scholarly journals Feminine Appeals on Cigarette Packs Sold in 14 Countries

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren Czaplicki ◽  
Kevin Welding ◽  
Joanna E. Cohen ◽  
Katherine Clegg Smith

Objective: Limited research has examined feminine marketing appeals on cigarette packs in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). We reviewed a systematically collected sample of cigarette packs sold across 14 LMICs in 2013 (Wave 1) and 2015–2017 (Wave 2).Methods: Packs in Wave 1 (n = 3,240) and Wave 2 (n = 2,336) were coded for feminine imagery and descriptors (flowers, fashion, women/girls, color “pink”). We examined trends in feminine appeals over time, including co-occurrence with other pack features (slim or lipstick shape, flavor, reduced harm, and reduced odor claims).Results: The proportion of unique feminine cigarette packs significantly decreased from 8.6% (n = 278) in Wave 1 to 5.9% (n = 137) in Wave 2 (p < 0.001). Among all feminine packs, flower-and fashion-related features were most common; a substantial proportion also used flavor and reduced odor appeals.Conclusion: While there was a notable presence of feminine packs, the decline observed may reflect global trends toward marketing gender-neutral cigarettes to women and a general contempt for using traditional femininity to market products directly to women. Plain packaging standards may reduce the influence of branding on smoking among women.

Author(s):  
Olufemi Erinoso ◽  
Kevin Welding ◽  
Katherine Clegg Smith ◽  
Joanna E Cohen

Abstract Introduction Cigarettes designed to have less smoke smell were developed by the tobacco industry to supposedly reduce negative qualities. Cigarettes with marketing claims communicating these designs have been sold in high-income countries and marketing of “less smoke smell” terms on cigarette packaging can promote cigarette use. It is unclear to what extent they have been marketed in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods The Tobacco Pack Surveillance System (TPackSS) systemically collected tobacco packs available in 14 LMICs with high tobacco use between 2013-2017. We coded 4,354 packs for marketing appeals, including claims related to smoke smell. We describe “less smoke smell” and similar claims found on these packs and compare across country and tobacco manufacturers. Results Phrases communicating less smoke smell were present on packs purchased in nine of 14 LMICs, including Bangladesh, Brazil, China, India, Mexico, Philippines, Russia, Ukraine, and Vietnam. The most commonly (74.1%) used terminology was “less smoke smell”, "LSS" or a combination of the two. Packs from Russia had the most prevalent use (11.8%) of such claims. Companies using these terms across 21 brands included Japan Tobacco International (JTI), British American Tobacco (BAT), Philip Morris International (PMI) and other smaller companies. JTI accounted for 70.9% of packs with such terms. Conclusion Some of the world’s largest tobacco companies are communicating less smoke smell on packs in LMICs. Less smoke smell and similar phrases on packaging should be prohibited because they can enhance the appeal of cigarettes. Implications Tobacco companies are using “less smoke smell” and similar phrases on cigarette packs in LMICs. These claims have the potential to increase the appeal of smoking and promote cigarette use. Countries should consider policies to restrict attractive labeling claims, in accordance with the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) Article 13 guidelines, which recommends restrictions on attractive design elements on tobacco packaging.


2020 ◽  
Vol 101 ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
T. van Boeckel ◽  
J. Pires ◽  
R. Silvester ◽  
C. Zhao ◽  
J. Song ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Smith ◽  
Kevin Welding ◽  
Carmen Washington ◽  
Michael Iacobelli ◽  
Joanna Cohen

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernanda Ewerling ◽  
Anita Raj ◽  
Cesar G. Victora ◽  
Franciele Hellwig ◽  
Carolina V. N. Coll ◽  
...  

