Plain Packing of Cigarette Campaign in Australia - Case Study Example

Plain Packing of Cigarette Campaign in Australia Name Class Unit Executive summary This report looks at the plain packing of cigarette in Australia. The report starts by looking at how common smoking is at Australia. In Australia, cigarette use is high among the male population with 20.4%, while female smokers account for 16.3%. The figure is a decline from high levels in 2001. Cigarette smoking is a major cause of death due to the associated risks. The risks associated with cigarette smoking are; heart attack, stroke, asthma, eye disease and bronchitis among other respiratory illness. Cigarette smoking is addictive, making it hard to quit for the user. It has also been proved that passive smoking exposes one to the same risks as the smoker. The plain packing campaign aimed at the use of graphic images on the tobacco packages and elimination of branding on the packet. This campaign led to plain packaging of tobacco products. The campaign intended to reduce the appeal of cigarettes, prevent relapsing for those who had quit and reduce the ability of the packaging to mislead the consumers through wrong information. For the teenage and young adults, plain packaging is less stylish, hence was aimed at deterring them from smoking. According to the report, it has been proved that the campaign have shown initial signs of success. The plain packing campaign has the capability to achieve its objectives in the long run. The report concludes that the report needs to improve by countering illegal cigarettes and engaging all stakeholders in order to reduce opposition. Contents Executive summary 2 Contents 3 Introduction 4 How common is the issue in Australia? (So how common is smoking in Australia) 4 What is its distribution of the issue in the population? Are particular population groups more at risk? Which ones? 5 What are the risk factors? How can it be prevented? 5 How does the campaign address the issue? What social, economic, political and ideological theories is the campaign employing? 6 Is the campaign working? Critique the campaign using evidence and relevant social, economic, political and ideological theories. 7 What more needs to be done and why 9 References 10 Introduction Smoking is a leading preventable cause of death globally. This has led to many countries adopting rules and measures that can lead to decline in tobacco smoking (Healey, 2011). In some countries, advertising and sponsorship by the cigarette companies have been banned. Through experimental evidence, it has been suggested that plain packaging of cigarettes can lead to decline in tobacco smoking. In 2011, the Australian government came up with legislation which mandated that cigarettes should be sold in plain packages. This meant that cigarettes should be sold without brands and logos (Clarke & Prentice, 2012). The government had earlier banned all forms of advertising for tobacco products. There were also rules which required that cigarette packaging to display a graphic warning in a large portion of their packet (Healey, 2011). This report will analyse the plain packing of the cigarette campaign in Australia. To do the analysis, the report will look at how common smoking is in Australia, distribution of the issue, risk factor and how to prevent, how the campaign address the issue, determine whether the campaign is working and what more needs to be done. How common is the issue in Australia? (So how common is smoking in Australia) According to the Australian bureau of statistics, the number of smokers aged 18 years and over has been on decline since 2001. In 2001, male smokers aged 18 years and above were at 27.2% (Cancer Council, 2013). The figure has been on decline and stood at 20.4% in 2011-12. The same case applies to the female smokers. In 2001, female smokers aged 18 years and above accounted for 21.2% (Cancer Council, 2013). The figure reduced to 16.3% in 2011-12. In Australia, smoking is the main cause of preventable death (Cancer Council, 2013). The statistics in 2011-12 showed that about 8 million Australians had smoked at some point in their lives (Cancer Council, 2013). The statistics showed that the current smokers were at 3.1 million with 90% of them smoking daily. It was also proved that smokers aged 14 years and above has been on decline by 40% during the period of 1991 to 2010 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012). What is its distribution of the issue in the population? Are particular population groups more at risk? Which ones? Looking at these statistics, it is evident that male smokers are more than female smokers (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012). The high number of male smokers puts them at a higher risk of tobacco related deaths. To young children, infant death syndrome have been associated with passive smoking (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012). Infants may also be affected by cigarette smoking leading to allergic sensation. Statistics have proved that non-smokers who lived in households with daily smokers were subject to be exposed to risks associated with tobacco smoking. Children aged less than 15 years accounted living with a smoker accounted for 7.2% (Cancer Council, 2013). What are the risk factors? How can it be prevented? There are several factors that contribute to people smoking, which includes environmental and internal cues (Morris, 2014). The