Global Progress in Tobacco Control: Evidence-Based Strategies, Policy Frameworks, and Public Health Impacts

Nadia K. Mensah¹*, Rafael J. Ortega², Mei-Ling Zhou³

1. Department of Public Health, King’s College London, UK
2. School of Public Policy, University of Toronto, Canada
3. Institute of Global Health Policy, National University of Singapore, Singapore

*Corresponding Author:
Dr. Nadia K. Mensah
Department of Public Health
King’s College London
London, UK
Email: [email protected]

Abstract

Tobacco consumption continues to represent one of the foremost preventable drivers of global morbidity and mortality, reinforcing the urgency for robust tobacco control policies. This review synthesizes the empirical evidence underpinning key regulatory strategies—including excise taxation, smoke-free legislation, and graphic health warnings—demonstrating their effectiveness in curbing tobacco use and enhancing population health. Implementation approaches are critically examined, with particular attention to the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) as a cornerstone of international coordination. The discussion also addresses persistent challenges in policy adoption, enforcement disparities, and the regulation of emerging nicotine products such as e-cigarettes. Measurable public health achievements, such as declining smoking prevalence and improved health outcomes, are considered alongside gaps and opportunities for policy refinement. The review concludes by advancing recommendations aimed at strengthening enforcement mechanisms, promoting equity, and incorporating comprehensive oversight of alternative tobacco products. Future research priorities and the pivotal role of multisectoral stakeholders are emphasized, highlighting the necessity of sustained global collaboration to advance tobacco control and reduce the burden of tobacco-related disease.

Keywords: tobacco control policies, smoking prevalence, e-cigarette regulation, public health policy, global health equity

© The Author(s) 2025. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third-party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Introduction

Tobacco consumption continues to represent one of the foremost preventable causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide (Sinha & Haider, 2024) [40]. According to estimates from the World Health Organization (WHO), tobacco is responsible for over 8 million deaths each year, with more than 7 million attributable to direct use and approximately 1.3 million linked to exposure to secondhand smoke (Organization, 2019) [34]. Despite decades of research and public health advocacy, tobacco still imposes a substantial burden on health systems and national economies, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where more than 80% of the global population of tobacco users is concentrated (da Silva Giongo, de Mesquita Carvalho, da Silva, da Silva Cabral, & Chança, 2023) [13]. This persistent challenge underscores the urgent need for comprehensive and effective policy interventions to reduce tobacco use and mitigate its associated harms (EDITION).

The detrimental health consequences of tobacco are extensively documented, encompassing cardiovascular disease, respiratory disorders, and numerous forms of cancer. Equally concerning are the economic repercussions (Abujaber et al., 2024) [2]. Expenditures on tobacco-related healthcare and losses in productivity place significant pressure on national budgets, frequently diverting resources away from other urgent health priorities. In addition, the societal burden of tobacco use—including its role in perpetuating poverty and health inequities—further complicates global efforts to control this epidemic (J. N. Marbin & Gribben, 2019) [26].

In response, tobacco control policies have become a central component of global health strategies. These measures are designed to lower tobacco use prevalence, protect non-smokers from involuntary exposure, and establish environments that deter initiation, especially among younger populations (Organization, 2020) [23]. Policy instruments such as excise taxation, restrictions on advertising, and smoke-free legislation have yielded significant progress in many regions. However, the overall impact of these measures remains highly dependent on the strength of their implementation, the rigor of enforcement, and their adaptability to specific local contexts.

This article seeks to provide a comprehensive review of recent progress in tobacco control policy by focusing on three core areas. First, it evaluates the empirical evidence supporting the most effective strategies for reducing tobacco consumption. Second, it examines models of implementation that have achieved success in diverse contexts, identifying both enabling factors and persistent barriers to adoption. Finally, it analyzes the public health outcomes associated with these measures, emphasizing successful cases while also highlighting areas that require further improvement. By integrating these findings, the paper aims to inform ongoing global tobacco control initiatives and support broader objectives of advancing equity in global health.

