Image source: Storm Crypt/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 DEED

Key Points

• The Philippines is an island nation in Southeast Asia consisting of over 7,000 individual islands. It is part of the World Health Organization’s Western Pacific Region.
• Its population was 115.6 million as of 2022. The previous year, adult tobacco use prevalence was 19.5%.
• The Philippines ratified the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in 2005. It has not signed the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.
• PMFTC Inc. – a joint venture between Philip Morris International and the Fortune Tobacco Corporation, the tobacco business of local conglomerate LT Group – has the largest share of the Philippine cigarette market. Japan Tobacco International accounts for most other sales.
• Recent tobacco industry tactics in the Philippines include attempting to influence the committee responsible for overseeing tobacco control in the country; corporate social responsibility, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic; and establishing relationships with public officials, including at the very top of government.

The Philippines has made some progress on tobacco control, especially since the introduction of the reforms known as the Sin Taxes in 2013. These both greatly simplified tax structures and significantly increased excise on tobacco and alcohol products, with a substantial share of the new revenue being channelled into universal healthcare.¹ Tobacco use prevalence, which stood at 29.7% in 2009, had fallen to 23.8% by 2015, and again to 19.5% by 2021.²³ However, rising incomes and subsequent smaller increases in tobacco taxes have made cigarettes more affordable, slowing further progress.⁴ Other challenges include an illicit tobacco market larger than the global average;⁵ the growing popularity of newer nicotine and tobacco products (particularly e-cigarettes) amongst young people;⁶ and ongoing tobacco industry presence on the inter-agency committee responsible for implementing tobacco control regulation in the country.⁷ Philippine domestic law continues to fall short of what is required by the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) across a number of areas.⁸

Tobacco Use in the Philippines

In 2022, the population of the Philippines was 115.6 million.⁹ According to the 2021 Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS), tobacco use prevalence amongst Filipino adults was 19.5%.³ Prevalence is much higher amongst males (nearly 35%) than females (just over 4%).³ Amongst adolescents aged between 13 and 15, 12.5% were using some form of tobacco in 2019.¹⁰ Again, prevalence for males (over 18%) is higher than for females (nearly 7%).¹⁰

In the 2021 GATS, just over 2% of Filipino adults reported current use of e-cigarettes (3.6% males; 0.5% females).³ However, use of e-cigarettes is considerably higher amongst youth. In the 2019 Global Youth Tobacco Survey, the corresponding figure was over 14% – higher than for conventional cigarettes (10%).¹⁰ More than 20% of boys aged between 13 and 15 reported using e-cigarettes, compared to 7.5% of girls.¹⁰ Smokeless tobacco use in the Philippines also appears to be greater amongst the young: in 2019, 3% of young people reported current smokeless tobacco use, compared to 1.5% of adults in 2021.¹⁰³

There were an estimated 95,600 deaths attributable to tobacco use in 2019, accounting for nearly 15% of all mortality in the Philippines that year.¹¹ According to a 2018 study, the economic burden of tobacco use in the Philippines in 2012 was just under PHP₱270 billion (US$15.1 billion according to the purchasing power parity exchange rate) – equivalent to 2.5% of national GDP. This includes both direct costs resulting from tobacco use (e.g., hospitalisations and medication) as well as indirect costs (reduced productivity due to disability and mortality). The same study found that diseases attributable to tobacco use accounted for nearly 5% of total health expenditure.¹²

Tobacco in the Philippines

Market share and leading brands

PMFTC Inc. (PMFTC) dominates the Philippine cigarette market, with a market share of around 61% in 2022.¹³ PMFTC is a joint venture between Philip Morris International (PMI) and the Fortune Tobacco Corporation, the tobacco business of local conglomerate LT Group.¹⁴

Japan Tobacco International (JTI) has a market share of 38%, thanks to its 2017 acquisition of local company Mighty Corporation.¹³¹⁵ Together, PMFTC and JTI account for virtually all of the licit cigarette sales in the country.¹³

PMI’s flagship brand Marlboro is the most popular brand of cigarette, with a share of nearly 33% in 2022. In second place is another PMFTC brand, Fortune International, with a share of nearly 17%. JTI’s Winston is third, with a market share of around 14%. All other brands have market shares of less than 10%.¹⁶

• For more information on the tobacco industry in the Philippines, please see the Tobacco Supply Chain Database.

At nearly 23%, the Philippines has one of the largest market shares for menthol cigarettes in the world.¹⁷¹⁸ Menthol cigarettes have been marketed in the Philippines since at least the 1970s, including in campaigns targeting young women.¹⁹ In more recent times, the menthol market share has increased year on year since 2014. Similarly, though the market for flavour capsule cigarettes is much smaller than for menthol, it has also been growing steadily, with yearly increases since 2015.¹⁷ These products are often more attractive to youth and young adults than conventional cigarettes; menthol in particular is associated with increased smoking initiation.¹⁸

• For more information, please see the page on Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs.

Tobacco farming and child labour

Since the early 1960s, tobacco production in the Philippines has remained roughly stable, at between 40,000 and 70,000 tonnes a year. However, between 1981 and 1993 it increased to between 74,000 and 118,000 tonnes. Conversely, between 2006 and 2009 it dipped below 40,000, to a low of 32,000 tonnes in 2008.²⁰

Figure 1: Tobacco production, 1961 to 2021.²⁰ Source: UN Food and Agriculture Organization/Our World in Data | CC BY

Research has demonstrated that tobacco growing is not a profitable enterprise for most farmers. Despite this, farmers continue to grow tobacco due to a belief in its profitability and the reliability of the tobacco market; its perceived resilience to bad weather compared to other crops; and, in particular, access to credit.²¹ Filipino farmers interviewed for a study published in 2019 stated that tobacco farming allowed them to take out loans to which they would not have had access had they been growing other crops. Loans were also used to cover non-agricultural expenses such as school fees, buying food, and paying off other loans.²¹

As part of the Sin Tax reforms, 15% of the revenue collected from tobacco taxes is allocated to tobacco-growing communities to promote economically viable alternatives.²² However, this remains a challenge. Farmers have cited lack of capital, difficulties accessing credit, an absence of technical support and a perceived lack of markets for other crops as reasons for not transitioning away from tobacco.²¹

Tobacco is also one of 13 commodities produced in the Philippines which feature on the U.S. Department of Labor’s 2022 List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor.²³ However, comprehensive and up-to-date information on child labour in Philippine tobacco farming is not available.

Tobacco and the economy

The Philippines is a net importer of raw tobacco, importing about US$243 million of raw tobacco in 2022, compared to exports of around US$184 million.²⁴²⁵ However, the country is a net exporter of cigarettes, with exports in the same year of over US$232 million, compared to about US$22.6 million in imports.²⁶²⁷

Illicit trade

Illicit tobacco was estimated to form around 16% of the market in the Philippines in 2018.⁵ Though this is above the likely global average of 11 to 12%, it has changed little since 1998.⁵²⁸ Though industry-funded studies found significant increases in the Philippine illicit tobacco trade following the introduction of the Sin Taxes in 2013, there is no independent evidence to support this.⁵

Tobacco and the environment

The WHO reports that curing in tobacco agriculture is a leading cause of demand for wood from native forests in the Philippines.²⁹

Farmers cultivating the native batek variety of tobacco in the southern Philippines have been documented as using several toxic agrochemicals to control pests. These include some listed as hazardous by the WHO, such as cypermethrin and methomyl.³⁰

It has been estimated that between 30 and 50 billion cigarette butts are littered every year in the Philippines – 12.5 million on the resort island of Boracay alone.³¹ Boracay was closed for six months in 2018 for environmental rehabilitation, resulting in billions in lost revenues for both government and the private sector.³¹³²

• For more information on the tobacco industry’s environmental impact, please see Tobacco and the Environment and the long read on Plastics, the Environment and the Tobacco Industry.

