A comparative assessment of the price, brands and pack characteristics of illicitly traded cigarettes in five cities and towns in South Africa

Abstract

ObjectiveThe prevalence of illicitly traded cigarettes in South Africa has been reported to be 40–50%. However, these estimates do not account for the more nuanced characteristics of the illicit cigarette trade. With the goal of better understanding contraband cigarettes in South Africa, this study piloted three methods for assessing the price, brands, pack features and smoker's views about illicit cigarettes in five cities/towns. Data were collected in June and July 2012.SettingA convenience sample of three South African cities (Johannesburg, Durban and Nelspruit) and two smaller towns (Musina and Ficksburg) were chosen for this study.Outcome measuresThree cross-sectional approaches were used to assess the characteristics of contraband cigarettes: (1) a dummy purchase of cigarettes from informal retailers, (2) the collection of discarded cigarette packs and (3) a survey of tobacco smokers.ParticipantsFor the purposes of the survey, 40 self-reported smokers were recruited at taxi ranks in each downtown site. Adults who were over the age of 18 were asked to verbally consent to participate in the study and answer a questionnaire administered by a researcher.ResultsThe leading reason for labelling a pack as illicit in each city/town was the absence of an excise stamp (28.6% overall), and the least common reason was an illegal tar or nicotine level (11.1% overall). The overall proportion of informal vendors who sold illicit cigarettes was 41%. Singles and packs of 20 were consistently cheaper at informal vendors. Survey participants’ responses reflected varied perspectives on illicit cigarettes and purchasing preferences.ConclusionsEach approach generated an interesting insight into physical aspects of illicit cigarettes. While this pilot study cannot be used to generate generalisable statistics on illicit cigarettes, more systematic surveys of this nature could inform researchers’ and practitioners’ initiatives to combat illicit and legal cigarette sales and usage.

Countervailing Effects: What the FDA Would Have to Know to Evaluate Tobacco Regulations

“…To estimate the size of the illicit tobacco market, data can be gathered from surveys and sources used to produce existing estimates of illicit market size. To augment and update existing estimates, novel surveys and analysis of discarded cigarette packs (Lakhdar, 2008;Wilson et al, 2009;Merriman, 2010;Davis et al, 2013;Stoklosa and Ross, 2014;Wherry et al, 2014) can be performed. New surveys of consumers on illicit tobacco purchases can be conducted in the field or by telephone.…”

“…The estimates are computed using a variety of methods to collect data, including collection of empty discarded packs, consumer surveys, seizure data, and other methods. Numerous studies, beginning with Lakhdar (2008), perform discarded-pack studies (Wilson et al, 2009;Merriman, 2010;Barkans and Lawrance, 2013;Davis et al, 2013;Stoklosa and Ross, 2014;Wherry et al, 2014). Many types of surveys can ascertain the prevalence of illicit tobacco purchases, including telephone surveys of areas near Indian reservations (Hyland et al, 2004) and convenience samples of self-identified smokers at bus stops (Wherry et al, 2014).…”

“…Numerous studies, beginning with Lakhdar (2008), perform discarded-pack studies (Wilson et al, 2009;Merriman, 2010;Barkans and Lawrance, 2013;Davis et al, 2013;Stoklosa and Ross, 2014;Wherry et al, 2014). Many types of surveys can ascertain the prevalence of illicit tobacco purchases, including telephone surveys of areas near Indian reservations (Hyland et al, 2004) and convenience samples of self-identified smokers at bus stops (Wherry et al, 2014). Pack-collection surveys ask respondents to provide a pack of cigarettes of the type usually consumed (Fix et al, 2014), to show all opened packs in the household to the researcher (Stoklosa and Ross, 2014), or to show the 7 Daudelin, Soiffer, and Willows (2013, pp.…”

“…10 most recent pack opened (Joossens et al, 2014). One field study in South Africa employed teams of researchers to make "dummy purchases" at cigarette stands and shops, gathering data on licit and illicit brands offered for sale (Wherry et al, 2014).…”

“…Packs may then be examined for the absence of mandated tax stamps for the local area, or of health warnings, or other telltale signs that indicate an illegal purchase or location of consumption (Lakhdar, 2008;Wilson et al, 2009;Merriman, 2010;Davis et al, 2013;Stoklosa and Ross, 2014;Wherry et al, 2014). The packs can also be classified by type of tobacco product.…”