IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v10y2020i4p101-d463044.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Barriers to Tobacco Control in China: A Narrative Review

Author

Listed:
  • Wancong Leng

    (School of Policy Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences and Law, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1QU, UK)

  • Rui Mu

    (Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China)

Abstract

This research chooses the method of narrative literature review to analyze the barriers in implementing tobacco regulatory policies in China and explore the strategies that can overcome these challenges. China is the world’s largest producer and consumer of tobacco products. Although the prevalence of cigarette smoking declined from 34.5% to 27.7% between 1984 and 2015, the reduction over the 30 years has been slow. Therefore, effective tobacco regulatory policies are necessary. However, as the tobacco industry is one of the major sources of government revenue and an indispensable part of the national economy, the implementation of tobacco regulatory policies faces many challenges. In terms of the institutional dimension, the ambiguous attitude of national institutions and tobacco companies’ development strategies impede the enforcement of tobacco policies. In addition, the primary economic barrier to tobacco control is the unwillingness of the government to raise value-added tax on tobacco. Finally, the social customs of exchanging individual cigarettes and gifting packaged cigarettes among adults and juveniles in China hinder the implementation of tobacco regulatory policies. In this case, a combined strategy of top-down and bottom-up approaches can remove these barriers, such as using the authoritative power to control tobacco use and raising non-smokers’ awareness of smoking risks and public education.

Suggested Citation

  • Wancong Leng & Rui Mu, 2020. "Barriers to Tobacco Control in China: A Narrative Review," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:10:y:2020:i:4:p:101-:d:463044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/10/4/101/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/10/4/101/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brandt, A.M., 2012. "Inventing conflicts of interest: A history of Tobacco industry tactics," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 102(1), pages 63-71.
    2. Kelley Lee & Jappe Eckhardt & Chris Holden, 2016. "Tobacco industry globalization and global health governance: towards an interdisciplinary research agenda," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Terry Maxwell Alchin, 1995. "A note on tobacco product prices in the Australian CPI," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(12), pages 473-477.
    4. Joy, Annamma, 2001. "Gift Giving in Hong Kong and the Continuum of Social Ties," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(2), pages 239-256, September.
    5. Chan, Allan K. K. & Denton, Luther & Tsang, Alex S. L., 2003. "The art of gift giving in China," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 47-52.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ye Yang & Angela Paladino, 2015. "The case of wine: understanding Chinese gift-giving behavior," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 335-361, September.
    2. Gabriel Donleavy & Kit-Chun Lam & Simon Ho, 2008. "Does East Meet West in Business Ethics: An Introduction to the Special Issue," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 79(1), pages 1-8, April.
    3. Bian, Qin & Forsythe, Sandra, 2012. "Purchase intention for luxury brands: A cross cultural comparison," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(10), pages 1443-1451.
    4. Ludwig Bstieler & Martin Hemmert, 2010. "Trust formation in Korean new product alliances: How important are pre-existing social ties?," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 299-319, June.
    5. David Ackerman & Jing Hu & Liyuan Wei, 2009. "Confucius, Cars, and Big Government: Impact of Government Involvement in Business on Consumer Perceptions Under Confucianism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(3), pages 473-482, October.
    6. repec:dau:papers:123456789/8678 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Cheng, Andong & Meloy, Margaret G. & Polman, Evan, 2021. "Picking Gifts for Picky People," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 191-206.
    8. Gao, Hailian & Huang, Songshan (Sam) & Brown, Graham, 2017. "The influence of face on Chinese tourists’ gift purchase behaviour: The moderating role of the gift giver–receiver relationship," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 97-106.
    9. Guijun Zhuang & Alex Tsang, 2008. "A Study on Ethically Problematic Selling Methods in China with a Broaden Concept of Gray-marketing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 79(1), pages 85-101, April.
    10. Elodie Gentina & Thomas Li-Ping Tang & Qinxuan Gu, 2017. "Does Bad Company Corrupt Good Morals? Social Bonding and Academic Cheating among French and Chinese Teens," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(3), pages 639-667, December.
    11. Matthew Tieu & Michael Lawless & Sarah C. Hunter & Maria Alejandra Pinero de Plaza & Francis Darko & Alexandra Mudd & Lalit Yadav & Alison Kitson, 2023. "Wicked problems in a post-truth political economy: a dilemma for knowledge translation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    12. Mamonov, Stanislav & Benbunan-Fich, Raquel, 2017. "Exploring factors affecting social e-commerce service adoption: The case of Facebook Gifts," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 590-600.
    13. Wu, Ruomeng & Steffel, Mary & Shavitt, Sharon, 2021. "Buying gifts for multiple recipients: How culture affects whose desires are prioritized," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 10-20.
    14. Mingzhi Hu & Guocheng Xiang & Shihu Zhong, 2021. "The Burden of Social Connectedness: Do Escalating Gift Expenditures Make You Happy?," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(8), pages 3479-3497, December.
    15. Frank Houghton & Sharon Houghton & Diane O’Doherty & Derek McInerney & Bruce Duncan, 2019. "Greenwashing tobacco—attempts to eco-label a killer product," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 9(1), pages 82-85, March.
    16. Tao Zhang, 2022. "Measuring following behaviour in gift giving by utility function: statistical model and empirical evidence from China," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    17. Siyang Luo & Qianting Kong & Zijun Ke & Liqin Huang & Meihua Yu & Yiyi Zhu & Ying Xu, 2020. "Residential Mobility Decreases the Perception of Social Norm Violations," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 961-986, April.
    18. Luo, Biao & Fang, Wenpei & Shen, Jie & Cong, Xue Fei, 2019. "Gift–image congruence and gift appreciation in romantic relationships: The roles of intimacy and relationship dependence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 142-152.
    19. Tonya Williams Bradford, 2021. "We can fix this! Donor activism for nonprofit supply generation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 397-417, March.
    20. Valérie Guillard & Céline del Bucchia, 2012. ""How About Giving My Things Away Over The Internet? " When Internet Makes It Easier To Give Things Away," Post-Print hal-00909262, HAL.
    21. Yanju Zhou & Yi Yu & Xiaohong Chen & Xiongwei Zhou, 2020. "Guanxi or Justice? An Empirical Study of WeChat Voting," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 201-225, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:10:y:2020:i:4:p:101-:d:463044. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.