Roadmap to Tobacco Control

The Philippines ratified the WHO FCTC in 2005 and the treaty entered into force later that year.³³³⁴ WHO FCTC ratification was a catalyst for strengthening tobacco control laws in the country and reducing industry influence on policy.³⁴ However, the Philippines is not a party to the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.³⁵

The Tobacco Regulation Act of 2003 (RA 9211) is the country’s main tobacco control law, covering areas such as smoking in public places; tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship; and sales restrictions. Subsequent legislation built on the 2003 law, introducing further regulation on issues such as designated smoking areas, advertising and the packaging and labelling of tobacco products.³⁶

However, given that RA 9211 was enacted just three months before the Philippines signed the WHO FCTC, Filipino tobacco control advocates have argued that the law was both timed and designed to pre-empt the Convention. This has resulted in tobacco control regulations which, nearly 20 years later, still fall some way short of WHO FCTC requirements.⁷³⁷ Designated smoking areas are still permitted in indoor offices and workplaces; restaurants; and cafés, pubs and bars. Restrictions on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship remain incomplete. And at 50.6% of the retail value of the most popular brand of cigarettes, tobacco taxation is significantly below the 75% threshold recommended by the WHO.⁸

The tobacco industry, led by the Philippine Tobacco Institute (PTI), has also used RA 9211 as justification for delaying the introduction of more WHO FCTC-compliant measures (such as graphic health warnings), arguing that such measures contravene existing Philippine law.³⁷³⁸

In August 2020, the joint House Committees on Trade and Industry and on Health approved a bill regulating manufacture, sale and use of e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (HTPs).³⁹ This bill reversed an earlier decision to raise the purchase age from 18 to 21 and restrict flavourings to tobacco and plain menthol. It also shifted responsibility for regulation of these products from the Food and Drug Administration to the Department of Trade and Industry. Eight days after the bill was approved, the first of four stores dedicated to PMI’s flagship HTP IQOS opened for business.⁴⁰

This bill was a precursor to the Vaporized Nicotine and Non-Nicotine Products Regulation Act, which eventually became law in July 2022. E-cigarettes in hundreds of different flavours reportedly flooded the Philippine market in the months following the passage of the law.⁴¹ Leading Filipino tobacco control advocates argue that the law has undermined recent gains in tobacco control.⁴⁰

For more details, please see the following websites:

• Legislation by country/Jurisdiction – Philippines, Tobacco Control Laws, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
• Philippines, WHO FCTC Implementation Database, WHO FCTC Secretariat
• Country profile – Philippines, World Health Organization, WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic 2023

Tobacco Industry Interference in the Philippines

Recent tobacco industry tactics in the Philippines include attempting to influence the committee responsible for overseeing tobacco control in the country; corporate social responsibility, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic; and attempts to influence policy, including by establishing relationships at the very top of government.

Conflict of interest

The Philippines’ main tobacco control law, RA 9211, requires the government to implement a “balanced policy”, given that:

“It is the policy of the State to protect the populace from hazardous products and promote the right to health and instill health consciousness among them. It is also the policy of the State, consistent with the Constitutional ideal to promote the general welfare, to safeguard the interests of the workers and other stakeholders in the tobacco industry.”⁴²

However, the first principle of the implementation guidelines for Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC states that “There is a fundamental and irreconcilable conflict between the tobacco industry’s interests and public health policy interests.”⁴³ Any requirement for “balance” can only therefore hinder progress on tobacco control and undermine public health.

This may be seen in the composition of the Interagency Committee on Tobacco (IAC-T), a multisectoral body established by RA 9211 responsible for overseeing implementation of the legislation.⁴² One seat on the IAC-T is reserved for the National Tobacco Administration (NTA) – a government agency that sits within the Department of Agriculture – which has a mandate to “Promote the balanced and integrated growth and development of the tobacco industry to help make agriculture a solid base for industrialization.”⁴⁴

Another seat is reserved for a representative of the tobacco industry, specifically the Philippine Tobacco Institute (PTI), an association whose members over the years have included PMFTC and JTI, among others.^42454647 The PTI has a long history of undermining tobacco control measures, including successfully managing to reduce the size of graphic health warnings on tobacco products, opposing tobacco tax reforms and litigating over tobacco control regulations against public bodies such as the City of Balanga and the Department of Health.⁴⁶⁴⁸⁴⁹

Tobacco control advocates have called repeatedly for the removal of the PTI from the IAC-T, citing conflict of interest and alleging that it uses its position to actively weaken tobacco control policies.⁴⁶⁵⁰⁵¹ The WHO has supported this position, stating that the composition of the Philippine IAC-T “is blatantly in conflict with WHO FCTC Article 5.3”, which requires parties to protect their public health policies against the commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry.⁵²

Corporate social responsibility

As of 2023, there was still no ban on tobacco industry corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the Philippines.⁸ The tobacco industry has taken advantage of this shortcoming to try to enhance its reputation and influence both policy makers and the general public.

From 2017 to 2021, PMI spent nearly US$38 million on CSR in the Philippines. Nearly US$31 million of this total was spent in 2020 and 2021 alone.⁵³ Much of this funding is channelled through the Jaime V. Ongpin Foundation (JVOFI), a development NGO and partner of “Embrace”, PMFTC’s CSR programme.⁵³⁵⁴ During 2020, in the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, JVOFI distributed ambulances, ventilators, PCR machines for COVID-19 testing, personal protective equipment, food supplies and rapid test kits throughout the country.⁵⁴

PMI was far from the only tobacco industry player carrying out this kind of work: by mid-April 2020, the LT Group – PMI’s partner in joint venture PMFTC – had spent PHP₱200 million (around US$4 million) on COVID-19 assistance.⁵⁴ The LT Group implements such initiatives in the Philippines via its CSR arm, the Tan Yan Kee Foundation.⁵⁵ Also in April 2020, Japan Tobacco International (JTI) donated 20,000 face masks to hospitals in the province of Batangas, where its manufacturing facilities are located.⁵⁴

An investigation published by the media and business intelligence organisation Eco-Business in 2021 revealed that a number of congressional representatives were involved in the distribution of COVID-19 relief donated by the tobacco industry and its associates.⁴⁰ These donations also coincided with several debates in Congress which addressed regulation for newer nicotine and tobacco products (see section “Roadmap to Tobacco Control”).⁴⁰³⁷

Both PMI and JTI also lobbied the Philippine Ministry of Finance for permission to continue their operations as normal during lockdown, though cigarettes were not considered to be an essential item.⁵⁴ In an April 2020 press release, JTI argued that lockdown restrictions were forcing smokers to buy illicit tobacco; were resulting in lower tax revenues for government; and were harming retailers, especially small and family-run businesses.⁵⁶ Restrictions on the transport and delivery of tobacco products were subsequently lifted.⁵⁷

This shows how industry arguments around the illicit trade were accepted by Filipino policy makers, allowing tobacco companies to operate even during an outbreak of a lethal respiratory disease to which smokers are more vulnerable.⁵⁸

• For more on tobacco industry activity during the pandemic, please see the COVID-19 Tobacco Tactics page and the COVID-19 monitoring database.

Unnecessary interaction with high level officials

Hailing from the Ilocos region, where tobacco is a major cash crop, President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. has met with PMI at least twice since becoming president in June 2022.⁴¹⁵⁹ The most recent of these meetings was a lunch he and First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos hosted for PMI executives – including CEO Jacek Olczak – at the Malacañang Palace in November 2022, the first time a company CEO has been received at the Philippine presidential palace. Also present were PMFTC president Denis Gorkun and LT Group CEO Lucio Tan III.⁴¹

PMFTC’s director for global communications stated that the aim of the meeting was to outline the company’s plan “to expand our economic footprint in the Philippines.”⁴¹ PMI is reportedly investing US$150 million in the expansion of a manufacturing plant in Tanauan, Batangas. The new wing of the factory is to be used for the production of BLENDS, tobacco sticks used exclusively in PMI’s BONDS, a more affordable version of its flagship HTP IQOS.⁴¹

In 2012, the then Senator Marcos was photographed during a Senate debate on the Sin Taxes speaking to a lawyer representing PMFTC.⁶⁰⁶¹

Relevant Links

• The Toll of Tobacco in the Philippines, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, 2023
• Tobacco Industry Interference Index 2022: The Philippine Report on the Implementation of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, HealthJustice, 2023
• Global Adult Tobacco Survey, Fact Sheet, Philippines 2021, Republic of the Philippines Department of Health, Philippine Statistics Authority, WHO Philippines et al
• Global Youth Tobacco Survey, Fact Sheet, Philippines 2019, Republic of the Philippines Department of Health, Epidemiology Bureau, WHO Western Pacific Region et al
• Tobacco Industry Monitor – Philippines, Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance, 2024

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs

References

The post Philippines Country Profile appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Image source: © Guillaume Piolle/CC BY 3.0

Key Points

• Lebanon is located on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea. It is served by the World Health Organization’s Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean (EMRO).
• It has a population of 5.5 million, with an estimated tobacco use prevalence for those aged 15 and over of 39%.
• Lebanon ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) in 2005. It has not ratified the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.
• Lebanon has a state-owned tobacco monopoly, the Regie Libanaise de Tabacs et Tombacs, known as the Regie, which controls the domestic market. Transnational tobacco companies only have access to the Lebanese market through the Regie.
• In recent years, tobacco industry lobbying has prevented the introduction of graphic health warnings; the Regie has sought to influence Lebanon’s delegation to the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the WHO FCTC; and the industry has conducted extensive corporate social responsibility activities, some of which have involved Lebanese state institutions.

