting in greater reductions. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0281-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A systematic review on the impact of point-of-sale tobacco promotion on smoking.

              The tobacco retail environment is a crucial marketing medium for the industry. A 2009 review found evidence of a positive association between exposure to point-of-sale (POS) tobacco promotion and increased smoking and smoking susceptibility, though limitations in the evidence base were identified.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2015
                09 November 2015
                : 5
                : 11
                : e009521
                Affiliations
                Department of Marketing, University of Otago , Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Professor Janet Hoek; Janet.hoek@ 123456otago.ac.nz
                Article
                bmjopen-2015-009521
                10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009521
                4654275
                26553840
                291b5fad-81b8-4245-ac92-47692fc561f6
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 24 July 2015
                : 14 October 2015
                : 16 October 2015
                Categories
                Qualitative Research
                Research
                1506
                1725
                1724
                1725
                1734

                Medicine
                public health,qualitative research
                Medicine
                public health, qualitative research

                Comments

                Comment on this article