A Systematic Review of Tobacco Industry Tactics in Southeast Asia: Lessons for Other Low- And MiddleIncome Regions.
A Systematic Review of Tobacco Industry Tactics in Southeast Asia: Lessons for Other Low- And MiddleIncome Regions.
复制标题
DOI：
10.34172/ijhpm.2020.97
复制
发表时间：
2021-06-01
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
van der Eijk, Yvette
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Amul, Gianna Gayle Herrera;Tan, Grace Ping Ping;van der Eijk, Yvette
背景：跨国烟草公司(TTC)在东南亚根深蒂固，现在正瞄准其他中低收入国家，特别是非洲。虽然烟草行业在东南亚的策略得到了很好的记录，但还没有研究系统地审查这些策略，以便为烟草流行正在蔓延的非洲的烟草控制政策和动向提供信息。方法：我们对描述东南亚烟草行业策略的文章进行了系统的文献综述，这些国家包括新加坡、印度尼西亚、马来西亚、菲律宾、缅甸、东帝汶、泰国、柬埔寨、越南、老挝和文莱。在筛选了512篇文章后，我们收集并分析了134篇符合我们最终纳入标准的文章的数据。结果：烟草跨国公司通过企业社会责任(CSR)倡议将自己定位为良好的企业公民，推动烟草行业成为经济增长的支柱和合作伙伴，从而在东南亚市场占据主导地位。烟草跨国公司还结成了战略部门联盟，并加强了它们的政治联系，以推迟条例的实施，并游说加强烟草管制。在政府抵制跨国企业进入市场的尝试时，他们使用诉讼和包括走私在内的欺骗性策略，迫使政府开放市场，并玷污了公共卫生组织的声誉。烟草行业通过广泛的直接和间接营销策略破坏了烟草广告、促销和赞助(TAP)法规。结论：东南亚烟草跨国经营的经验表明，除了强调公众健康的好处外，强调烟草控制的经济效益可能是LMIC国家政府优先考虑烟草控制的一个更有说服力的论点。鉴于烟草行业广泛使用诉讼，LMIC需要更多的法律支持和资源来对抗行业诉讼。LMIC还应优先采取措施，保护卫生政策不受烟草行业既得利益的影响，并堵住烟草营销限制方面的监管漏洞。
Background: Transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) have a well-established presence in Southeast Asia and are now targeting other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), especially Africa. While the tobacco industry’s tactics in Southeast Asia are well documented, no study has systematically reviewed these tactics to inform tobacco control policies and movements in Africa, where the tobacco epidemic is spreading. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review of articles that describe tobacco industry tactics in Southeast Asia, which includes Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Myanmar, East Timor, Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, and Brunei. After screening 512 articles, we gathered and analysed data from 134 articles which met our final inclusion criteria. Results: Tobacco transnationals gained dominance in Southeast Asian markets by positioning themselves as good corporate citizens with corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives, promoting the industry as a pillar of, and partner for, economic growth. Tobacco transnationals also formed strategic sectoral alliances and reinforced their political ties to delay the implementation of regulations and lobby for weaker tobacco control. Where governments resisted the transnationals’ attempts to enter a market, they used litigation and deceptive tactics including smuggling to pressure governments to open markets, and tarnished the reputation of public health organizations. The tobacco industry undermined tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship (TAPS) regulations through a broad range of direct and indirect marketing tactics. Conclusion: The experience of Southeast Asia with tobacco transnationals show that, beyond highlighting the public health benefits, underscoring the economic benefits of tobacco control might be a more compelling argument for governments in LMICs to prioritise tobacco control. Given the tobacco industry’s widespread use of litigation, LMICs need more legal support and resources to counter industry litigations. LMICs should also prioritize measures to protect health policy from the vested interests of the tobacco industry, and to close regulatory loopholes in tobacco marketing restrictions.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
5.2
作者：
Assunta, M;Chapman, S
通讯作者：
Chapman, S
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Achadi, A;Soerojo, W;Barber, S
通讯作者：
Barber, S
影响因子：
5.2
作者：
Assunta, M;Chapman, S
通讯作者：
Chapman, S
影响因子：
5.2
作者：
Assunta, Mary
通讯作者：
Assunta, Mary
影响因子：
5.2
作者：
Assunta, M;Fields, N;Chapman, S
通讯作者：
Chapman, S