Lebanon has some of the highest rates of tobacco use in the world. It is ranked third in the world for cigarette consumption per capita.⁶² A 2019 survey also suggested that waterpipe use prevalence is particularly high, and higher amongst women than men.⁶³ Tobacco products were easily affordable until the start of Lebanon’s economic crisis in 2019.⁶² Though they have become less affordable since then, the decline in affordability has been weaker compared to that for other goods.⁶⁴ At just 9.9% of the retail price, the tax imposed on tobacco products falls well short of the 75% recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO).⁶⁵⁶⁶ Though a comprehensive tobacco control law was introduced in 2011, there have been major challenges with implementation and enforcement.⁶⁷

Tobacco Use in Lebanon

In 2022, the population of Lebanon was 5.5 million.⁶⁸ In 2019, the WHO estimated overall tobacco use prevalence to be 39% amongst the population aged 15 and over, based on all national survey data from 1990.⁶⁹ An academic study carried out in 2019 found similar results. Based on a cross-sectional household survey, it found prevalence of cigarette smoking among adults aged between 18 and 69 of just over 35% (49% males; 21.5% females).⁶³ It also found overall waterpipe use prevalence of 39.5%, and at over 46%, prevalence for women was higher than for men (nearly 33%).⁶³ Almost half of current cigarette smokers reported smoking more than 20 cigarettes per day, while most waterpipe users smoked at least three sessions per week.⁶³

In 2017, Lebanon reported tobacco use among boys aged 13-15 of 35% – the highest amongst the 19 EMRO countries which carried out the Global School-based Student Health Survey between 2001 and 2018.⁷⁰ The corresponding figure for Lebanese girls that year was 28%.⁷⁰ A study carried out amongst Lebanese adolescents aged 11 to 18 between 2016 and 2017 found ever use of waterpipe of 34%.⁷¹

There were an estimated 7,810 deaths attributable to smoking in 2019, accounting for over 23% of all mortality in Lebanon for that year.⁷² A study published in 2014 put the economic burden of tobacco use in Lebanon in 2008 at US$326.7 million, or 1.1% of national GDP.⁷³

A 2019 study on e-cigarette use amongst school and university students aged from 17 to 23 found that 14.5% reported ever use, with 8% reporting current use.⁷⁴ However, at the time of writing, data on e-cigarette use amongst Lebanese adults remains scarce.

Tobacco in Lebanon

The Lebanese state tobacco monopoly

The Lebanese tobacco industry is controlled entirely by a state-owned company, the Regie Libanaise des Tabacs et Tombacs (referred to here as “the Regie”).⁷⁵⁷⁶ The Regie has exclusive rights to tobacco manufacturing and distribution, tobacco imports and exports, and to the purchase of locally grown tobacco leaf. It also oversees an anti-smuggling unit.⁷⁷ The Regie distributes local and imported tobacco products to licensed wholesalers, at prices it determines with the Ministry of Finance (MoF).⁷⁷⁷⁸ These wholesalers then sell the tobacco products to retailers across Lebanon.⁷⁷ Though these retailers are also licensed by the Regie, they are not under its direct control and largely depend on the wholesalers for their tobacco supply.⁷⁷ The Regie sets the profit margin and weekly quota of sold tobacco for both wholesalers and retailers.⁷⁷

Overseen by the MoF, the Regie’s performance has a direct impact on the public treasury.⁷⁷ Not only does this provide the Regie with significant access to policy makers, it also creates conflict with other government departments (such as Health), as the MoF may oppose measures which damage the Regie’s profitability.⁷⁷⁶⁷

Market share and leading brands

As of 2022, the Regie had a share of over 55% of the tobacco market, up from 45% in 2017.¹³ The leading transnational tobacco company (TTC) in Lebanon was Philip Morris International (PMI), with a market share of nearly 15%, followed by Japan Tobacco International (JTI) on over 11%, Imperial Brands on almost 10%, and British American Tobacco (BAT) on 6.5%.¹³

Transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) only have access to the Lebanese market via the Regie. In return for purchasing Lebanese tobacco leaf, the Regie imports manufactured tobacco products to sell on the Lebanese market and buys Virginia tobacco leaf for the manufacture of local brand cigarettes.⁷⁷ Since 2016, international brands have also been made in Lebanon at Regie manufacturing facilities, as per agreements with the Big Four TTCs.^79808182

The Regie brand Cedars is by far the most popular brand of cigarettes in Lebanon, with a market share of 55% in 2022.⁸³ PMI’s Marlboro is in second place with a share of around 14%.⁸³ JTI’s Winston is third (8%), followed by BAT’s Kent and Imperial Brands’ Gitanes (both around 5%).⁸³ All other brands have a market share of 3% or less.⁸³

Tobacco farming and child labour

In 2020, tobacco was being cultivated on 1.32% of Lebanon’s agricultural land.⁸⁴ In 2021, tobacco production was just over 10,000 tonnes, down slightly from a high of 12,800 tonnes in 2001.⁸⁵ This makes Lebanon the fifth-largest tobacco producer amongst the 14 EMRO countries for which data is available.⁸⁶

Lebanese tobacco leaf is purchased exclusively by the Regie via a price support programme, under which the Regie purchases from farmers at a given yearly price and quantity which is determined by the MoF.⁷⁷ According to Hamade (2014), the price paid is well over the average paid to farmers in other sectors in Lebanon; essentially, it is a subsidy which reinforces farmers’ dependence on tobacco growing and disincentivises any transition towards other crops.⁷⁵⁷⁷

Lebanese tobacco featured on the 2022 List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor produced by the U.S. Department of Labor.⁸⁷ Tobacco production is very labour intensive and involves all or most members of the household, which includes women and children.⁷⁵ On top of enduring poor wages and working conditions, female workers are also at risk of sexual violence in tobacco-growing communities.⁸⁸

• For information on tobacco industry responses to accusations of complicity in child labour, please see the pages on CSR: Child Labour and the Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco-Growing Foundation (ECLT).

Tobacco and the economy

Lebanon is a net importer of raw tobacco. According to Comtrade data, in 2022, it imported over US$40.5 million in raw tobacco, compared to under US$16.4 million in exports.⁸⁹⁹⁰

Lebanon is also a net importer of cigarettes. In 2022, Lebanese cigarette imports were nearly US$16.5 million, compared to less than US$1 million in exports.⁹¹⁹²

It is also a net importer of waterpipe tobacco. Its imports were worth US$17.3 million in 2022, compared to exports of under US$70,000.⁹³⁹⁴

Illicit trade

Industry documents suggest that illicit trade was used by the TTCs as a means of building market share and furthering regional expansion during the Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990).⁹⁵ With governance weak and legal cigarette production in decline, the TTCs flooded the Lebanese market with cheap contraband products.⁹⁵ Though the government made direct appeals to these companies, requesting that they stop supplying distributors involved in this illicit trade, it had little effect.⁹⁵ The documents also show that the TTCs sought to use the issue of illicit trade as leverage in negotiations on establishing manufacturing presence in the country.⁹⁵

Today, reliable data on the scale of the illicit trade in Lebanon are not available. An industry-funded report by the consultancy Oxford Economics (OE) indicated that by the first quarter of 2019 the illicit trade accounted for 28.1% of the market in tobacco products.⁹⁶⁹⁷ However, this data may not be reliable given OE’s long relationship with the tobacco industry. Not only was this particular study funded by PMI, BAT and JTI, but also prepared according to terms of reference agreed with all three companies.⁹⁷ These terms of reference are not disclosed, while the methodology used is highly susceptible to industry interference.⁹⁸

Exaggerating the scale of illicit trade is a well-documented tactic which has been used by the tobacco industry all over the world as a means of opposing tobacco control regulations. See Illicit Tobacco Trade for further details.

• For more information on the tobacco industry in Lebanon, please see the Tobacco Supply Chain Database.

