ArticleHealth promotion international2025
An analysis of submissions on regulations to implement Aotearoa New Zealand's tobacco endgame policies.
Article in Health promotion international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In late 2022, Aotearoa New Zealand passed legislation to introduce three commercial 'tobacco endgame' policies designed to reduce smoking prevalence rapidly and equitably; however, a newly elected coalition government repealed these measures in early 2024. Although Aotearoa is a Party to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, tobacco companies could participate in policy consultation processes and lobbied strongly against the endgame policies. Using an Official Information Act request, we obtained submissions made during the final consultation phase (on regulations that would have implemented the policies). We focused on 13 submissions made by tobacco companies, groups or individuals understood to have received industry funding (directly or indirectly), and groups that have roles within the nicotine product supply chain. We analysed arguments opposing the retail outlet reduction measure, which aimed to make smoked tobacco products substantially less accessible. Using the Policy Dystopia Model as a framework, we identified arguments that mapped to the PDM's economic, legal and political domains. Submitters stated the policy would impose serious costs, particularly on retailers; they anticipated illicit tobacco trade escalating, a consequence they predicted would harm communities and reduce public safety. We identified two over-arching themes: unfairness and promoting self-interest. Tobacco companies' ability to participate in consultation processes questions whether Aotearoa's implementation of Article 5.3 of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control adequately protects public health policy-making from tobacco companies' influence. Stronger regulation of lobbying should set greater transparency requirements, monitor and critique industry activity, and implement a robust code of conduct.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.