Evidence Base for Tobacco Control Policies

2.1. Key Evidence Underpinning Tobacco Control Measures

A wide range of tobacco control interventions have consistently demonstrated efficacy in lowering tobacco consumption and its associated health consequences. Among these, taxation is regarded as one of the most powerful strategies to discourage tobacco use (Felsinger & Groman, 2022) [16]. Economic analyses consistently show an inverse association between product pricing and consumption, with higher excise taxes leading to reduced smoking rates, particularly among young individuals and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. By raising the cost of tobacco products, governments can both prevent initiation and promote cessation, thereby providing a highly cost-effective means of mitigating the burden of tobacco-related illness (DeCicca, Kenkel, & Lovenheim, 2022) [15].

Restrictions on smoking in public spaces represent another fundamental component of tobacco control. These policies safeguard non-smokers from secondhand smoke exposure and help to shift societal norms in ways that denormalize smoking (Kisira, 2019) [21]. Evidence from jurisdictions that have enacted comprehensive smoke-free legislation reveals notable improvements in indoor air quality and reductions in hospital admissions for conditions such as asthma and cardiovascular disease. Furthermore, these laws have been associated with declines in smoking prevalence by creating environments less conducive to tobacco use (Semple et al., 2022) [39].

Health warnings on cigarette packaging also constitute a proven strategy. Studies indicate that graphic health warnings, particularly those employing striking visual imagery, heighten awareness of the health hazards of smoking (Rosenblatt, Dixon, Wakefield, & Bode, 2019) [38]. Such warnings have been shown to deter initiation and encourage quitting among current smokers. Countries that have implemented plain packaging regulations—which eliminate branding while amplifying the visibility of warnings—have documented additional declines in smoking prevalence (Ophir, Brennan, Maloney, & Cappella, 2019) [33].

2.2. International Evidence Demonstrating Policy Effectiveness

Extensive global research provides strong support for the effectiveness of tobacco control policies. A landmark study spanning more than 100 countries confirmed that tobacco excise taxes are directly correlated with reductions in both smoking prevalence and consumption. In high-income nations such as Australia and the United Kingdom, robust tax policies have driven substantial declines in smoking rates. Likewise, several low- and middle-income countries, including the Philippines, have recorded significant progress following the adoption of similar fiscal measures (Nargis et al., 2019) [30].

Evidence from Ireland and Uruguay illustrates the positive impact of smoke-free laws on public health outcomes. Following Ireland’s implementation of a nationwide smoking ban, there was a significant reduction in secondhand smoke exposure and an 18% decline in smoking rates among hospitality sector workers. Similarly, Uruguay’s comprehensive legislation produced measurable reductions in tobacco-related morbidity and mortality within only a few years (Mlinarić et al., 2019) [29].

The role of health warnings has likewise been well documented in diverse settings. Canada, one of the earliest adopters of graphic warnings, reported increased knowledge of smoking-related risks and higher quit attempts. In Brazil, the introduction of such warnings resulted in widespread recognition of tobacco’s dangers, particularly among adolescents (Ma, 2022).

2.3. New Directions in Research

As tobacco control continues to develop, novel challenges and opportunities demand further research and innovation. One pressing area is the regulation of electronic cigarettes and other emerging nicotine delivery products (Bhatnagar et al., 2019) [7]. These devices, which are particularly popular among younger populations, raise concerns about their potential to undermine tobacco control gains. Rigorous research on their health impacts and their role in cessation versus initiation is essential to guide evidence-based regulation. Countries such as the United States and New Zealand are actively pursuing comprehensive frameworks that balance harm reduction with prevention (J. Liu, Gaiha, & Halpern-Felsher, 2020) [23].

