How do industry and other actors undermine tobacco control policies post-adoption? A scoping review

Abstract

Abstract Background Over recent decades, many countries have strengthened their tobacco control policies. To be effective, full implementation is needed. Tobacco industry interference is widely recognised as a key barrier to tobacco control progress and evidence-based models like the policy dystopia model (PDM) list industry strategies, focusing on those avoiding and undermining policy adoption. While prior research highlighted industry activities post-adoption, these have not been captured systematically. This review aimed to map the efforts of industry, front groups and other actors to undermine the implementation of policies, including marketing, packaging, smokefree and flavour measures. Methods We searched six literature databases, relevant bibliographies and grey literature, and consulted experts. We included articles describing one or more attempts to undermine adopted policies, including marketing, packaging, smokefree and flavour. The PDM served as starting point for coding; additional strategies were identified inductively. Strategies were charted against aims and policies. Results Several aims and strategies were identified which were similar across policies. Following policy adoption efforts to 1) overturn and 2) weaken measures, and 3) delay implementation continued. Legal strategies were utilised and there were attempts to influence stakeholders. In addition, tobacco industry and other actors sought to 4) undermine policy effectiveness by creating confusion, circumventing policies, and noncompliance, and 5) use implementation as an opportunity to enhance industry reputation. Conclusions Interference from tobacco industry and other actors threatens effective tobacco control policy implementation. The public health community must continue to monitor, expose and counter industry conduct after policy adoption. More research is needed to enhance our understanding of how industry interferes in policy implementation, and how this can be pre-empted and countered. Key messages • The interference from tobacco industry and other actors following policy adoption threatens effective tobacco control, and needs to be monitored, exposed and countered by the public health community. • Policymakers and civil servants need to be wary of efforts to undermine tobacco control policies and act to ensure effective policy implementation.