Policies to reduce availability of tobacco products in the retail environment

Abstract Background After implementation of a tobacco vending machine ban in 2022 and a supermarket sales ban in 2024, the Dutch government intends to further phase out tobacco sales after 2030 by prohibiting sales in petrol stations and small outlets. This study aims to understand 1) the impact of these policies on tobacco outlet availability, and 2) differences in tobacco outlet availability by area socioeconomic status (SES) in the Netherlands. Methods Between September 2019 and June 2020, all potential tobacco retailers in four Dutch cities (Amsterdam, Eindhoven, Haarlem, and Zwolle) were visited and mapped using Global Positioning System (GPS). Expected reductions in tobacco outlet availability were calculated per policy measure. Tobacco outlet density was calculated using ESRI ArcMap version 10.4.1. The association between neighbourhood SES and tobacco outlet availability was estimated with linear and logistic regression model. Results We identified 870 tobacco outlets and an outlet density of 6.2/10.000 capita. The potential sales bans in petrol stations and small outlets would reduce the number of outlets (resp. -7% and -43%) and the outlet density (resp. -0.4 and -2.7). In Eindhoven, Haarlem, and Zwolle, neighbourhoods with high-SES compared to low-SES were less likely to contain a tobacco outlet (OR:0.71, 95%CI:0.59-0.85) and had a lower outlet density (ß:-1.20, 95%CI:-2.20;-0.20). In Amsterdam, the associations were inverse (OR:1.22, 95%CI:1.05-1.40; ß:3.50, 95%CI:0.81;6.20). Conclusions The availability of tobacco outlets varies within and between cities depending on the distribution of the built environment. Future tobacco control policies targeting the retail environment should focus on limiting the overall number tobacco outlets and especially small outlets, which may benefit low SES neighbourhoods in mid-sized cities most.


Background:
After implementation of a tobacco vending machine ban in 2022 and a supermarket sales ban in 2024, the Dutch government intends to further phase out tobacco sales after 2030 by prohibiting sales in petrol stations and small outlets. This study aims to understand 1) the impact of these policies on tobacco outlet availability, and 2) differences in tobacco outlet availability by area socioeconomic status (SES) in the Netherlands.

Methods:
Between September 2019 and June 2020, all potential tobacco retailers in four Dutch cities (Amsterdam, Eindhoven, Haarlem, and Zwolle) were visited and mapped using Global Positioning System (GPS). Expected reductions in tobacco outlet availability were calculated per policy measure. Tobacco outlet density was calculated using ESRI ArcMap version 10.4.1. The association between neighbourhood SES and tobacco outlet availability was estimated with linear and logistic regression model.

Conclusions:
The availability of tobacco outlets varies within and between cities depending on the distribution of the built environment. Future tobacco control policies targeting the retail environment should focus on limiting the overall number tobacco outlets and especially small outlets, which may benefit low SES neighbourhoods in mid-sized cities most.

Background:
Smoke-free policies (SFPs) have proven to be effective in protecting people from exposure to second-hand smoke (SHS) and lowering smoking rates. Our aims were to assess the impact of SFPs in hospitality venues (e.g. bars) on smoking behaviour of young people and to assess the impact of SFPs in the home environment on smoking behaviour and exposure to SHS. Methods: Two reviews were conducted. The first was conducted in June 2020. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for studies that assessed the association between any form of SFPs in hospitality venues and a measure of smoking behaviour among young people (aged 10-24 years). The second review will be conducted in June 2022. Searches will be conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO and CENTRAL. We will search for studies that assess the association between any form of SFPs in the home environment (e.g. multi-unit housing) and a measure of smoking behaviour (e.g. initiation) or SHS exposure.

Results:
Nine studies (publication years 2005-2016) were included in the first review, of which the majority used a quasiexperimental design. Four studies evaluated SFPs in hospitality venues specifically. Two studies reported that strict, but not weaker, SFPs decrease progression to established smoking. Two other studies provided mixed results. Five studies also included other workplaces, of which three studies found significant decreases in current smoking, smoking frequency, and/or smoking quantity. The results of the second review will be presented in detail during the workshop, however an exploration suggests that SFPs in the home environment may prevent smoking and SHS exposure.

Conclusions:
Most studies of the first review found that SFPs in hospitality venues are associated with a decrease in smoking behaviour among young people. Their results indicate the need for strict smoke-free legislation without exemptions. The conclusions of the second review will be presented during the workshop.