Another priority lies in the creation of youth-focused prevention programs. Adolescents remain highly susceptible to industry marketing and peer influence. School-based education, mass media campaigns, and community initiatives that raise awareness of tobacco harms have demonstrated effectiveness in preventing uptake (Mills, Golden, O’Leary, Logan, & Lich, 2023) [28]. For instance, combined education and enforcement strategies in Norway and Thailand have successfully reduced youth smoking rates (Aaron, 2021) [1].

Finally, growing attention is being directed toward equity in tobacco control. Research increasingly emphasizes the need to address disparities in tobacco use among marginalized groups. Tailored interventions that account for cultural, economic, and social determinants are being developed to ensure equitable health gains from tobacco control policies (Halas et al., 2020) [18].

Models for Implementing Tobacco Control

The effective execution of tobacco control policies is fundamental to achieving reductions in tobacco use and the associated health and economic burdens. Globally, diverse implementation frameworks have been applied to facilitate policy adoption, ensure enforcement, and sustain progress. While certain regions have achieved remarkable success, others continue to encounter significant obstacles that hinder advancement. This section explores models that have proven successful, identifies barriers to adoption and enforcement, and underscores the importance of international collaboration and funding mechanisms in strengthening tobacco control initiatives.

3.1. Examination of Effective Implementation Frameworks

Among the most impactful global instruments for advancing tobacco control is the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). Endorsed by the World Health Assembly in 2003, the FCTC represents the first international treaty negotiated under the World Health Organization (WHO) (Borges, Menezes, & Souza, 2020). It offers a structured guideline for countries to implement evidence-based measures such as taxation, advertising restrictions, and prohibitions on smoking in public spaces. Its strength lies in its adaptability, enabling governments to design strategies that reflect local contexts while remaining aligned with shared principles (Craig, Fong, Chung-Hall, & Puska, 2019) [12].

Uruguay provides a strong example of FCTC application. The country was among the pioneers in adopting comprehensive smoke-free regulations and mandating graphic health warnings that cover 80% of cigarette packages. Despite facing substantial legal opposition from the tobacco industry, Uruguay’s commitment to rigorous enforcement has earned it recognition as a global leader in tobacco control (Melillo, 2020) [27]. Similarly, Australia introduced groundbreaking plain packaging laws designed to diminish the appeal of tobacco products. Combined with high excise taxation, these initiatives have produced a significant decline in smoking prevalence (Junior, 2020) [20].

Innovative strategies have also been notable in low- and middle-income nations. A prominent example is the Philippines’ 2012 “sin tax” reform, which increased excise taxes on tobacco and earmarked a portion of the revenue for healthcare funding. This approach has been widely commended for simultaneously reducing smoking rates and expanding access to health services for underserved communities (Cheng & Estrada, 2020) [11].

3.2. Obstacles to Policy Adoption and Enforcement

Despite the clear successes, numerous countries face persistent challenges in advancing and enforcing tobacco control policies. One of the most formidable barriers is the influence of the tobacco industry, which relies on extensive lobbying, legal disputes, and sophisticated marketing strategies to obstruct regulation. This problem is especially pronounced in low-income settings, where governments may lack the institutional capacity or financial resources to resist industry interference or ensure compliance with existing laws (임현정, 2019) [43].

Cultural and societal norms also complicate implementation. In several regions, tobacco use remains embedded in social traditions or perceived as a symbol of prestige, creating resistance to restrictive policies. Misconceptions about the economic consequences of tobacco control—such as concerns regarding job losses in the tobacco sector—can further impede political will and public support (Hoek, Edwards, & Waa, 2022) [19].

Even in countries with advanced legislation, enforcement challenges persist. Weak administrative systems, corruption, and inadequate funding often contribute to inconsistent adherence to tobacco regulations. For example, although many countries have enacted smoke-free legislation, enforcement varies widely, with some jurisdictions struggling to effectively monitor compliance and apply penalties (Adewusi, 2021) [3].

