ArticlePloS one2025
Designing a deposit-refund system for cigarette butts: What do smokers care about?
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cigarette butts (CBs) are the world's most littered item and significantly contribute to environmental pollution. A deposit-refund system (DRS) has been proposed to reduce CB littering, but its effective design remains underexplored. This study addressed this gap by investigating smokers' perceptions and preferences in hypothetical DRS scenarios for CBs. We conducted a discrete choice experiment in Japan (n = 1,865) and Indonesia (n = 2,000). Respondents were divided into treatment and control groups, with the treatment group receiving information on CB environmental impact aligned with the WHO's campaign. Our results revealed that a DRS for CBs was preferred to the status quo, with higher preferences in Indonesia (90.33%) than in Japan (63.92%). The information treatment further increased DRS preferences (Indonesia: 91.82%; Japan: 69.83%) and willingness to endure cost to support DRS operations. Cost simulations showed participation probabilities remained above 55% with a cost of up to 5% of a cigarette's price in Japan, and above 80% with a cost of up to 10% in Indonesia. Our findings underscore the importance of environmental information in DRS adoption. Both countries preferred a producer-managed system to a government-managed one, highlighting an opportunity for tobacco producers to fulfill extended producer responsibility through a DRS. Furthermore, DRS design should be country-specific. Notably, Japanese respondents' familiarity with heat-not-burn cigarettes influenced their preference for a tailored DRS to those products, whereas Indonesian respondents preferred a DRS for CBs. Japanese respondents also emphasized accessibility more than their Indonesian counterparts.
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.