Cited by 16Global Public Health Policies and EpidemiologySmoking Behavior and CessationPublic Health Policies and Education

Courtesy and the challenges of implementing smoke‐free policies in Japan

Bialous, Stella Aguinaga, Mochizuki‐Kobayashi, Yumiko, Stillman, Frances·2006·Nicotine & Tobacco Research

Abstract

For decades, the tobacco companies have developed a worldwide campaign to oppose the creation of smoke-free environments. Public health efforts to promote clean indoor air have been uneven throughout the world, and in few places have such efforts faced as many challenges as in Japan. The Japanese market is dominated by Japan Tobacco, which is partly owned by the government, and Philip Morris International is also present in Japan. Japan Tobacco and Philip Morris International have developed campaigns promoting courtesy and tolerance that, until recently, seem to have resonated well with the public. The companies also have supported research promoting ventilation and have funded consultants to act as experts in the area of second-hand smoke exposure. Japan is a critical country to study, partly because of the strength of Japan Tobacco in the country and the growth of Japan Tobacco International in Southeast Asia and the rest of the world, and partly because of Japan's ratification of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. This paper uses tobacco industry documents to provide an overview of the tobacco industry's scientific and political efforts to stifle the development of clean indoor measures in Japan. Learning past industry strategies may assist policymakers and advocates in the development of future public health activities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14622200600576297

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Japanese government and JTI share similar pro-tobacco control sentiments.

    “As a result, Japanese government and JTI share similar pro-tobacco control sentiments (Bialous, Mochizuki-Kobayashi et al. 2006).”

    From Civil society and the negotiation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (2009) · cites this paper as Bialous, Mochizuki-Kobayashi et al. 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bialous, S. A., Mochizuki‐Kobayashi, Y., & Stillman, F.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Stillman, Frances
Venue
Nicotine & Tobacco Research
Published
2006-04-01
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
203-216
ISSN
  • 1462-2203 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-994X
OpenAlex
W2011564282
Cited by
16
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nicotine & Tobacco Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
Keywords
smoke-free policies, tobacco industry, Philip Morris International, passive smoking, Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, tobacco control, Japan
MeSH terms
Smoking Prevention, Health Plan Implementation, Health Policy, Humans, Japan, National Health Programs, Public Health, Smoking, Tobacco Smoke Pollution, Tobacco Industry, Inhalation Exposure

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review