3.3. Importance of Global Collaboration and Financial Support Mechanisms

International cooperation has played a crucial role in advancing tobacco control, particularly within low-resource environments. The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) provides a structured platform for countries to exchange effective practices, gain technical assistance, and coordinate global action against tobacco use. Through instruments such as the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products, member states collaborate to confront cross-border challenges, including smuggling, which undermines taxation policies and contributes to widening health disparities (Barry, Hill, Williams, & Collin, 2022) [6].

Equally essential are funding streams that underpin the implementation of tobacco control initiatives. Programs led by organizations such as the Bloomberg Initiative to Reduce Tobacco Use and the Gates Foundation have delivered both financial and technical aid to countries adopting regulatory measures (Naznin et al., 2021) [31]. These investments support activities including policy formulation, capacity development, and public education campaigns. For example, Bloomberg Philanthropies has been instrumental in assisting nations such as Bangladesh and Indonesia to strengthen tobacco taxation structures and expand awareness initiatives.

Regional alliances further enhance collaborative efforts. In Africa, the East African Community has formulated a shared tobacco control strategy, enabling participating states to harmonize regulations and pool resources. Similarly, the Pan American Health Organization has provided technical guidance to countries across the Americas, facilitating adoption and enforcement of control measures and contributing to marked declines in smoking rates across the region (Ong’oyi, 2021) [32].

In summary, the process of implementing tobacco control measures is inherently shaped by political, economic, and cultural contexts. Experiences from Uruguay, Australia, and the Philippines illustrate how substantial progress can be achieved when evidence-based strategies are customized to local circumstances and backed by strong governmental commitment. Yet, persistent barriers—such as industry interference, cultural acceptance of tobacco use, and weak enforcement—highlight the need for ongoing vigilance and adaptation. Global partnerships and financial support systems have proven indispensable in overcoming these challenges by providing technical expertise and financial capacity. Strengthening cooperation and knowledge-sharing across borders will be vital for reducing the worldwide burden of tobacco-related illness and advancing healthier populations.

Health Outcomes Attributable to Tobacco Control Policies

Tobacco control interventions have been central in addressing the harmful health effects of tobacco consumption, which continues to rank among the most significant causes of preventable morbidity and mortality globally. By introducing strategies such as increased taxation, smoke-free regulations, and population-wide education campaigns, many countries have realized considerable gains in both health and economic outcomes. This section evaluates the measurable effects of these policies, presents case studies that demonstrate their impact, and considers existing limitations and opportunities for refining current approaches.

4.1. Measurable Impacts of Tobacco Control Policies

The implementation of comprehensive tobacco control measures has produced demonstrable outcomes, most notably in lowering smoking prevalence and enhancing population health indicators. According to the WHO, global smoking rates fell from 22.7% in 2007 to 17.5% in 2022, a decline largely attributable to policy-driven interventions (H. Liu et al., 2024). Among these, taxation on tobacco products has proven particularly effective, with evidence showing a strong association between higher prices and reduced consumption. Research indicates that a 10% increase in cigarette prices generally results in a 4% decrease in smoking prevalence in high-income countries, with even greater reductions observed in low- and middle-income nations (Organization, 2024) [37].

Significant health improvements have accompanied these measures. Jurisdictions enforcing smoke-free environments and comprehensive awareness campaigns report lower rates of tobacco-related conditions, including lung cancer, cardiovascular disease, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (Bird, Kashaniamin, Nwankwo, & Moraros, 2020) [8]. Evidence from the United States, for example, demonstrates that states with stringent tobacco legislation experience fewer hospital admissions and reduced premature mortality linked to smoking. Gains have also extended to maternal and child health, with reduced prevalence of low birth weight and preterm births following declines in maternal tobacco use (Bafunno et al., 2020) [5].

The economic advantages of these interventions further emphasize their value. By curbing tobacco-related illnesses and improving workforce productivity, governments are able to reduce healthcare expenditures and reallocate resources toward other public health needs. According to World Bank data, each dollar invested in tobacco control generates an estimated economic return of at least $35 through reduced treatment costs and enhanced productivity (Organization, 2021) [36].