tobacco companies use a lot of money in branding to attract non-smokers into smoking. Advertising of tobacco products is mostly carried out through packaging since most of mass media have high restrictions (Morris, 2014). Most of smokers live in environments with high tobacco use. This is due to fact that smokers have high chances of having friends and spouses who are smokers than non-smokers making it easy to be addicted (Zacher, et al. 2014). There is also a tendency of smokers to prefer an environment without smoking restrictions (Morris, 2014). Heavy smokers are addicted and have a habit of smoking which makes it hard to quit. For the light smokers, they feel the need to smoke due to social situations (Morris, 2014). Teenagers may engage in smoking as they see it as stylish and as a way of rebellion. Smokers see the habit as enjoyable and relaxing and it is applied as a mechanism for coping (Healey, 2011). Cigarette contains nicotine which makes the smokers have good feelings and suppress stress. Smokers fear to quit due to social reasons, fear of losing way of coping with stress and cost of therapy (Greenland, 2012). In order to prevent smoking, there is need to address the main factors that lead to smoking (Scollo, et al. 2014). Those who are addicted can go through therapy while for teenagers and new smokers, educational programmes can be used. The introduction of anti-smoking campaigns can also be an effective measure to curb smoking (Clarke & Prentice, 2012). How does the campaign address the issue? What social, economic, political and ideological theories is the campaign employing? The effects of tobacco smoking on the society’s health and the economy through health care funds had led to campaigns to address the issue (Hoek et al. 2012). Governments had adopted measures that have denormalised cigarette smoking (Hoek et al. 2012). The measure involves exposing tobacco smoking as a toxic substance with an aim of making it unacceptable in the society. Plain packaging campaign was aimed at extending the denormalisation approach and focus on the packaging (Hoek et al. 2012). The activists pushed for the use of graphic images on the tobacco packages and elimination of branding on the packet (Hoek et al. 2012). Packaging helps in making the smokers identify themselves with a brand. The plain packing also entails putting health warnings covering 75% of tobacco packaging front page and 90% of the back of tobacco packaging (Australian Government, Dept of Health. 2014). All these will address the issue by ensuring reduced attractiveness of tobacco products to the customers, increase the effectiveness and noticeability of authorized health warnings, and reduce the possibility of retail packaging of products from misleading consumers about the harm or the effects of smoking (Australian Government, Dept of Health. 2014). Packaging has been used by the tobacco industry as a means of promotion since the mass media have become stricter on tobacco advertising (Hoek et al. 2012). By targeting packaging, the campaigns aimed at eliminating tobacco promotions through packaging and eliminate users association with the brand as well as reduced appealing to potential smokers into smoking (Clarke & Prentice, 2012). Prior research had shown that users are more attracted to certain cigarettes brands (Swinburne University of Technology, & Greenland, 2011). The Australian government made requirements that brand identifiers should not be used in the packing apart from the name. The graphic warning was more eminent to the smokers in plain packing which can help them in quitting (Scheffels, 2008). Is the campaign working? Critique the campaign using evidence and relevant social, economic, political and ideological theories. Australia being the first country to introduce plain packaging campaign, there has been no prior statistics from other countries to compare with. Despite this, research by several scholars shows that the campaign has effects on the smokers (Wakefield et al. 2012). The plain packaging campaign have made smokers to view it as of lower quality and less satisfying than branded cigarettes. The plain packing has increased the number of those who want to quit smoking in the country, according to a study done (Wakefield et al. 2012). The use of a larger message on health warning has made it easier for the smokers to recall making them more effective and reducing possibility of relapsing for those who had quit smoking. The research has also proved that smoking among the young people may reduce since the packaging has made them less stylish (Wakefield et al. 2012). A study done on young women smokers proved that plain packaging made cigarettes less appealing and was associated with older generations (Moodie et al. 2014). The packaging was found to generate negative emotions towards smoking, which is an indicator that the campaign can increase chances of quitting (Scollo, et al. 2014). The most eminent outcome from the research on the young women smokers is that the campaign can lead to reduced smoking among the group (Moodie et al. 2014). As most of the research papers show, the plain packaging campaign has been able to succeed in some aspects (Guillaumier et al. 2014). The packaging has made the cigarettes less stylish and made some of the smokers to think about quitting. It has been proved that associations with cigarettes brands and appearance of the pack have been the main motivators among