Roadmap to Tobacco Control

Lebanon ratified the WHO FCTC in 2005.⁹⁹ It has yet to ratify the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.¹⁰⁰

In August 2011, Lebanon passed Law No. 174, its first ever tobacco control law.⁶⁷ This was the result of years of advocacy led by the National Tobacco Control Program (NTCP) (a government organisation within the Ministry of Public Health), alongside academics, tobacco control advocates, civil society organisations, local and international NGOs, and policy makers.⁶⁷ Law No. 174 banned smoking in all indoor public spaces; banned tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship; and introduced larger text warnings on tobacco products, with the potential to add graphic health warnings at a later date.⁶⁷

However, enforcement remains a challenge, particularly regarding the provision for smokefree spaces. This measure was properly enforced for just three months, thanks in part to strong lobbying from restaurants and other establishments offering waterpipe.⁶⁷ There has also been a lack of political will to enforce the law.⁶⁷ In late 2012, the then Minister of the Interior implied that the police would be flexible about enforcing the law during the holiday period.¹⁰¹ The Ministry of Tourism also stopped enforcing the law, alleging a negative impact on Lebanon’s tourist industry and stating that it did not have the resources necessary to monitor implementation.⁶⁷¹⁰²

For more details, please see the following websites:

• Legislation by country – Lebanon, Tobacco Control Laws, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
• Lebanon, WHO FCTC Implementation Database, WHO FCTC Secretariat
• Country profile – Lebanon, World Health Organization, WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic 2021

Tobacco Industry Interference in Lebanon

Tobacco industry tactics in Lebanon include lobbying, which has prevented the introduction of graphic health warnings; attempting to influence Lebanon’s delegation to the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the WHO FCTC; and corporate social responsibility.

Portraying tobacco as a symbol of resistance

Part of the revenue the Regie collects from imported tobacco products is used to cover the subsidies given to tobacco growers in rural areas, particularly in the south of the country.⁷⁷⁶⁷ Given that this area was previously occupied by Israel, keeping farmers on this land is seen by the state as an important geopolitical objective.⁶⁷ Indeed, both Nassif Seklaoui, Chairman and General Manager of the Regie, and the speaker of the Lebanese parliament, have explicitly linked tobacco growing to the struggle of the Lebanese people and their resistance to foreign occupation.¹⁰³ Such strategies aim to instil the belief that tobacco is a strategic industry and a source of national pride. As the opening statement of a Regie pamphlet from 2011 reads, “The tobacco crop has become a symbol of resilience, resistance and people’s attachment to the Nation’s land.”⁷⁵

Influencing policy: health warnings

Law 174 significantly increased the size of the textual health warnings on tobacco products in Lebanon, from 15% to 40% of the principal surface areas.⁶⁷¹⁰⁴ A further decree in 2012 defined the text of the warnings, though implementation was delayed, reportedly due the Regie lobbying the Minister of Finance.¹⁰⁵¹⁰⁶ Since then, the larger text warnings have been widely implemented – though the measure still falls short of the 50% or more coverage recommended by the WHO FCTC.¹⁰⁷¹⁰⁸

Law 174 did also allow for the introduction of graphic health warnings (GHWs) at a later date, subject to the signing of an implementation decree by the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Finance.¹⁰⁷ According to Lebanese tobacco control advocates, of all provisions in Law 174, this was the hardest to obtain, due to fierce opposition from the tobacco industry, including the Regie.¹⁰⁶ During discussions on Law 174 in 2011, some members of the Lebanese parliament objected to the inclusion of GHWs, echoing industry positions on the issue.¹⁰⁶ Though the implementation decree for GHWs was elaborated in 2011 and updated in 2016, it has still not been approved, reportedly due to industry interference and lobbying.¹⁰⁷ As of 2021, GHWs had yet to be implemented.¹⁰⁹

Interacting with the Lebanese delegation to the COP

In 2018, the Regie hosted a meeting attended by six government officials at its headquarters, ahead of the Eighth Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP8) to the WHO FCTC. In the Regie’s own words, the meeting aimed to define a position that “addresses the threats that the items on COP8 agenda for next October pose to tobacco sector”.¹¹⁰ There was also a presentation laying out the Regie’s positions on decisions made at the previous COP, as well as the proposals to be discussed at COP8.¹¹⁰

Delivering this presentation, Mariam Hariri, the Regie’s Head of General Management, stated:

“We cannot look at tobacco sector only from the perspective of health damage; we must rather look at it with a comprehensive and impartial view. We must take into consideration the economic benefits it offers and the specificity of Lebanon.”¹¹⁰

This meeting contravened the implementation guidelines for Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC, which urge parties to limit interactions with the tobacco industry to those strictly necessary for effective regulation of the industry and its products.¹¹¹

The Regie has also lobbied foreign diplomats. In May 2022, the German ambassador to Beirut visited Regie headquarters in Hadath. He was briefed on “the Regie’s achievements in agricultural, industrial, and commercial fields, among others, as well as about the societal role that it had played during the recent years.”¹¹²

• For more on the relationship between diplomats and the tobacco industry, please see Diplomats Lobbying for Tobacco Companies.

Corporate social responsibility

In 2016, the Regie launched its sustainable development plan, entitled “Development Vision for a Brighter Tomorrow”. Its stated aim was “promoting economic development, environment protection, fighting illicit trade & child labor, and improving the living of workers & farmers and the communities where we operate.”¹⁰³ The plan was launched at a ceremony which was supported by the speaker in the Lebanese parliament, and attended by notable figures from business, politics, finance and the trade union movement.¹⁰³ These included senior civil servants from government departments including the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Economy and Lebanese customs.¹⁰³

Since then, the Regie has conducted extensive CSR activities, including some directed at or involving Lebanese state institutions. For example, it donated US$2.6 million to the Lebanese Army in 2021.⁷⁷ It also engaged in CSR during the COVID-19 pandemic, donating US$1 million to the Lebanese government to support repatriating Lebanese students abroad and to buy ventilators for COVID-19 patients.¹¹³

The Regie has also organised “women empowerment training sessions” for the daughters of tobacco farmers in different areas of Lebanon. These sessions had the support of local authorities; for example, some were held in municipal buildings or involved the participation of local councillors.¹¹⁴¹¹⁵

The Regie has also carried out CSR in partnership with TTCs. In 2017, in an initiative financed by PMI Lebanon, the Regie offered scholarships to 136 children of tobacco farmers in the north of the country – the fourth consecutive year it had done so.¹¹⁶

• For more on tobacco industry activity during the pandemic, please see the COVID-19 Tobacco Tactics page and the COVID-19 monitoring database.

Relevant Links

• AUB tobacco researchers and Lebanese activists press conference on economic impacts of Law 174: The tobacco control law is good for the economy and public health, American University of Beirut
• Prevalence of cigarette and waterpipe tobacco smoking among adults in three Eastern Mediterranean countries: a cross-sectional household survey, R. Nakkash, Y. Khader, A. Chalak, R. Abla, N. M. E. Abu-Rmeileh, A. Mostafa, M. Jawad, J. H. Lee and R. G. Salloum, BMJ open, 2022, 12(3), e055201
• The passage of tobacco control law 174 in Lebanon: reflections on the problem, policies and politics, R.T. Nakkash, L. Torossian, T. El Hajj, J. Khalil and R.A. Afifi, Health Policy and Planning, 2018, Volume 33, Issue 5, pp. 633–644
• K2P COVID-19 Series: Prompting Government Action for Tobacco Control in Lebanon during COVID-19 Pandemic, R. Saleh, R. Nakkash, A. Harb and F. El-Jardali, 2020, Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center, Beirut, Lebanon
• The Economics of Tobacco in Lebanon: An Estimation of the Social Costs of Tobacco Consumption, Salti, J. Chaaban and N. Naamani, Substance Use & Misuse, 2014, 49:6, 735-742

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• Eastern Mediterranean Region
• Oxford Economics
• Tobacco Farming

TCRG Research

• The Lebanese Regie state-owned tobacco monopoly: lessons to inform monopoly-focused endgame strategies, H. Alaouie, J.R. Branston and M.J. Bloomfield, 2022, BMC Public Health, 22, 1632.
• Developing more detailed taxonomies of tobacco industry political activity in low-income and middle-income countries: qualitative evidence from eight countries, B.K. Matthes, K. Lauber, M. Zatoński, L. Robertson, A.B. Gilmore, BMJ Global Health 2021;6:e004096.
• Tobacco industry commissioned reports on illicit tobacco trade in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: how accurate are they? Sandberg, A.W.A. Gallagher and R. Alebshehy, 2020, Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, 26(11):1320–1322.

For a comprehensive list of all TCRG publications, including research that evaluates the impact of public health policy, go to TCRG publications.

References

The post Lebanon Country Profile appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Key Points

• Bangladesh is a country in South Asia, part of the World Health Organization’s South-East Asia Region.
• It has a population of 171.2 million, with tobacco use prevalence of 43.7%.
• Smoking prevalence is high, at 23.5%. However, smokeless tobacco (SLT) use prevalence is even higher, at 27.5%.
• Bangladesh ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) in 2004. It has not ratified the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.
• The Bangladeshi cigarette market is dominated by British American Tobacco Bangladesh, followed by Japan Tobacco International’s local subsidiary United Dhaka Tobacco Company Limited. There are also local cigarette, bidi and SLT producers.
• Recent tobacco industry tactics in Bangladesh include direct lobbying of civil servants, which successfully obtained an exemption to lockdown restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic; using diplomats to lobby in its interests; and the mobilisation of third-party organisations against tobacco control.

