Understanding why some Australian retailers have stopped selling tobacco, some might and some are unlikely

Global policy scan of commercial combustible tobacco product retailing regulations by WHO region

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Regulatory schemes for tobacco retailing help restrict the supply and availability of smoked tobacco products. Tobacco retailer density and the proximity of tobacco outlets to youth spaces, such as schools, are greater in more disadvantaged areas. Exposure to tobacco retailing normalises smoking and increases ease of access, thus increasing smoking uptake and undermining quitting. To inform future policy, we conducted a global scan of combustible tobacco retail regulatory schemes (We use the term schemes to refer to any kind of relevant initiative, policy, regulations or legislation that we found).

METHODS

All types of English language records concerning the regulation of commercial tobacco product availability were considered, including peer-reviewed journal articles, key reports and policy documents. The key features of regulatory schemes were documented. In addition, we contacted key informants in different countries and regions for advice on additional sources and undertook targeted searching in regions where we initially found little data.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

Although many countries have well-established and comprehensive tobacco control programmes, tobacco retail policy that actively addresses the availability of tobacco is underutilised. Many jurisdictions have implemented a minimum purchase age and restricted point-of-sale advertising and marketing. Other tobacco retailing regulations also included licensing systems with licence fees, caps on licences and restrictions on store location, type and retailer density/proximity. A very small number of jurisdictions have ended tobacco retailing altogether.

CONCLUSIONS

At a minimum, policy-makers should implement licensing schemes, licence caps and proximity limits and invest in robust monitoring systems and compliance enforcement. Tobacco products' ubiquity is incompatible with its status as a dangerous addictive substance and does not align with tobacco endgame goals.

Towards tobacco-free retailers: feasibility of an intervention encouraging retailers to stop selling tobacco in Tasmania

BACKGROUND

Despite calls for greater emphasis on tobacco supply reduction strategies, limited evidence of interventions (regulatory and non-regulatory) to reduce tobacco retailer numbers exists. This study investigated the feasibility of a real-world, non-regulatory intervention to encourage low volume tobacco retailers to stop selling, in a jurisdiction with a tobacco retailer licensing system.

INTERVENTION

Between December 2018 and 2019, low volume tobacco retailers (n=164) were exposed to multiple intervention elements (eg, postcard and letter mail-out, onsite visit) focused on the business benefits of stopping selling, in the lead up to their tobacco licence expiry date. The intervention was delivered in Tasmania, Australia in a region characterised by socioeconomic disadvantage, high smoking rates and density of tobacco retailers.

METHODS

For this mixed-methods study we collected data through implementation records on 164 retailers and postintervention interviews with 21 retailers to explore intervention implementation, awareness, acceptability, usefulness and actions taken.

RESULTS

Retailers were able to recall the intervention, specifically messages focused on the business-related reasons to stop selling tobacco. Of the 107 retailers that the project officer spoke with onsite or via telephone, the majority (72%) accepted phase I components. The intervention introduced some retailers to the concept of ending tobacco sales, which made them stop and consider this option. Of the 164 retailers exposed to the intervention, 18 (11%) retailers ended tobacco sales.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that a non-regulatory intervention targeting low volume retailers to end tobacco sales may help to reduce the retail availability of tobacco.

Is tobacco a driver of footfall among small retailers? A geographical analysis of tobacco purchasing using electronic point of sale data

OBJECTIVE

Opponents of policies designed to reduce tobacco retail availability argue that tobacco products are a vital driver of 'footfall' in small retailers. This study considers the changing contribution of tobacco to footfall and revenue among convenience stores across Britain, compares tobacco to other 'footfall driver' products and assesses whether tobacco's importance varies by neighbourhood deprivation and urban/rural status.

METHODS

We conducted an analysis of electronic point of sale systems data from 1253 convenience stores in Britain in 4 weeks in 2016 and 2019. We calculated the number and value of purchased basket types (Tobacco Only, Non-Tobacco, Mixed) in each year and by neighbourhood characteristics.

RESULTS

The mean numbers of baskets per store containing tobacco fell by 47% during 2016-2019, a greater decline than any other footfall driver product. The sales value of tobacco products rose sharply over this time period due to increasing unit price. However, the proportion of store turnover accounted for by tobacco transactions declined. There were marked falls in the turnover from non-tobacco products in Mixed tobacco baskets. The proportion of baskets containing tobacco and the value of turnover from these baskets was greater in more deprived and urban areas but these places also experienced larger reductions over time, narrowing differences between areas.