4.2. Country-Specific Illustrations of Policy Effectiveness

Several national experiences highlight the substantial impact of comprehensive tobacco control strategies. Thailand presents a strong example, where combined interventions—high excise taxes, graphic warning labels, and strict public smoking bans—have driven consistent declines in smoking prevalence over the past two decades. Between 1991 and 2021, adult smoking rates fell from 32% to 19%. Importantly, revenue from tobacco taxation was reinvested in healthcare initiatives and anti-smoking campaigns, creating a sustainable prevention and treatment cycle (Aungkulanon et al., 2019) [4].

Brazil offers another striking case. Following its ratification of the FCTC, the country adopted wide-ranging policies including bans on advertising, the introduction of plain packaging, and large graphic health warnings (Vedovato & Vianna, 2020) [41]. These efforts led to a dramatic decline in adult smoking prevalence, from 34.8% in 1989 to 12.6% by 2019. Brazil’s National Cancer Institute further estimates that these initiatives prevented nearly 420,000 deaths linked to tobacco use over a 20-year period (Wei, 2020). Turkey also provides a notable success story: between 2008 and 2014, comprehensive taxation policies, combined with a nationwide education campaign and provision of free cessation services, reduced tobacco use by 15%. The introduction of mandatory plain packaging in 2020 further reinforced its commitment to tobacco control (Dağli, Dilektaşli, & Pisinger, 2021) [14].

4.3. Constraints and Opportunities for Advancement

Although tobacco control policies have demonstrated considerable achievements, significant obstacles remain in sustaining their long-term effectiveness and equity. A key limitation lies in the inconsistent application of measures across regions and nations. High-income countries generally possess both the resources and political commitment to enforce comprehensive strategies, whereas many low-income settings face difficulties in enforcement because of financial constraints, fragile governance systems, and competing health priorities (Grinin, Malkov, & Korotayev, 2023) [17].

The emergence of alternative nicotine products, including e-cigarettes and heated tobacco devices, has introduced new complexities. Regulatory responses vary widely, with some countries adopting lenient frameworks while others enforce strict prohibitions. The evidence regarding the long-term health implications of these products remains inconclusive, creating uncertainty about their role in harm-reduction strategies (Aaron, 2021) [1]. Additionally, cultural and social contexts can act as barriers, as smoking continues to represent an entrenched practice or social custom in certain populations, thereby diminishing the influence of education and policy interventions. Moreover, persistent lobbying and misinformation campaigns by the tobacco industry further obstruct policy progress (Buettner-Schmidt, Miller, & Maack, 2019) [10].

Another challenge is the inadequate attention to at-risk groups, such as youth and economically disadvantaged individuals, who bear a disproportionate burden of tobacco use. While fiscal measures like taxation are proven to reduce consumption, they may also impose a substantial financial strain on addicted smokers from low-income backgrounds. Addressing these disparities requires tailored approaches, including specialized cessation programs and subsidized alternatives to support quitting efforts (J. Marbin et al., 2021) [25].

Conclusion and Policy Directions

5.1. Consolidation of Principal Insights

This review of international tobacco control strategies highlights the substantial impact of evidence-based measures in lowering smoking prevalence and improving population health. Interventions such as taxation, smoke-free laws, graphic health warnings, and large-scale awareness campaigns have significantly reduced tobacco consumption and related health risks. Countries that adopted holistic frameworks aligned with global standards, notably the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), achieved notable declines in tobacco-attributable morbidity and mortality. Illustrative examples from Brazil, Thailand, and Turkey show how comprehensive implementation strategies can reshape public health outcomes while delivering both economic and societal gains.

Nonetheless, persistent challenges remain. Unequal enforcement, limited institutional capacity, and the rapid proliferation of alternative products like e-cigarettes complicate continued progress. Furthermore, the heavier impact of tobacco use on marginalized groups underscores the necessity for equity-driven policies. Moving forward, overcoming these barriers will require innovative, inclusive interventions, stronger global partnerships, and enhanced involvement of stakeholders to sustain momentum in tobacco control.

