Eric Crosbie, Brian Tran, Beatriz Albuquerque de Figueiredo, Luciana Severini, Gianella Severini, Ernesto M Sebrié
{"title":"Tobacco industry strategies to influence the regulation of new and emerging tobacco and nicotine products in Latin America and the Caribbean.","authors":"Eric Crosbie, Brian Tran, Beatriz Albuquerque de Figueiredo, Luciana Severini, Gianella Severini, Ernesto M Sebrié","doi":"10.26633/RPSP.2024.43","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To document tobacco industry strategies to influence regulation of new and emerging tobacco and nicotine products (NETNPs) in Latin America and the Caribbean.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed industry websites, advocacy reports, news media and government documents related to NETNPs, focusing on electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products. We also conducted a survey of leading health advocates. We applied the policy dystopia model to analyze industry action and argument-based strategies on NETNP regulations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Industry actors engaged in four instrumental strategies to influence NETNP regulation - coalition management, information management, direct involvement in and access to the policy process, and litigation. Their actions included: lobbying key policy-makers, academics and vaping associations; providing grants to media groups to disseminate favorable NETNP information; participating in public consultations; presenting at public hearings; inserting industry-inspired language into draft NETNP legislation; and filing lawsuits to challenge NETNP bans. The industry disseminated its so-called harm reduction argument through large/influential countries (e.g., Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico). Industry discursive strategies claimed NETNPs were less harmful, provided safer alternatives, and should be regulated as so-called harm reduction products or have fewer restrictions on their sale and use than those currently in place.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our analysis provides a better understanding of industry strategies to undermine tobacco and nicotine control. To help counter industry efforts, health advocates should proactively strengthen government capacities and alert policy-makers to industry attempts to create new regulatory categories (so-called reduced-risk products), provide misleading information of government authorizations of NETNPs, and co-opt so-called harm-reduction messages that serve the industry's agenda.</p>","PeriodicalId":21264,"journal":{"name":"Revista Panamericana De Salud Publica-pan American Journal of Public Health","volume":"48 ","pages":"e43"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11164239/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Panamericana De Salud Publica-pan American Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2024.43","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To document tobacco industry strategies to influence regulation of new and emerging tobacco and nicotine products (NETNPs) in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Methods: We analyzed industry websites, advocacy reports, news media and government documents related to NETNPs, focusing on electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products. We also conducted a survey of leading health advocates. We applied the policy dystopia model to analyze industry action and argument-based strategies on NETNP regulations.
Results: Industry actors engaged in four instrumental strategies to influence NETNP regulation - coalition management, information management, direct involvement in and access to the policy process, and litigation. Their actions included: lobbying key policy-makers, academics and vaping associations; providing grants to media groups to disseminate favorable NETNP information; participating in public consultations; presenting at public hearings; inserting industry-inspired language into draft NETNP legislation; and filing lawsuits to challenge NETNP bans. The industry disseminated its so-called harm reduction argument through large/influential countries (e.g., Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico). Industry discursive strategies claimed NETNPs were less harmful, provided safer alternatives, and should be regulated as so-called harm reduction products or have fewer restrictions on their sale and use than those currently in place.
Conclusion: Our analysis provides a better understanding of industry strategies to undermine tobacco and nicotine control. To help counter industry efforts, health advocates should proactively strengthen government capacities and alert policy-makers to industry attempts to create new regulatory categories (so-called reduced-risk products), provide misleading information of government authorizations of NETNPs, and co-opt so-called harm-reduction messages that serve the industry's agenda.