CONCLUSION

Tobacco's importance as a driver of footfall and related turnover among convenience retailers has reduced significantly in Britain in recent years, particularly in deprived and urban areas, undermining industry claims that tobacco is essential to the viability of these businesses.

Is the tobacco 'footfall' argument justified for tobacco purchases in New Zealand convenience stores?

INTRODUCTION

New Zealand's Smokefree 2025 goal aims to greatly decrease the availability of tobacco. One option is to cease the sale of tobacco from convenience stores. However, tobacco companies and retail trade associations oppose this move and have argued that customers who purchase tobacco drive footfall and spend more than non-tobacco customers. The aim of this study is to test the validity of industry claims about the importance of tobacco to convenience stores.

METHODS

During November and December 2019, immediate postpurchase surveys were undertaken with customers on exit from a random sample of 100 convenience stores in two New Zealand cities. We estimated the mean number of items purchased, including tobacco and non-tobacco items, and mean expenditure on non-tobacco items.

RESULTS

Of the 3399 transactions recorded, 13.8% included tobacco, of which 8.3% comprised tobacco only and 5.5% included tobacco and non-tobacco items. The mean number of transactions containing both tobacco and non-tobacco items was 1.98, and 1.87 for those containing non-tobacco items only. Customers who purchased tobacco and non-tobacco items spent on average NZ$6.99 on non-tobacco items, whereas customers who purchased non-tobacco items only, spent on average NZ$5.07.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results do not support claims that tobacco drives one-quarter of footfall into stores or that customers who purchase tobacco spend almost twice as much as non-tobacco customers. Combined purchases of tobacco and non-tobacco items constituted 5.5% of transactions; the impact on a store's profitability of removing tobacco sales is unknown and could be the focus of future research.

Why Tasmanian retailers stop selling tobacco and implications for tobacco control

INTRODUCTION

The retail availability of tobacco is at odds with the health harms associated with tobacco smoking and undermines tobacco control efforts. Evidence suggests ease of access to tobacco through retail outlets contributes to smoking prevalence.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to understand why retailers stop selling tobacco and explore possible implications for tobacco control.

METHODS

The Tobacco Licensing Database maintained by the Department of Health Tasmania was used to identify and recruit past retailers who no longer held licences. Semistructured interviews were conducted to explore business demographics and the reasons they stopped selling tobacco. Interview findings were analysed using a thematic framework.

RESULTS

Twenty former tobacco retailers participated, representing all business types except specialist tobacconists and large supermarkets. Retailers gave multiple reasons for ending tobacco sales, related to business considerations, security, tobacco regulations, ethics and health. Most often, the decision was business-related; health or ethical considerations were rarely a factor. Most retailers felt they played no role in mitigating tobacco-related harm.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insights into factors that make tobacco sales unattractive or unfeasible for low-volume outlets and may inform supply-focused tobacco control policy. A campaign that emphasises the possible business benefits of ending tobacco sales in favour of other higher-margin products may support retailers to transition away from tobacco sales. The regulatory obligations of selling tobacco are disincentives and create a less favourable retail environment.

Who sells tobacco, who stops? A comparison across different tobacco retailing schemes

BACKGROUND

Licensing of tobacco retailers has been proposed as a mechanism to encourage retailers to stop selling tobacco. However, previous studies of tobacco licensing and/or of retailers who have stopped selling have been restricted to one legislative environment. This study examines patterns of tobacco retailing across three legislative environments with three different licensing schemes (an annual fee-based licence, a zero-cost, one-off notification scheme and no notification/licensing scheme).

METHOD

A telephone survey was conducted of 2928 potential tobacco retailers who could personally choose whether or not to sell tobacco (rather than the decision being made at a head office).

RESULTS

Unexpectedly, the annual licence fee to sell tobacco was not significantly associated with a lower rate of selling tobacco or a higher rate of stopping. After allowing for other factors, probability of selling, stopping selling and reported importance of tobacco sales varied across outlet types (p<0.001 for all three outcomes), and according to the remoteness of the retailer (p<0.001, p trend=0.041 and p=0.025 respectively).

CONCLUSION

A fee of $A286 was not associated with a lower rate of selling, or a higher rate of stopping. The effect of licensing on retailer numbers will presumably be greater for higher licence fees, but will also depend on the perceived importance of tobacco sales to the retailer. In turn, importance of tobacco sales appears to depend on market factors, including proximity to major urban centres and low-cost competitors. A higher licence fee is likely to have a larger effect on discouraging retailers from selling.