5.2. Strategic Policy Directions for Advancing Global Tobacco Control

From this review, several key policy recommendations emerge to strengthen the global fight against tobacco use. Governments must give priority to enforcement mechanisms that guarantee adherence to existing regulations. This requires imposing stricter penalties for non-compliance, strengthening surveillance and monitoring systems, and dedicating adequate resources to enforcement bodies. Particular emphasis should be placed on low- and middle-income countries, where enforcement challenges are most evident.

Although taxation continues to serve as a central pillar of tobacco control, opportunities remain to enhance its effectiveness. Adaptive tax models that adjust for inflation and shifts in purchasing power can preserve the deterrent effect over time. Importantly, revenues generated through tobacco taxation should be redirected toward healthcare services, cessation programs, and public education initiatives, thereby supporting a self-sustaining framework for prevention and treatment. The increasing prevalence of e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products calls for coherent and harmonized regulatory approaches. These should include oversight of marketing practices, establishment of product safety standards, and restrictions on availability to reduce uptake among young populations. Coordinated international action is also crucial to align regulations and counter industry tactics designed to exploit legal or policy inconsistencies.

Tobacco control frameworks must also prioritize vulnerable groups, such as adolescents, socioeconomically disadvantaged communities, and populations in regions with high smoking prevalence. Culturally tailored interventions, subsidized cessation assistance, and targeted educational programs can help mitigate health inequities and ensure inclusive progress. In parallel, integrating digital innovations into tobacco control can increase impact. Mobile applications, social media–based campaigns, and data analytics systems have the potential to reach diverse audiences and provide timely, evidence-based insights for policymakers.

5.3. Emerging Research Priorities and the Role of Stakeholders

Looking ahead, future research should concentrate on critical domains necessary to sustain momentum in tobacco control. Clarifying the long-term health outcomes of alternative nicotine products is particularly important to inform evidence-based regulatory decisions. Further, economic analyses of tobacco control policies can reinforce the argument for continued investment by demonstrating substantial returns in both healthcare savings and productivity gains. Exploration of novel cessation strategies—spanning behavioral, pharmacological, and technology-assisted interventions—should also be prioritized, especially when adapted for diverse and underserved populations.

Stakeholder collaboration will remain fundamental to advancing these objectives. Governments, healthcare institutions, academic bodies, and civil society organizations must collectively foster an enabling environment for ongoing progress. International agencies, notably the World Health Organization, should maintain their role in offering technical support, funding, and strategic policy guidance, particularly to resource-constrained regions. Meanwhile, non-governmental organizations and advocacy groups can contribute by raising public awareness, countering tobacco industry lobbying, and ensuring accountability among policymakers.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to colleagues at the Framework Convention Alliance for Tobacco Control and the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease for their feedback during the early drafting stages.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest related to this work.

Author Contributions

N.K.M. conceived the review and prepared the initial draft. R.J.O. contributed analysis of international policy frameworks. M.-L.Z. contributed sections on regional public health impacts and evaluation of interventions. All authors revised the manuscript critically for intellectual content and approved the final version.

