Evolution of Tobacco Labeling and Packaging: International Legal Considerations and Health Governance
Open accessAbstract
Numerous national governments have recently adopted packaging and labeling legislation to curb global tobacco uptake. This coincides with the World Health Organization’s 2011 World No Tobacco Day, which recognized the extraordinary progress of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The tobacco industry has presented legal challenges to countries, including Australia, Uruguay, and the United States, for enacting legislation meeting or exceeding FCTC obligations. We argue that national governments attempting to meet the obligations set forth in public health treaties such as the FCTC should be afforded flexibilities and protection in developing tobacco control laws and regulations, because these measures are necessary to protect public health and should be explicitly recognized in international trade and legal agreements.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Since the 1990s, tension between trade and tobacco control has escalated as new legal rules concerning intellectual property and foreign investment have enabled investors, including tobacco companies, to challenge domestic public health policies in international trade and investment arbitration courts.
“Since the 1990s, the tension between trade and tobacco control has escalated1 as new legal rules concerning intellectual property and foreign investment have enabled investors (including tobacco companies) to challenge domestic public health policies in international trade and investment arbitration courts.2–4”
From Defending strong tobacco packaging and labelling regulations in Uruguay: transnational tobacco control network versus Philip Morris International (2018) · cites this paper as [3]
Cites
Cigarettes Butts and the Case for an Environmental Policy on Hazardous Cigarette Waste
Novotny, T. E., Lum, K., Smith, E., Wang, V., & Barnes, R. (2009) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph6051691 · Cited by 336 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Crosbie, E., Sosa, P., & Glantz, S. A. (2018) · Tobacco control · doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-053690 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mackey, T. K., Liang, B. A., & Novotny, T. E.
- Affiliations
- California Western School of Law (US)
- Venue
- American Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- American Public Health Association
- Published
- 2013-04
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- e39-e43
- ISSN
- 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0048
- PMC
- PMC3673250
- OpenAlex
- W2044002820
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3
- FWCI
- 12.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › World Trade Organization Law
- Social Sciences › Law › Intellectual Property Law
- Keywords
- tobacco packaging, tobacco control legislation, Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, international trade agreements, legal flexibility, health governance
- MeSH terms
- Australia, Drug and Narcotic Control, Humans, United States, Uruguay, Global Health, Product Packaging, Tobacco Industry, Government Regulation, Consumer Health Information, Tobacco Products
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
