Cargando…

Do Tobacco Companies Have an Incentive to Promote “Harm Reduction” Products?: The Role of Competition

INTRODUCTION: Some cigarette companies have started to talk about replacing cigarettes with less harmful alternatives, which might include nicotine vaping products (NVPs), heated tobacco products (HTPs), and oral nicotine delivery products. We consider market competition as a primary driver of wheth...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Levy, David T, Thirlway, Frances, Sweanor, David, Liber, Alex, Maria Sanchez-Romero, Luz, Meza, Rafael, Douglas, Clifford E, Michael Cummings, K
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10664083/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36692328
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntad014
_version_ 1785138541516292096
author Levy, David T
Thirlway, Frances
Sweanor, David
Liber, Alex
Maria Sanchez-Romero, Luz
Meza, Rafael
Douglas, Clifford E
Michael Cummings, K
author_facet Levy, David T
Thirlway, Frances
Sweanor, David
Liber, Alex
Maria Sanchez-Romero, Luz
Meza, Rafael
Douglas, Clifford E
Michael Cummings, K
author_sort Levy, David T
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Some cigarette companies have started to talk about replacing cigarettes with less harmful alternatives, which might include nicotine vaping products (NVPs), heated tobacco products (HTPs), and oral nicotine delivery products. We consider market competition as a primary driver of whether cigarette companies follow through on their stated intentions. AIMS AND METHODS: We focus on the behavior of cigarette companies in the United States. We compare competition in the pre- and post-2012 time periods, analyze the impact of the growth in NVPs on smoking prevalence and cigarette company profits, and examine the potential future role of competition. RESULTS: Since 2006, consumers have broadened their use of non-combustible nicotine delivery products (NCNDPs) to include, inter alia, NVPs, HTPs, and oral nicotine pouches. U.S. cigarette companies have acquired major stakes in each of these product categories which corresponds to a period of rapidly declining adult smoking prevalence, especially among younger adults (ages 18–24 years). The shifting dynamics of the nicotine product marketplace are also reflected in cigarette company stock prices. While cigarette companies are likely to promote HTPs and nicotine delivery products over NVPs, their incentives will be directly related to competition from independent firms, which in turn will depend on government regulation. CONCLUSIONS: Although cigarette companies will back alternatives to combusted tobacco when threatened by competition, the prospects for their lasting conversion to NCNDPs will depend on the extent of such competition, which will be influenced by government regulation of tobacco products. IMPLICATIONS: Regulations that limit competition from independent firms while also protecting cigarette company profits risk slowing or even reversing recent declines in smoking, especially among youth and young adults. Regulations that reduce the appeal and addictiveness of combusted tobacco products, such as higher cigarette taxes or a reduced nicotine standard, will encourage smokers to quit and/or switch to less harmful non-combusted forms of tobacco. The regulation of non-combustible nicotine delivery products and cigarettes should be proportionate to their relative risks, so that smokers have incentives to switch from combustibles to safer alternatives, and cigarette companies have incentives to promote safer products.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10664083
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106640832023-01-24 Do Tobacco Companies Have an Incentive to Promote “Harm Reduction” Products?: The Role of Competition Levy, David T Thirlway, Frances Sweanor, David Liber, Alex Maria Sanchez-Romero, Luz Meza, Rafael Douglas, Clifford E Michael Cummings, K Nicotine Tob Res Reviews INTRODUCTION: Some cigarette companies have started to talk about replacing cigarettes with less harmful alternatives, which might include nicotine vaping products (NVPs), heated tobacco products (HTPs), and oral nicotine delivery products. We consider market competition as a primary driver of whether cigarette companies follow through on their stated intentions. AIMS AND METHODS: We focus on the behavior of cigarette companies in the United States. We compare competition in the pre- and post-2012 time periods, analyze the impact of the growth in NVPs on smoking prevalence and cigarette company profits, and examine the potential future role of competition. RESULTS: Since 2006, consumers have broadened their use of non-combustible nicotine delivery products (NCNDPs) to include, inter alia, NVPs, HTPs, and oral nicotine pouches. U.S. cigarette companies have acquired major stakes in each of these product categories which corresponds to a period of rapidly declining adult smoking prevalence, especially among younger adults (ages 18–24 years). The shifting dynamics of the nicotine product marketplace are also reflected in cigarette company stock prices. While cigarette companies are likely to promote HTPs and nicotine delivery products over NVPs, their incentives will be directly related to competition from independent firms, which in turn will depend on government regulation. CONCLUSIONS: Although cigarette companies will back alternatives to combusted tobacco when threatened by competition, the prospects for their lasting conversion to NCNDPs will depend on the extent of such competition, which will be influenced by government regulation of tobacco products. IMPLICATIONS: Regulations that limit competition from independent firms while also protecting cigarette company profits risk slowing or even reversing recent declines in smoking, especially among youth and young adults. Regulations that reduce the appeal and addictiveness of combusted tobacco products, such as higher cigarette taxes or a reduced nicotine standard, will encourage smokers to quit and/or switch to less harmful non-combusted forms of tobacco. The regulation of non-combustible nicotine delivery products and cigarettes should be proportionate to their relative risks, so that smokers have incentives to switch from combustibles to safer alternatives, and cigarette companies have incentives to promote safer products. Oxford University Press 2023-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10664083/ /pubmed/36692328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntad014 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Reviews
Levy, David T
Thirlway, Frances
Sweanor, David
Liber, Alex
Maria Sanchez-Romero, Luz
Meza, Rafael
Douglas, Clifford E
Michael Cummings, K
Do Tobacco Companies Have an Incentive to Promote “Harm Reduction” Products?: The Role of Competition
title Do Tobacco Companies Have an Incentive to Promote “Harm Reduction” Products?: The Role of Competition
title_full Do Tobacco Companies Have an Incentive to Promote “Harm Reduction” Products?: The Role of Competition
title_fullStr Do Tobacco Companies Have an Incentive to Promote “Harm Reduction” Products?: The Role of Competition
title_full_unstemmed Do Tobacco Companies Have an Incentive to Promote “Harm Reduction” Products?: The Role of Competition
title_short Do Tobacco Companies Have an Incentive to Promote “Harm Reduction” Products?: The Role of Competition
title_sort do tobacco companies have an incentive to promote “harm reduction” products?: the role of competition
topic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10664083/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36692328
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntad014
work_keys_str_mv AT levydavidt dotobaccocompanieshaveanincentivetopromoteharmreductionproductstheroleofcompetition
AT thirlwayfrances dotobaccocompanieshaveanincentivetopromoteharmreductionproductstheroleofcompetition
AT sweanordavid dotobaccocompanieshaveanincentivetopromoteharmreductionproductstheroleofcompetition
AT liberalex dotobaccocompanieshaveanincentivetopromoteharmreductionproductstheroleofcompetition
AT mariasanchezromeroluz dotobaccocompanieshaveanincentivetopromoteharmreductionproductstheroleofcompetition
AT mezarafael dotobaccocompanieshaveanincentivetopromoteharmreductionproductstheroleofcompetition
AT douglasclifforde dotobaccocompanieshaveanincentivetopromoteharmreductionproductstheroleofcompetition
AT michaelcummingsk dotobaccocompanieshaveanincentivetopromoteharmreductionproductstheroleofcompetition