In 2016, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina declared her intention to make Bangladesh tobacco free by 2040.¹¹⁷ Bangladesh has in recent years increased its compliance with the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC), created a dedicated tobacco control cell and introduced a health surcharge on all tobacco products.¹¹⁷¹¹⁸ However, according to a study published in 2022, no measures have been adopted to implement Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC.¹¹⁹ Industry interference in public policy – particularly by British American Tobacco Bangladesh (BATB), in which the state holds a share of over 9% – is an ongoing challenge.¹¹⁹¹²⁰ The study’s authors argue that progress in minimising such interference is essential if the commitment to a creating a tobacco-free Bangladesh by 2040 is to be met.¹¹⁹

Tobacco Use in Bangladesh

In 2022, the population of Bangladesh was 171.2 million.¹²¹ Among adults aged from 18 to 69, overall tobacco use prevalence was nearly 44% as of 2018 (almost 60% of men and over 28% of women).¹²²

As of 2018, 23.5% of Bangladeshi adults smoked.¹²² Cigarettes were the most popular product: amongst current tobacco smokers, over 99% reported using cigarettes, compared to 32.5% who reported smoking bidis (cigarettes rolled by hand in a dried leaf of the tendu tree).¹²² There was a major gender difference, with nearly 47% of men reporting current smoking at the time of the survey, compared to 1% of women.¹²²

At 27.5%, smokeless tobacco (SLT) use is even more common than smoked tobacco.¹²² This is due in part to the high prevalence of SLT use amongst Bangladeshi women. Over 28% of Bangladeshi women used SLT, compared to nearly 27% of men.¹²²Most female tobacco users in low- and middle-income countries are SLT users in India and Bangladesh.¹²³ Popular SLT products include betel quid with zarda, betel quid with sadapata, pan masala with tobacco and gul.¹²²

Amongst adolescents aged from 13 to 17, nearly 10% used tobacco in some form as of 2014, with almost 14% of boys using tobacco compared to 2% of girls.¹²⁴ The rate for cigarette smoking was nearly 8%, with 11% of boys smoking compared to 1.5% of girls.¹²⁴

There were an estimated 106,000 deaths attributable to smoking in 2019, accounting for over 12% of all mortality in Bangladesh that year.¹²⁵ The total annual cost of tobacco use in Bangladesh was estimated at BDT৳305.6 billion (US$3.6 billion) in 2018, which was equivalent to 1.4% of GDP in 2017-18.¹²⁶ Direct healthcare costs accounted for BDT৳83.9 billion, of which 24% was covered by public health expenditure. This is a significant outlay, representing 8.9% of the healthcare budget in 2018-19.¹²⁶ However, most of the costs attributable to tobacco use – both direct and indirect – are borne by tobacco users and their families.¹²⁶ While the economic contribution of the tobacco industry to Bangladeshi GDP was estimated at BDT৳229.11 billion ($US2.7 billion) in 2018, this was still BDT৳76.54 billion (US$911 million) less than the annual costs attributable to tobacco use. Tobacco therefore results in a net loss to the Bangladeshi economy.¹²⁶¹²⁷

Tobacco in Bangladesh

Market share and leading brands

In 2022, market research company Euromonitor International estimated the Bangladeshi tobacco market to be worth nearly BDT৳420 billion – over US$4.5 billion.¹²⁸¹²⁹

British American Tobacco Bangladesh (BATB) dominates the Bangladeshi tobacco market, with a market share of over 84.5% in 2022.¹³ Its portfolio includes the three bestselling brands of cigarette in the country: Royal, Derby and Hollywood.⁸³ The Bangladeshi state holds a stake of more than 9% in BATB, both directly, and through two state-owned assets.¹²⁰

BATB’s closest competitor is Japan Tobacco International (JTI), which has a market share of over 9% following its 2018 acquisition of the United Dhaka Tobacco Company Limited (UDTCL), the tobacco business of the Akij Group conglomerate.^13130131 Its leading brands are Sheikh and Navy.⁸³

Smaller domestic companies include Abul Khair Tobacco Company, Alpha Tobacco Manufacturing Company and Nasir Tobacco Industries Ltd.¹³²

• For more information on the tobacco industry in Bangladesh, please see the Tobacco Supply Chain Database.

Smokeless tobacco and bidis

Accurate, up-to-date information on the SLT industry in Bangladesh is scarce. SLT producers are mostly home based and work informally, which makes for a fragmented market.¹³³¹³⁴ However, larger companies include Kaus Chemical Works, which sells Hakimpuri Zarda, one of the most popular zarda products (made of dried and boiled tobacco leaves, lime, areca nut, additives, tannins and spices) in the country; and Baba Al-Tajer Dhaka.^133135136

Similarly, reliable and up-to-date information about bidi production is not available. However, a 2012 investigation found 117 bidi factories spread throughout the country.¹³⁷ The leading bidi company in Bangladesh is the Akiz Bidi Company; others include Aziz Bidi, Maya Bidi and Bangla Bidi.¹³⁸

Tobacco farming

Large-scale tobacco agriculture began in Bangladesh following independence in 1971, when BATB began growing in the greater Rangpur area.¹³⁹ Today, tobacco is grown throughout the country, with significant tobacco-growing regions including Lalmonirhat, Nilphamari, Kushtia, Manikganj, Tangail, Bandarban and Cox’s Bazar.¹³⁹

Bangladeshi tobacco production was steady at around 40,000 tonnes annually from the late 1970s until 2009, at which point it began to increase rapidly, peaking at just under 130,000 tonnes in 2019.¹⁴⁰ In 2020 Bangladesh declared nearly 86,000 tonnes, making it the 12^th largest tobacco producer in the world.¹⁴⁰¹⁴¹

Child labour

Human rights organisations have documented child labour in tobacco fields in Bangladesh.¹⁴² In 2020, a video report published by Unfairtobacco and Bangladeshi NGO UBINIG showed children missing school in order to help their families with the tobacco harvest.¹⁴³ Another video report documented the impacts of tobacco farming on Bangladeshi women, including the challenge of combining long hours working on the harvest with domestic tasks; negative health effects, including respiratory problems, fevers, and loss of appetite; as well as poor economic returns.¹⁴⁴

In 2016, the Swedish NGO Swedwatch published a report based on research in three leaf cultivation areas which supply BATB.¹⁴⁵ It documented widespread child labour and negative impacts on the health and wellbeing of farm labourers, both children and adults.¹⁴⁵ It also showed how the use of flawed contracts and uncertain promises contributed to over-indebtedness and trapped many farmers in poverty.¹⁴⁵ In response, BAT conducted an internal review which, according to the company, “did not raise any significant concerns and indicated that the report as a whole is not representative of the reality on the ground.”¹⁴⁶ A subsequent investigation BAT commissioned to consulting firm DNV GL supported its internal review.¹⁴⁷

Bangladeshi bidis feature on the U.S. Department of Labor’s 2022 List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor.¹⁴⁸ It is estimated that at least half of the workforce in the Bangladeshi bidi industry is aged between 4 and 14; average wages are between US$0.77 and US$1.57 per day.¹³⁸ A 2012 investigation found that most bidi workers were women and children.¹³⁷ According to several workers, managers and people in communities around the bidi factories surveyed, this is because their labour is much cheaper and they are less capable of organising for higher wages or better working conditions.¹³⁷

• For information on tobacco industry responses to accusations of complicity in child labour, please see the pages on CSR: Child Labour and the Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco-Growing Foundation (ECLT).

