Dataset Information

Country-specific costs of implementing the WHO FCTC tobacco control policies and potential financing sources.

ABSTRACT:

Background

One of the major obstacles to the full implementation of the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention of Tobacco Control (FCTC) tobacco control measures is the lack of sustainable financing resources.

Goal

To update and simulate country-specific indicators that are highly relevant to the costs and financial resources of the treaty policy implementation. We also developed an Excel tool for simulation and assessed the aggregated-level indicators by the 2016 World Bank income groups.

Approaches

Using mostly 2016 data or 2014-15 data if 2016 one are not available, we updated five indicators relevant to the treaty implementation, which are the gap between current and desirable policy implementation, cigarette affordability, the costs of implementing best- buy tobacco control policies, the number of smoking-attributable deaths, and the simulated tax revenue resulting from a $1 tax increase. We also aggregated indicators and simulation results by the World Bank income groups, encompassing the five indicators and the reduction in smoking and in attributable deaths due to a hypothetical 1I$ tax increase. Finally, the policy implementation cost was compared with tax revenue and revenue increases.

Findings

As of 2016, smoking remains one of the leading causes of premature deaths worldwide while the implementation of best-buy tobacco control policies was below the recommended levels. Meanwhile, there was room to further increase cigarette taxes and prices, as cigarettes remained affordable in many countries. The total costs of implementing best-buy policies in the next 15 years merely account for 8.3% of the 2016 excise tax revenue, indicating that a small proportion of annual tax revenue could fund the implementation of tobacco control policies recommended by the WHO FCTC.

Conclusions

Increasing taxes could have a multiplier impact on curbing tobacco use through aiding the implementation of the WHO FCTC.

SUBMITTER: Shang C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6169924 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe tobacco industry works to block, delay, and weaken national tobacco control legislation to implement the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). This article reviews how Nepal overcame industry opposition and to a comprehensive tobacco control law implementing the FCTC.MethodsWe triangulated newspaper articles and policy documents with key informant interviews.ResultsWith the support of international health groups, local tobacco control advocates worked with policymakers in Nepal to pass a comprehensive tobacco control law that exceeded FCTC obligations. The tobacco industry exploited a time of political transition to block consideration by Parliament, arranged and sponsored foreign tours for legislators, made death threats to tobacco control advocates and their families, and argued for the economic importance of tobacco farms. Despite strong interference from Health, and Law and Justice ministers, a 2009 Supreme Court ruling helped tobacco control advocates secure a comprehensive tobacco control law in 2011 that included rotating pictorial health warning labels covering 75% of both sides of cigarette packages, 100% smoke free public places and workplaces, private homes and vehicles, and a tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship ban.ConclusionsAdvocates in developing countries should utilize Nepal's experience to reject tobacco industry offers of compromise and continue educating politicians and legislators to generate political support to pass a comprehensive tobacco control law. Technical and financial support from international agencies, and effective collaboration and coordination of civil societies, and utilization of domestic litigation are helpful in LMICs where governance is weak (the abstract in Nepali is available as a Supplementary Material).ImplicationsThe tobacco industry exploited a time of political transition in Nepal in its effort to block comprehensive tobacco control policy in Parliament by sponsoring foreign tours of legislatures, making death threats to tobacco control advocates and their families, and arguing for the economic importance of tobacco farms. Tobacco control advocates used litigation to raise awareness and educate legislators and promote strong legislation with the involvement of international health groups. Technical and financial support from international agencies, and effective collaboration and coordination of civil societies, and utilization of domestic litigation are helpful in LMICs where governance is weak.

Project description:It is unclear whether the benefits of tobacco control policies extend to pregnant women and infants, especially among racial/ethnic minority and low socioeconomic populations that are at highest risk for adverse birth outcomes.To examine the associations of state cigarette taxes and the enactment of smoke-free legislation with US birth outcomes according to maternal race/ethnicity and education.Using a quasi-experimental approach, we analyzed repeated cross sections of US natality files with 16,198,654 singleton births from 28 states and Washington, DC, between 2000 and 2010. We first used probit regression to model the associations of 2 tobacco control policies with the probability that a pregnant woman smoked (yes or no). We then used linear or probit regression to estimate the associations of the policies with birth outcomes. We also examined the association of taxes with birth outcomes across maternal race/ethnicity and education.State cigarette taxes and smoke-free restaurant legislation.Birth weight (in grams), low birth weight (<2500 g), preterm delivery (<37 weeks), small for gestational age (<10th percentile for gestational age and sex), and large for gestational age (>90th percentile for gestational age and sex).White and black mothers with the least amount of education (0-11 years) had the highest prevalence of maternal smoking during pregnancy (42.4% and 20.0%, respectively) and the poorest birth outcomes, but the strongest responses to cigarette taxes. Among white mothers with a low level of education, every $1.00 increase in the cigarette tax reduced the level of smoking by 2.4 percentage points (-0.0024 [95% CI, -0.0004 to -0.0001]), and the birth weight of their infants increased by 5.41 g (95% CI, 1.92-8.89 g). Among black mothers with a low level of education, tax increases reduced smoking by 2.1 percentage points (-0.0021 [95% CI, -0.0003 to -0.0001]), and the birth weight of their infants increased by 3.98 g (95% CI, 1.91-6.04 g). Among these mothers, tax increases also reduced the risk of having low-birth-weight, preterm, and small-for-gestational-age babies, but increased the risk of having large-for-gestational-age babies. Associations were weaker among higher-educated black women and largely null among higher educated white women and other groups. We did not find evidence for an association of smoke-free restaurant legislation with birth outcomes.Increases in the cigarette tax are associated with improved health outcomes related to smoking among the highest-risk mothers and infants. Considering that US states increase cigarette taxes for reasons other than to improve birth outcomes, these findings are welcome by-products of state policies.