the young smokers (Guillaumier et al. 2014). Earlier, some of the tobacco companies had rebranded their products to appeal to the young consumers. With the current campaign, tobacco companies are prohibited against branding which ensures that the youth are not targeted through branding (Quit Victoria & Cancer Council Victoria, 2011). It’s evident from the current research that the campaign has a potential to reduce cigarette smoking in the long run (Guillaumier et al. 2014). The initial research shows some positive effects of the campaign, however it will take time to see the full impact of the campaign (Zacher, et al. 2014). What more needs to be done and why Despite initial signs of success of plain packaging of cigarettes campaign, there is need to improve it. The campaign should engage all measures that will curb illicit cigarettes. It has been argued that since the introduction of plain packaging of cigarettes, the sale of illegal cigarettes increased (Clarke & Prentice, 2012). The campaign can consider putting measures that will ensure illegal cigarettes does not take advantage of the policy (Healey, 2011). The campaign should also increase its engagement with other stakeholders in the industry. By involving all stakeholders, the government can avoid scenarios of lawsuits and opposition to the campaign. The tobacco companies have been on the frontline against the campaign claiming that it will not work and violations of their use of trademarks (Clarke & Prentice, 2012). Though this opposition was expected, involving them during drafting of the campaign should have reduced negative sentiments against the campaign. References Australian Government, Dept of Health. (2014). Introduction of plain tobacco packaging in Australia. Retrieved 15th September 2014 from http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/tobacco-plain Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012). Australian Health Survey: First Results 2011-2012, (cat. no. 4364.0.55.001), ABS, Canberra, Retrieved 8th September 2014 from Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2011). 2010 National Drug Strategy Household Survey report, (cat. no. PHE 145), AIHW, Canberra, Retrieved 8th Sept 2014 from, Cancer Council. (2013). NSW, Statistics on Smoking in Australia, Retrieved 8th September 2014 from, . Clarke, H., & Prentice, D. (2012). Will Plain Packaging Reduce Cigarette Consumption? Economic Papers: a Journal of Applied Economics and Policy, 31(3): 303-317. Greenland, S. (2012). Does plain packaging spell death for cigarette brands in Australia and beyond? Pearson Australia. Guillaumier, A., Bonevski, B. Paul, C. Durkin, S. & Catherine D'Este, (2014). Socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers’ ratings of plain and branded cigarette packaging: an experimental study, BMJ Open. 4(2): e004078. Healey, J. (2011). Tobacco smoking. Thirroul, N.S.W: Spinney Press. (http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=sfRGYgEACAAJ&dq=Issues+in+Society:+Tobacco+smoking&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3DQYVN32Ia_b7Aav7YHwCw&redir_esc=y) Hoek, J., Edwards,R., Gendall,P. Maubach, N. (2012), Strong public support for plain packaging of tobacco products, Australian And New Zealand Journal Of Public Health, vol. 36 no. 5. Melanie, W., Linda, H. Sarah, D. & Ron B. (2013). Introduction effects of the Australian plain packaging policy on adult smokers: a cross sectional study, BMJ Open, 1(3): 22. Moodie, C., Bauld, L., Ford, A. & Mackintosh, A.M. (2014). Young women smokers’ response to using plain cigarette packaging: qualitative findings from a naturalistic study, BMC Public Health. 14(1): 812. Morris, J. (2014). Smoking, Plain packaging and Public health, Adam Smith Institute and Reason Foundation. Quit Victoria & Cancer Council Victoria, (May 2011). Plain Packaging of Tobacco products: A review Of the evidence, Commonwealth of Australia. Public consultation on plain packaging of tobacco products. Retrieved 14 September 2014 from, http://www.heartfoundation.org.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/Evidence-Paper-Plain- `Packaging.pdf Scheffels, J.A. (2008). difference that makes A difference: young adult smokers' accounts of cigarette brands and package design. Tobacco Control, 17(2): 118-22. Scollo, M., Zacher, M., Durkin, S. & Wakefield, M. (2014). Early evidence about the predicted unintended consequences of standardised packaging of tobacco products in Australia: a cross-sectional study of the place of purchase, regular brands and use of illicit tobacco. BMJ Open, 4(8): 34-45. Swinburne University of Technology, & Greenland, S. J. (2011). Plainly powerful packaging: marketing objectives of cigarette pack design. Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy. Swinburne University of Technology, & Greenland, S. (2011). Spluttering on: why big tobacco just can’t butt out on plain packaging. The Conversation Media Trust. Wakefield, M., Germain, D., Durkin, S., Hammond, D., Goldberg, M., & Borland, R. (2012). Do larger pictorial health warnings diminish the need for plain packaging of cigarettes? Addiction, 107(6), 1159-1167. Zacher, M., Bayly, M., Brennan, E., Dono, J., Miller, C., Durkin, S., Scollo, M., Wakefield, M. (2014). Personal tobacco pack display before and after the introduction of plain packaging with larger pictorial health warnings in Australia: an observational study of outdoor café strips. Addiction, 109(4): 653-662. Read More