Tobacco and the economy

Bangladesh is a net exporter of tobacco. In 2015, the last year for which data is currently available from UN Comtrade (as of September 2023), Bangladesh exported US$43.5 million in raw tobacco, compared to just over US$8 million in imports.¹⁴⁹¹⁵⁰ However, it is a net importer of factory-made cigarettes. The same year, it imported over US$3 million in cigarettes, compared to just over US$354,000 in exports.¹⁵¹¹⁵²

Illicit trade

A World Bank report published in 2019 found that Bangladesh had a low estimated incidence of illicit trade in cigarettes (2%), compared to estimated global rates of 10-12%.¹⁵³ According to the report, annual revenue losses from the illicit cigarette trade are about US$100 million, around 4% of total tobacco revenues.¹⁵³ Bangladesh has strong legal and institutional structures to combat illicit trade, including a cigarette stamp and banderol system to ensure compliance with taxation, robust law enforcement and stiff penalties for smuggling.¹⁵³

Though the illicit bidi trade is likely to be larger than that for cigarettes, revenue loss has so far been low given that bidis were barely taxed at all until recently.¹⁵³ The illicit trade in smokeless tobacco is also likely to be significant, though in the absence of any track and trace system or even tax stamps on SLT products, it is impossible to estimate the illicit share of the SLT market accurately.¹³³ A 2022 study found that “Almost all ST [smokeless tobacco] products bought in Bangladesh (…) were non-compliant with the local packaging requirements and hence potentially illicit”.¹³³

Tobacco and the environment

A 2020 study found various forms of contamination due to tobacco growing in Bangladesh, both in the soil and in nearby water sources. The most important parameter found to be significantly higher in tobacco-growing land was the pesticide aldicarb.¹⁴¹ Classified as “extremely hazardous” by the WHO, this chemical is banned in 125 countries, though its use remains widespread.¹⁵⁴ The same study calculated the environmental cost of tobacco curing (due to carbon emissions) at US$310 per acre used for tobacco cultivation.¹⁴¹

Another report stated that contamination of water and soil by tobacco farming is endangering the livelihoods of nearly 800,000 people in the Bandarban and Cox’s Bazar districts who depend on the Matamuhuri river for fishing and cultivation of food crops.¹⁵⁵ Swedwatch also documented deforestation and forest degradation linked to farms in Bandarban and Chakoria which supply BATB.¹⁴⁵ It alleged that BATB has contributed to these problems by failing to prevent sourcing of fuel wood from natural forests and by supporting the construction of kilns in forest areas.¹⁴⁵

• For more information on the tobacco industry in Bangladesh, please see the Tobacco Supply Chain Database.

Roadmap to Tobacco Control

Bangladesh was the first country to sign the WHO FCTC on 16 June 2003.¹⁵⁶ It ratified the treaty a year later.¹⁵⁷ However, it has not signed the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.¹⁵⁸

The Smoking and Tobacco Products Usage (Control) Act (2005) is the principal law governing tobacco control in Bangladesh. The Act is comprehensive and covers smokefree spaces; tobacco advertising; the sale of tobacco to and by minors; and the packaging and labelling of tobacco products, among other areas.¹⁵⁹ However, the law had some major limitations. For example, it mandated only textual health warnings on smoked tobacco products, which is problematic in Bangladesh given the popularity of smokeless tobacco.¹⁶⁰ Similarly, although it banned advertising of tobacco products, it did not comprehensively cover sponsorship.¹⁶⁰

The Act was amended in 2013 and implementation rules were introduced in 2015, increasing compliance with the WHO FCTC. However, the industry was given a 12-month transition period to fully comply.¹⁶⁰ Even then, industry interference – principally by British American Tobacco Bangladesh (BATB) – has succeeded in delaying full implementation of the Amendment.¹⁶⁰ For example, though the Amendment mandated graphic health warnings (GHWs) on the upper half of all tobacco packaging, as of May 2022 – over seven years since the implementation rules were first published in the country’s official gazette – GHWs were still printed on the lower half of tobacco products.¹⁶⁰ Though this is considered a complete measure by the WHO, it means that the GHWs may be less visible to many Bangladeshi consumers. This is because tobacco products are often sold by mobile sellers out of steel trays which cover the lower half of the products.¹⁶⁰

Other major loopholes remain. Designated smoking areas are still permitted in certain public places; there are no restrictions on the sale of individual cigarettes (single sticks), small packets of cigarettes, or tobacco products via the internet; and there are no restrictions on use, advertising, promotion and sponsorship, or packaging and labelling of e-cigarettes.¹⁵⁹

However, as of June 2022, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) was preparing a new amendment to the Smoking and Tobacco Products Usage (Control) Act, which contains a number of global best practices.¹⁶¹ If passed, it would eliminate designated smoking areas; ban corporate social responsibility (CSR) by tobacco companies; ban the sale of single sticks; ban the display of tobacco products at points of sale; and increase the size of graphic health warnings (GHWs) on tobacco products from 50% to 90%.¹⁶¹ It also aims to ban the sale of e-cigarettes.¹⁶¹

In 2015, the Bangladeshi government began to levy a 1% Health Development Surcharge (HDS) on all tobacco products, which brings in around US$71 million a year, designed to support key government health initiatives including tobacco control.¹⁶² However, this funding has not always been easily accessible to the MoHFW. As of March 2021, the National Tobacco Control Cell (NTCC), which sits within the MoHFW, was working on a long-term tobacco control programme which would have smoother access to HDS funding.¹⁶²

For more details, please see the following websites:

• Legislation by country – Bangladesh, Tobacco Control Laws, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
• Bangladesh, WHO FCTC Implementation Database, WHO FCTC Secretariat
• Country profile – Bangladesh, World Health Organization, WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic 2021

Tobacco Industry Interference in Bangladesh

Recent tobacco industry tactics in Bangladesh include direct lobbying of civil servants, which successfully obtained an exemption to lockdown restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic; using diplomats to lobby in its interests; and the mobilisation of third-party organisations against tobacco control.

Influencing policy: conflicts of interest

According to a study published in 2022, no measures have been adopted to implement Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC in Bangladesh.¹¹⁹ The tobacco industry continues to influence policymaking, particularly BATB, in which the government holds a share of over 9%.¹¹⁹¹²⁰

This incident also demonstrates how much the tobacco industry (particularly BATB) is connected with government in Bangladesh.¹¹⁹ The Secretary at the MoI, who granted the lockdown exemptions to BATB and UDTCL, simultaneously had a seat on the BATB board as a non-executive director.¹¹⁹ This arrangement between the MoI and BATB appears to date back to at least 2010.¹⁶⁸

Several other senior civil servants also sit as independent or non-executive members on the BATB board, including a secretary at the Prime Minister’s Office.^169170171168

A study published in 2022 stressed that the presence of senior government officials on the BATB board leads both to individual and institutional conflicts of interest.¹¹⁹ However, a former Secretary at the MoI has denied this, stating that tobacco control is not discussed at BATB board meetings.¹⁷²

• For more on tobacco industry activity during the pandemic, please see the COVID-19 Tobacco Tactics page and the COVID-19 monitoring database.

Influencing policy: lobbying by diplomats

There have also been cases of lobbying of Bangladeshi authorities by foreign diplomats on behalf of the two main transnational tobacco companies operating in the country. In 2017, the British High Commissioner in Bangladesh intervened on behalf of BATB in a tax dispute between BATB and the NBR. Similarly, in 2021, the Japanese Ambassador sent a letter to the Bangladeshi Finance Minister criticising tax reforms which had impacted JTI, as well as restrictions on the marketing and sale of certain JTI products. The letter also complained of “anti-competitive” behaviour, alluding to BATB’s domination of the Bangladeshi tobacco market.

• For more information, please see the pages on UK Diplomats Lobbying for BAT: Bangladesh and Japanese Diplomats Lobbying for JTI.

Use of third parties

In June 2022, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) published another draft amendment to the Smoking and Tobacco Products Usage (Control) Act (2005) – Bangladesh’s main tobacco control law – and asked for input from relevant stakeholders (see section Roadmap to Tobacco Control).¹⁷³

In response, the MoHFW received letters criticising the amendment from various trade associations, including the Federation of Bangladesh Chamber of Commerce and Industries (FBCCI) and the Foreign Investors’ Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), both of which have tobacco industry links.¹⁷⁴¹⁷⁵

In July 2022, a “policy dialogue” event – widely reported in the press – was held at a five-star hotel in Dhaka by the Intellectual Property Association of Bangladesh (IPAB). Speakers argued the amendment would reduce tax revenue, increase illicit trade and threaten livelihoods, reportedly describing it as “unrealistic”, “unimplementable” and “counterproductive”.¹⁷⁶ On its website, IPAB lists BATB among its corporate members, from which it acknowledges receiving “extensive support”, and two members of IPAB’s executive committee also hold senior positions at BATB.^177178179180

Another participant at the event was the executive director of FICCI, which lists BATB, Philip Morris Bangladesh and United Dhaka Tobacco Company Ltd (UDTCL) as member organisations.^176181182183 FICCI also includes tobacco industry executives on its board of directors, including the managing director of UDTCL, author of the letter to the Ministry of Industries requesting an exemption from COVID-19 restrictions in 2020 (see Influencing policy: conflicts of interest).¹⁶⁵¹⁸⁴

A 2018 investigation by the public health NGO PROGGA concluded that BATB’s infiltration of influential business and trade organisations constituted a major barrier to greater tobacco control in Bangladesh.¹⁸⁵

• For more information on business organisations in Bangladesh and neighbouring countries see Trade Associations.

