This paper aimed to identify continued and emerging trends in the Australian tobacco market following plain packaging implementation, over a period of substantial increases in tobacco taxes. Since 2012, our surveillance activities (including review of trade product and price lists, ingredient reports submitted by tobacco companies to government and monitoring of the retail environment) found several trends in the factory-made cigarette market. These include the continued release of extra-long and slim cigarettes and packs with bonus cigarettes, particularly in the mainstream and premium market segments; new menthol capsule products; other novel flavourings in cigarettes; filter innovations including recessed and firm filters; continued use of evocative and descriptive product names; the proliferation of the new super-value market segment; and umbrella branding, where new products are introduced within established brand families. Several similar trends were also observed within the smoking tobacco market. While not all of these trends were new to the Australian market at the time of plain packaging implementation, their continued and increased use is notable. Plain packaging legislation could be strengthened to standardise cigarette and pack size, restrict brand and variant names, and ban features such as menthol capsules and filters innovations that provide novelty value or that may provide false reassurance to smokers.
By July 2018, five countries (Australia, France, the UK, New Zealand and Norway) had fully implemented plain (standardised) packaging. Using government documents, we reviewed the key legislative differences between these five countries to identify best practice measures and potential lacuna. We then discuss how governments planning to introduce plain packaging could strengthen their legislation. Differences between countries include the terminology used (either 'plain', 'standardised' or 'plain and standardised'), products covered and transition times (ranging from 2 to 12 months). Myriad differences exist with respect to the packaging, including the dimensions (explicitly stated for height, width and depth vs minimum dimensions for the health warnings only), structure (straight-edged flip-top packs vs straight, rounded and bevelled-edged flip-top packs and shoulder boxes) and size (minimum number of cigarettes and weight of tobacco vs fixed amounts) and warning content (eg, inclusion of a stop-smoking web address and/or quitline displayed on warnings on one or both principal display areas). Future options that merit further analysis include banning colour descriptors in brand and variant names, allowing pack inserts promoting cessation and permitting cigarettes that are designed to be dissuasive. Plain packaging legislation and regulations are divergent. Countries moving towards plain packaging should consider incorporating the strengths of existing policies and review opportunities for extending these. While plain packaging represents a milestone in tobacco-control policy, future legislation need not simply reflect the past but could set new benchmarks to maximise the potential benefits of this policy.
This paper describes the development, content and implementation of two pieces of Australian tobacco control legislation: one to standardise the packaging of tobacco products and the other to introduce new, enlarged graphic health warnings. It describes the process of legislative drafting, public consultation and parliamentary consideration. It summarises exactly how tobacco products have been required to look since late 2012. Finally, it describes implementation, most particularly, the extent to which packs compliant with the legislation became available to consumers over time.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.