AbstractIntroductionIn 2017, a survey-based women’s empowerment index (SWPER) was proposed for African countries, including three domains: social independence, decision making and attitude to violence. External validity and predictive value of the SWPER has been demonstrated in terms of coverage of maternal and child interventions and use of modern contraception. To determine its value for global monitoring, we explored the applicability of the SWPER in national health surveys from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in other world regions.MethodsWe used data from the latest Demographic and Health Survey for 62 LMICs since 2000. 14 pre-selected questions (items) were considered during the validation process. Content adaptations included the exclusion of women’s working status and recategorization of the decision-making related items. We compared the loading patterns obtained from principal components analysis performed for each country separately with those obtained in a pooled dataset with all countries combined. Country rankings based on the score of each SWPER domain were correlated with their rankings in the Gender Development Index (GDI) and the Gender Inequality Index (GII) for external validation.ResultsConsistency regarding item loadings for the three SWPER empowerment domains was observed for most countries. Correlations between the scores generated for each country and global score obtained from the combined data were 0.89 or higher for all countries. Correlations between the country rankings according to SWPER and GDI were, respectively, 0.74, 0.72 and 0.67 for social independence, decision-making, and attitude to violence domains. The correlations were equal to 0.81, 0.67, and 0.44, respectively, with GII.ConclusionThe indicator we propose, named SWPER Global, is a suitable common measure of women’s empowerment for LMICs, addressing the need for a single consistent survey-based indicator of women’s empowerment that allows for tracking of progress over time and across countries at the individual and country levels.SummaryWhat is already known?Although survey-based women’s empowerment indicators have been used in the literature, until 2017 there was no indicator proposed for use in a large set of countries that would be comparable between and within countries.In 2017, we proposed the Survey-based Women’s emPowERment indicator (SWPER, pronounced as “super”), to be used in African countries, that encompasses three wellrecognized domains of women’s empowerment (attitude to violence, social independenceand decision making).The external validity and predictive value of the SWPER has been demonstrated in terms of coverage of maternal and child interventions and use of modern contraception.Validation of the index was restricted to African countries, and a common measure to allow comparisons across low and middle-income countries (LMICs) from all world regions was still lacking.What are the new findings?We show that the SWPER Global may serve as a valid common measure of women’s empowerment among LMICs, as consistent patterns were obtained for most countries and world regions.The SWPER Global index addresses the need for a single cross-cultural standardized survey-based indicator of women’s empowerment in the context of LMICs that enables comparability between countries and over time and subgroup analyses, extending previously proposed indicators such as the Gender Development Index which is limited to the country-levelWhat do the new findings imply?The SWPER Global index enables the study of how women’s empowerment is linked to developmental and health outcomes, allowing for broad comparisons across countries and world regions.As a comprehensive cross-cultural standard tool, it also contributes to the monitoring and accountability of country progress over time in advancing gender equality and women’s empowerment.The new tool may help target and prioritize policy and advocacy efforts toward SDG 5 (achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls) at the regional and country levels.


Author(s):  
James Lomas ◽  
Karl Claxton ◽  
Jessica Ochalek

Abstract Economic evaluation of health-related projects requires principles and methods to address the various trade-offs that need to be made between costs and benefits, across sectors and social objectives, and over time. Existing guidelines for economic evaluation in low- and middle-income countries embed implicit assumptions about expected changes in the marginal cost per unit of health produced by the healthcare sector, the consumption value of health and the appropriate discount rates for health and consumption. Separating these evaluation parameters out requires estimates for each country over time, which have hitherto been unavailable. We present a conceptual economic evaluation framework that aims to clarify the distinct roles of these different evaluation parameters in evaluating a health-related project. Estimates for each are obtained for each country and in each time period, based on available empirical evidence. Where existing estimates are not available, for future values of the marginal cost per unit of health produced by the healthcare sector, new estimates are obtained following a practical method for obtaining projected values. The framework is applied to a simple, hypothetical, illustrative example, and the results from our preferred approach are compared against those obtained from other approaches informed by the assumptions implicit within existing guidelines. This exposes the consequences of applying such assumptions, which are not supported by available evidence, in terms of potentially sub-optimal decisions. In general, we find that applying existing guidelines as done in conventional practice likely underestimates the value of health-related projects on account of not allowing for expected growth in the marginal cost per unit of health produced by the healthcare sector.


2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Wickenden ◽  
Jackie Shaw ◽  
Stephen Thompson ◽  
Brigitte Rohwerder

This article explores COVID-19 related experiences of disabled people in Bangladesh, Kenya, Nigeria, Nepal and Uganda. Narrative interviews generated storied responses, focussing on respondents' priorities, which enabled us to hear what was most significant for them and their families. 143 interviews were conducted online or by phone by 7 local researchers (3 disabled), with appropriate inclusive support. Nearly everyone was interviewed twice to capture the progression of impacts over time. The data was analysed thematically through a virtual participatory approach.An overarching 'subjective' theme of feelings experienced by the participants was labelled 'destabilisation, disorientation and uncertainty'. We also identified 'concrete' or material impacts. People experienced various dilemmas such as choosing between securing food and keeping safe, and tensions between receiving support and feeling increased vulnerability or dependence, with interplay between the emotions of fear, loss and hope. We found both the concept of liminality and grief models productive in understanding the progression of participants' experiences. Disabled people reported the same feelings, difficulties and impacts as others, reported in other literature, but often their pre-existing disadvantages have been exacerbated by the pandemic, including poverty, gender and impairment related stresses and discrimination, inaccessible services or relief, and exclusion from government initiatives.


2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (9) ◽  
pp. 1071-1079 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Clegg Smith ◽  
K. Welding ◽  
C. Kleb ◽  
C. Washington ◽  
J. Cohen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document