Relevant Links

• Live: Tobacco Industry Interference on Amendment of Tobacco Control Law 2022, Center for Research and Advocacy to Fight Tobacco
• National STEPS Survey for Non-communicable Diseases Risk Factors in Bangladesh 2018, National Institute of Preventive and Social Medicine (NIPSOM)
• The economic cost of tobacco use in Bangladesh: A health cost approach, Bangladesh Cancer Society

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• South East Asian Region
• Trade Associations
• Greenwashing

TCRG Research

• Tobacco industry interference to undermine the development and implementation of graphic health warnings in Bangladesh, M.H. Shahriar, M.M. Hasan, M.S. Alam, B.K. Matthes, A.B. Gilmore, A.B.M. Zubair, Tobacco Control, 2023, doi: 10.1136/tc-2022-057538
• Achieving a tobacco-free Bangladesh by 2040: a qualitative analysis of the tobacco advertising environment and prohibitions in Bangladesh, A. Tselengidis, S. Adams, B. Freeman, S.M. Alam, P.A.S. Astuti, J. Cranwell, BMJ Open 2023;13:e069620, doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069620
• Advancing whole-of-government approaches to tobacco control: Article 5.3 and the challenge of policy coordination in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, India and Uganda, R. Barry, S.M. Abdullah, A. Chugh, S. Hirpa, P. Kumar, D. Male, R. Ralston, T. Wagner-Rizvi, J. Collin, Tobacco Control, 2022;31:s46-s52
• Developing more detailed taxonomies of tobacco industry political activity in low-income and middle-income countries: qualitative evidence from eight countries, B.K. Matthes, K. Lauber, M. Zatoński, L. Robertson, A.B. Gilmore, BMJ Global Health 2021;6:e004096.
• Estimating the magnitude of illicit cigarette trade in Bangladesh: protocol for a mixed-methods study, S. Abjullah, R. Huque, L. Bauld, H. Ross, A. Gilmore, R.M. John, K. Siddiqi, Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(13), 4791

For a comprehensive list of all TCRG publications, including research that evaluates the impact of public health policy, go to TCRG publications.

References

The post Bangladesh Country Profile appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

The Business Association of Georgia (BAG) was established in 2009, with a stated mission of improving the business environment in Georgia by “uniting the members, in close cooperation with the authorities, international and local partners”.¹⁸⁶

As of 2022, members of BAG include around 100 holding companies, that represent over 600 businesses of varying sizes.¹⁸⁶

Relationship with the tobacco industry

Membership

Philip Morris Georgia, a subsidy of Philip Morris International (PMI), became a member of BAG in 2017.¹⁸⁷

Japan Tobacco International (JTI) became a member in 2021.¹⁸⁷¹⁸⁸

COVID-19 donation

In 2020, Philip Morris Georgia made a donation of GEL 100,000 (UK£35,500) to a COVID-19 support fund established by BAG.¹⁸⁹

• See the COVID-19 page for information on tobacco industry corporate social responsibility and targeted donations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Activities

Lobbying to oppose regulations on heated tobacco products

A ban on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship was introduced in Georgia in May 2018, and an outdoor display ban in September 2018.¹⁹⁰

In September 2018, BAG submitted a legislative proposal to the Healthcare Committee of the Parliament requesting that heated tobacco products (HTPs) and other newer nicotine and tobacco products be subject to fewer regulations than conventional tobacco products.¹⁹¹¹⁹² BAG also submitted the proposal to the Office of Business Ombudsman of Georgia.¹⁹²¹⁹⁰ The Ombudsman’s office, which reportedly often has meetings and consultations with tobacco industry representatives,¹⁹⁰ subsequently wrote a letter to Parliament supporting the proposal.¹⁹³ However, the proposal was ultimately dismissed by Parliament.¹⁹⁰¹⁹¹

In January 2020, BAG submitted another legislative proposal requesting fewer regulations for HTPs.^190194195 During this time, BAG also published media reports which cited PMI’s HTP IQOS, as the reason for the request being made.¹⁹⁶

The proposal stated:

“The essence of our proposal is that new tobacco products and heating tobacco, devices and accessories intended for their consumption should not be subject to the prohibitions provided by the current legislation relating to Internet and/or mail order retailing, direct personal communications, and informational materials”[translation].¹⁹⁷

The proposal was again dismissed by Parliament in February 2020.¹⁹⁰

In July 2020, when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorised the marketing of IQOS,¹⁹⁸ Legal Director of BAG, Nika Nanuashvili,¹⁹⁹ criticised the Parliament of Georgia’s decisions not to accept BAG’s previous legislative proposals.²⁰⁰

In 2021, Nanuashvili contributed to a media report in which he echoed previous statements around product regulation. He also commented that smuggling rates of traditional tobacco products are high, citing the high cost of tobacco as the cause.²⁰¹

Plain packaging

Georgia mandated a law to introduce plain packaging to tobacco products, including HTPs, in May 2017. However, its implementation has been postponed on several occasions,²⁰² with regulations now due to enter into force in 2024.²⁰³

In 2021 BAG submitted another legislative proposal regarding regulations for newer products.²⁰⁴ Adding to previous submissions, this proposal argued against the introduction of plain packaging for HTPs. It also recommended that, for all tobacco products, new packaging regulations be postponed to 2025, and stated “Standardized packaging has failed in all markets where it has been implemented and failed to achieve its intended goals”[translation].²⁰⁵

The proposal also stated:

“since 2017, the reform of the legislation regulating tobacco products began in the country, and on this painful path, the most difficult, radical regulations were selected… Georgia’s legislation, which is significantly stricter than EU countries, especially in terms of marketing and standardized packaging, will inevitably lead to further narrowing of organized businesses in the relevant market and indirect encouragement of illegal imports”[translation].²⁰⁵

However, the proposal was again refused by Parliament.²⁰⁶

After rejection of the proposal, Nanuashvili stated in a media report that plain packaging would have a negative impact on the sale of lesser-known brands and argued that plain packaging could result in an increase in illicit trade.²⁰⁷

See also Industry Arguments Against Plain Packaging

Relevant Link

• Business Association of Georgia website

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Third party technique
• A list of pages in the Georgia category

References

The post Business Association of Georgia appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

• In 2012, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) published guidance for assessing tobacco and nicotine products proposed by manufacturers as less harmful alternatives to conventional cigarettes.
• Transnational tobacco companies have developed similar multi-stage approaches to scientifically assess these newer products.
• There is evidence to suggest the industry’s approach does not guarantee good quality research or prevent the industry from using strategies to influence science.
• The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control calls for regulatory decisions on tobacco products and the scientific assessment of tobacco products to be made independent of the tobacco industry

Background

In 2003 and 2004, the World Health Organization’s Scientific Advisory Committee on Tobacco Product Regulation (SACTob) and Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation (TobReg) issued principles and guidance on the type of evidence required to scientifically assess newer tobacco and nicotine products that were purportedly less harmful than cigarettes.²¹²²¹³ Both emphasised the need for a range of study types and independent verification of industry studies. In 2012, the US Institute of Medicine (IOM, now The National Academy of Medicine), an independent, evidence-based advisor on scientific, medical and health-related matters,²¹⁴ outlined the types of studies and appropriate designs, which would be necessary to demonstrate whether newer nicotine and tobacco products could reduce the harms associated with smoking. The IOM grouped the evidence required into three categories: health effects, addictive potential, and perceptions of the newer product.²¹⁵

In 2015, the Tobacco Product Assessment Consortium (TobPRAC – an independent body funded by the US National Cancer Institute)²¹⁶ reviewed the WHO’s and IOM’s recommendations for scientific evaluation of purportedly less harmful tobacco products.²¹⁷ In 2011, the consortium had developed a four-staged framework for scientifically evaluating newer tobacco and nicotine products, particularly those claimed by manufacturers to be less harmful.²¹⁸ The four stages proposed were: pre-market evaluation, pre-claims evaluation, post-market activities, and monitoring and re-evaluation (see image 1).²¹⁷²¹⁸

Image 1. Overview of the conceptual framework proposed by the Tobacco Product Assessment Consortium (TobPRAC) to assess newer products.(Source: Shields et al/TobPRAC, 2011, p. 47; Berman, et al, 2015)²¹⁷²¹⁸

Designed to inform tobacco product regulators worldwide, the framework was not based on any particular regulatory structure and, according to the TobPRAC, is therefore applicable to any jurisdiction. In line with Article 5.3 of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC), TobPRAC noted that regulatory decisions on the necessary criteria for scientifically assessing tobacco products should be made independent of the tobacco industry. As the tobacco industry would inevitably fund and conduct its own scientific research on its products, TobPRAC also emphasised the need for accompanying independent research and governance to effectively implement the framework.²¹⁷

The ‘big 4’ transnational tobacco companies²¹⁹ have since developed approaches to scientifically evaluate newer products which align with the recommendations of the WHO, IOM and TobPRAC. These companies publicise their scientific approaches and research via dedicated science websites (see External Links below).