References

6. Aaron DG. Tobacco reborn: the rise of e-cigarettes and regulatory approaches. Lewis & Clark L Rev. 2021;25:827.
7. Abujaber DA, Elshatarat RA, Al-Za’areer MS, Al Tarawneh NS, Al-Sayaghi KM, Younis HM, et al. Tobacco use and health hazards: A literature review for smoking cessation. Afr J Biol Sci. 2024;6:4610-22.
8. Adewusi I. An investigation into contemporary tobacco smoking behaviour in Nigeria: the impact of cultural transference on consumer behaviour and usage intentions. 2021.
9. Aungkulanon S, Pitayarangsarit S, Bundhamcharoen K, Akaleephan C, Chongsuvivatwong V, Phoncharoen R, Tangcharoensathien V. Smoking prevalence and attributable deaths in Thailand: predicting outcomes of different tobacco control interventions. BMC Public Health. 2019;19:1-11.
10. Bafunno D, Catino A, Lamorgese V, Del Bene G, Longo V, Montrone M, et al. Impact of tobacco control interventions on smoking initiation, cessation, and prevalence: a systematic review. J Thorac Dis. 2020;12(7):3844.
11. Barry RA, Hill SE, Williams S, Collin J. Challenges of conflict of interest, coordination and collaboration in small island contexts: towards effective tobacco control governance in UK overseas territories. Tob Control. 2022;31(Suppl 1):s39-s45.
12. Bhatnagar A, Whitsel LP, Blaha MJ, Huffman MD, Krishan-Sarin S, Maa J, et al. New and emerging tobacco products and the nicotine endgame: the role of robust regulation and comprehensive tobacco control and prevention: a presidential advisory from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2019;139(19):e937- e958.
13. Bird Y, Kashaniamin L, Nwankwo C, Moraros J. Impact and effectiveness of legislative smoking bans and antitobacco media campaigns in reducing smoking among women in the US: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Paper presented at: Healthcare; 2020.
14. Borges LC, Menezes HZd, Souza IMLd. Dilemmas in the implementation of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Cad Saude Publica. 2020;36:e00136919.
15. Buettner-Schmidt K, Miller DR, Maack B. Disparities in rural tobacco use, smoke-free policies, and tobacco taxes. West J Nurs Res. 2019;41(8):1184-1202.
16. Cheng KJG, Estrada MAG. Price elasticity of cigarette smoking demand in the Philippines after the 2012 Sin Tax Reform Act. Prev Med. 2020;134:106042.
17. Craig L, Fong GT, Chung-Hall J, Puska P. Impact of the WHO FCTC on tobacco control: perspectives from stakeholders in 12 countries. Tob Control. 2019;28(Suppl 2):s129-s135.
18. da Silva Giongo MJD, de Mesquita Carvalho A, da Silva ALO, da Silva Cabral LM, Chança RD. Impact of the use of heated tobacco. Physis Rev Saude Colet. 2023;33:e33SP103.
19. Dağli E, Dilektaşli A, Pisinger C. Preventing the initiation of tobacco and e-cigarettes among the youth. In: Supporting Tobacco Cessation. Sheffield: European Respiratory Society; 2021. p. 287-307.
20. DeCicca P, Kenkel D, Lovenheim MF. The economics of tobacco regulation: a comprehensive review. J Econ Lit. 2022;60(3):883-970.
21. Felsinger R, Groman E. Price policy and taxation as effective strategies for tobacco control. Front Public Health. 2022;10:851740.
22. Grinin L, Malkov S, Korotayev A. High-income and low-income countries. Toward a common goal at different speeds. In: Reconsidering the Limits to Growth: A Report to the Russian Association of the Club of Rome. Springer; 2023. p. 207-224.
23. Halas G, Schultz AS, Rothney J, Wener P, Holmqvist M, Cohen B, et al. A scoping review of foci, trends, and gaps in reviews of tobacco control research. Nicotine Tob Res. 2020;22(5):599-612.
24. Hoek J, Edwards R, Waa A. From social accessory to societal disapproval: smoking, social norms and tobacco endgames. Tob Control. 2022;31(2):358-64.
25. Junior WdCS. The plain packaging of tobacco products and its recognition by the WTO as a legitimate policy measure for the protection of public health. Cad IberoAm Dir Saude. 2020;9(2):29-53.
26. Kisira J. Smoking in public places: the legal framework in Uganda. 2019.
