Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/27574
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMoodie, Crawforden_UK
dc.contributor.authorHoek, Janeten_UK
dc.contributor.authorScheffels, Janneen_UK
dc.contributor.authorGallopel-Morvan, Karineen_UK
dc.contributor.authorLindorff, Kylieen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2018-08-01T00:00:50Z-
dc.date.available2018-08-01T00:00:50Z-
dc.date.issued2019-09en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/27574-
dc.description.abstractIntroduction By July 2018, five countries (Australia, France, United Kingdom, New Zealand, Norway) had fully implemented plain (standardised) packaging. Methods 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. Results Differences between countries include the terminology used (either ‘plain’, ‘standardised’, or ‘plain and standardised’), products covered, and transition times (ranging from two to twelve 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 (e.g. 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. Conclusions 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.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing Groupen_UK
dc.relationMoodie C, Hoek J, Scheffels J, Gallopel-Morvan K & Lindorff K (2019) Plain packaging: Legislative differences in Australia, France, the UK, New Zealand and Norway, and options for strengthening regulations. Tobacco Control, 28 (5), pp. 485-492. https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054483en_UK
dc.rightsThis article has been accepted for publication in Tobacco Control following peer review. The definitive copyedited, typeset version Moodie C, Hoek J, Scheffels J, et alPlain packaging: legislative differences in Australia, France, the UK, New Zealand and Norway, and options for strengthening regulations, Tobacco Control 2019;28:485-492 is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054483en_UK
dc.titlePlain packaging: Legislative differences in Australia, France, the UK, New Zealand and Norway, and options for strengthening regulationsen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054483en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid30068563en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleTobacco Controlen_UK
dc.citation.issn1468-3318en_UK
dc.citation.issn0964-4563en_UK
dc.citation.volume28en_UK
dc.citation.issue5en_UK
dc.citation.spage485en_UK
dc.citation.epage492en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusAM - Accepted Manuscripten_UK
dc.contributor.funderCancer Research UKen_UK
dc.author.emailc.s.moodie@stir.ac.uken_UK
dc.citation.date01/08/2018en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationInstitute for Social Marketingen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Otagoen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationNorwegian Institute of Public Healthen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationSchool of Public Healthen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationCancer Council Victoriaen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000497750300003en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85050930145en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid958407en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-1805-2509en_UK
dc.date.accepted2018-07-16en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-07-16en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2018-07-31en_UK
dc.relation.funderprojectCancer Research UK Centre for Tobacco Control Research (CTCR)en_UK
dc.relation.funderrefC312/A15192en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionAMen_UK
local.rioxx.authorMoodie, Crawford|0000-0002-1805-2509en_UK
local.rioxx.authorHoek, Janet|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorScheffels, Janne|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorGallopel-Morvan, Karine|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorLindorff, Kylie|en_UK
local.rioxx.projectC312/A15192|Cancer Research UK|http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000289en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2018-08-01en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/under-embargo-all-rights-reserved||2018-08-01en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved|2018-08-01|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenameMoodie-etal-TobaccoControl-2019.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source1468-3318en_UK
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Moodie-etal-TobaccoControl-2019.pdfFulltext - Accepted Version340.47 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.