Below is an outline of the approaches each transnational tobacco company states that it takes to scientifically assess its newer products. An overview is also provided showing the quantity of publications across each stage of each company’s scientific assessment approach. In the final section, some criticisms of the industry’s scientific approaches are summarised.

Philip Morris International

Image 2. PMI’s approach to scientifically assessing newer products.(Source: PMI Science website)²²⁰

Philip Morris International’s (PMI) scientific assessment approach has five stages (see image 2).²²⁰ The first stage, “product development”, comprises design and aerosol testing of potential newer products. The aerosol analyses aim to determine the physical and chemical properties of product emissions, which indicate the potential risks of the product.

Next, in vitro and in vivo “toxicological assessments” are used to measure the impact of the product emissions on cells and animals.

If this stage indicates that the product has reduced risk potential, the health effects of the products are tested in human users under controlled conditions (“clinical assessment”).

Following this, “perception and behavior” studies investigate consumer’s perceptions of the product, as well as user behaviours and levels of satisfaction.

Finally, in its “long-term assessment”, PMI states it will continue to monitor the biological effects and consumer acceptance of the product via safety surveillance, clinical studies, and epidemiological studies.²²⁰

PMI catalogues its scientific publications in a library on the PMI Science website.²²¹ Publications held in this online library include: journal articles, presentations, posters, books, clinical trial registrations, posters, dossiers, reports, data, and methods and protocol documents. Up until May 2022, PMI assigned each publication in its library a tag relating to the relevant stage of its assessment approach. In addition to the five stages described above, two additional tags were used in PMI’s library: ‘Plant Biology’ and ‘Overview’. The number of publications assigned each tag (as of May 2022)²²² is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Number of publications tagged with each assessment stage in the PMI Science library as of May 2022. N.B. a single publication can have multiple tags.

British American Tobacco

Image 3. BAT’s approach to scientifically assessing newer products.(Source: BAT Science website)²²³

British American Tobacco’s (BAT) scientific assessment approach consists of four stages (see image 3),²²³ fewer than the other transnationals. The preliminary “emissions” stage consists of studies which investigate whether the newer product functions correctly and whether combustion occurs (combustion studies), the chemical properties of the product emissions (emission studies), and then the effects of the product in vitro (toxicological studies).

Next, the product’s effects in human users are investigated. BAT states that “exposure”-related outcomes are assessed via clinical studies which analyse the behaviours exhibited by users (use behaviour), the short-term pharmacological effects of the nicotine in users (clinical: PK), and the levels of biomarkers of potentially harmful chemicals in users (clinical: exposure). “Risk” is assessed via medium-term clinical trials measuring the levels of biomarkers linked to harm and disease (clinical: individual risk), post marketing surveillance surveys to monitor the use of the product by consumers (population risk: PMS), and epidemiological modelling simulating potential impacts of the product on public health.

Finally, BAT states that it will use “long-term epidemiological data” to determine how the product is being used, as well as impacts on disease prevalence and public health.²²³

BAT catalogues its scientific publications in a library on the BAT Science website.²²⁴ Publications held in this online library include: abstracts, method documents, posters, presentations, journal articles, and ‘other’ publications.

Unlike the other transnationals, BAT does not categorise or tag the publications in this library by assessment stage.

Japan Tobacco International

Image 4. JTI’s approach to scientifically assessing newer products. (Source: JTI Science website)²²⁵

Japan Tobacco International’s (JTI) scientific assessment approach consists of 6 stages (see image 4),²²⁵ the highest number of the four companies. JTI start with testing the design of its prototype products (“product design”) and the chemical properties of the product’s emissions (“aerosol chemistry”).

Next, in vitro and in vivo “toxicological assessments”, as well as in silico simulation studies, are used to assess the toxicity of the product.

“Clinical studies” will then investigate the effects of the product on human users, including risk reduction and pharmacokinetic studies.

The users experience, including satisfaction and patterns of use, are assessed through “perception and behavior” studies.

JTI state that it completes its assessment by monitoring the long-term effects of the newer product (“long-term assessment”).²²⁵

JTI catalogues its scientific publications in a library on the JTI Science website.²²⁶ Publications held in this online library include: journal articles, reports, posters, presentations, booklets, press releases, leaflets and news items. JTI assigns each publication in its library a tag relating to the relevant stage of its assessment approach. In addition to the six stages described above, two additional tags were used in JTI’s library: ‘Indoor Air Quality’ and ‘Other’. The number of publications (as of January 2023)²²⁷ assigned each tag is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Number of publications tagged with each assessment stage in the JTI Science library as of January 2023. N.B. a single publication can have multiple tags.

Imperial Brands

Image 5. Imperial Brand’s approach to scientifically assessing newer products.(Source: Imperial Brands Science website)²²⁸

Imperial Brands’ scientific assessment approach consists of 6 stages (see image 5).²²⁸ It begins with assessing the product’s design and emissions via chemical analyses and preliminary toxicological studies (“product characterisation science”).

Once this has been completed, Imperial Brands moves onto further “biological science”, including in vitro assessments to test the product’s toxicity to human cells.

Then, clinical studies are used to confirm that the reduced risk potential observed in the laboratory-based studies are also observed in actual human users of newer products (“clinical science”).

The “behavioural science” stage comprise studies to investigate the use, perceptions and addictiveness of newer products, both pre- and post-commercialisation.

In the next stage, “computational science”, comprise mathematical and computational modelling to estimate population-level use and health impacts.

Finally, Imperial Brands states that it conducts post-market studies measuring product use, user attitudes, adverse events, health-related outcomes and sales data (“population health science”).²²⁸

Imperial Brands catalogues its scientific publications in a library on the Imperial Brands Science website.²²⁹ Publications held in this online library include: journal articles, infographics, posters, presentations and videos. Rather than using tags that describe each stage of its assessment approach, Imperial Brands assigns each publication in its library one or more of the following tags: ‘pre-clinical’, ‘clinical’ and ‘post-market’. The number of publications assigned each tag (as of January 2023)²³⁰ is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Number of publications tagged with each assessment stage in the Imperial Brands Science library as of January 2023. N.B. a single publication can have multiple tags.

Criticisms of the Industry’s Approaches

The tactics the tobacco industry uses to influence scientific research in order to further its economic interests are well documented.^231232233

• For more details see Influencing Science

There is evidence that the industry continues to employ strategies to influence research and its approaches do not prevent bias. For example, the tobacco industry, including PMI and BAT, has used external scientific consultants²³⁴ and publishes its research in journals with which it has ties.²³⁵ Such strategies help to influence the volume, credibility, reach and use of science.²³⁶

The industry has a history of designing clinical research to substantiate and develop harm reduction claims, especially those around reduced exposure to harmful chemicals compared to cigarettes.²³⁷ A 2022 systematic review critically assessing clinical trials on HTPs, most of which have been conducted by tobacco companies, fall short of what is needed to adequately investigate whether HTPs were beneficial to public health.²³⁸ The same review found most of the industry’s clinical trials on HTPs were at high risk of bias, particularly due to inadequate blinding of participants (concealing information from participants that might influence results)²³⁹ and selectively reporting results.²³⁸ A systematic review of the e-cigarette literature found studies by independent authors were more likely to report potentially harmful effects of e-cigarettes, while the majority of studies by tobacco, e-cigarette and pharmaceutical companies reported no harmful effects.²⁴⁰

All the transnational companies include epidemiological or long-term studies in their assessment approaches. However, according to each company’s Science webpages,^225241242243 their own publication library tags (see Figures 1-3), and reviews of both the HTP^244245246 and e-cigarette literature,²⁴⁷²⁴⁸ it appears that, to date, the industry has conducted few epidemiological or long-term studies.

As noted by TobPRAC, Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC calls for regulatory decisions on tobacco products and scientific assessment of tobacco products to be made independent of the tobacco industry.²¹⁷

For more details see FCTC Regulations on the Need to Protect Public Health Policies from Tobacco Industry Interference

Relevant links

• PMI Science
• BAT Science
• JT Science
• Imperial Brands Science

Tobacco Tactics Resources

Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products

Influencing Science

References

The post Industry Approaches to Science on Newer Products appeared first on TobaccoTactics.