27. Liu H, Qi Q, Duan Y, Cui Y, Chen Y, Zhou C. Smoking susceptibility and trends among nonsmoking adolescents: an international study. Pediatrics. 2024;153(3):e2023062360.
28. Liu J, Gaiha SM, Halpern-Felsher B. A breath of knowledge: overview of current adolescent e-cigarette prevention and cessation programs. Curr Addict Rep. 2020;7:520-32.
29. Ma Z. The role of narrative pictorial warning labels in communicating alcohol-related cancer risks. Health Commun. 2022;37(10):1345-53.
30. Marbin J, Balk SJ, Gribben V, Groner J, Walley SC, Boykan R, et al. Health disparities in tobacco use and exposure: a structural competency approach. Pediatrics. 2021, 147(1).
31. Marbin JN, Gribben V. Tobacco use as a health disparity: what can pediatric clinicians do? Children. 2019;6(2):31.
32. Melillo M. When the lawfare is about evidence: from the negotiation of the framework convention on tobacco control to the international disputes against tobacco control measures (Philip Morris v Uruguay and Australia-plain packaging). Eur Univ Inst. 2020.
33. Mills SD, Golden SD, O’Leary MC, Logan P, Lich KH. Using systems science to advance health equity in tobacco control: a causal loop diagram of smoking. Tob Control. 2023;32(3):287-95.
34. Mlinarić M, Hoffmann L, Kunst AE, Schreuders M, Willemsen MC, Moor I, Richter M. Explaining mechanisms that influence smoke-free implementation at the local level: a realist review of smoking bans. Nicotine Tob Res. 2019;21(12):1609-20.
35. Nargis N, Yong H-H, Driezen P, Mbulo L, Zhao L, Fong GT, et al. Socioeconomic patterns of smoking cessation behavior in low and middle-income countries: Emerging evidence from the Global Adult Tobacco Surveys and International Tobacco Control Surveys. PLoS One. 2019;14(9):e0220223.
36. Naznin E, Wynne O, George J, Denham AM, Hoque ME, Milton AH, et al. Smokeless tobacco policy in Bangladesh: A stakeholder study of compatibility with the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2021;40(5):856-63.
37. Ong’oyi MK. The influence of national interest on regional integration: the case of Kenya in the East African community. University of Nairobi; 2021.
38. Ophir Y, Brennan E, Maloney EK, Cappella JN. The effects of graphic warning labels’ vividness on message engagement and intentions to quit smoking. Commun Res. 2019;46(5):619-38.
39. World Health Organization. Regional strategy and action plan for tobacco control 2019–2023. [cited 2019]. Available from: [URL].
40. World Health Organization. Regional action plan for tobacco control in the Western Pacific (2020-2030): working towards a healthy, tobacco-free Region. [cited 2020]. Available from: [URL].
41. World Health Organization. Saving lives, spending less: the case for investing in noncommunicable diseases. [cited 2021]. Available from: [URL].
42. World Health Organization. WHO global report on trends in prevalence of tobacco use 2000–2030. [cited 2024]. Available from: [URL].
43. Rosenblatt DH, Dixon H, Wakefield M, Bode S. Evaluating the influence of message framing and graphic imagery on perceptions of food product health warnings. Food Qual Prefer. 2019;77:32-42.
44. Semple S, Dobson R, O’Donnell R, Abidin EZ, Tigova O, Okello G, Fernández E. Smoke-free spaces: a decade of progress, a need for more? Tob Control. 2022;31(2):250-6.
45. Sinha SK, Haider MN. Tobacco and health effects. In: Tobacco & Public Health: Tobacco and Community Well-being: A Worldwide Health Crisis. 2024;101.
46. Vedovato LR, Vianna CG. Tobacco Packaging As a Contribution for Promotion of a Healthy Environment in Brazil. In: Sustainable Consumption: The Right to a Healthy Environment. 2020. p. 249-65.
47. Wei TK. Modelling To Assess the Impact of Interventions for Preventing Chronic Diseases and Their Complications. National University of Singapore; 2020.
48. 임현정. Collusive Alliance of Transnational Tobacco Companies to Fight against Regulatory Threats in South Korea. 서울대학교 대학원; 2019.