Voluntary Retailer Compliance
Background
Several studies have indicated that tobacco use and addiction usually take root in adolescence or even childhood (2, 8). According to the Youth Risk Behavioral Surveillance, in 2003, 22% of high school students (9th-12th grade) had smoked during the 30 days prior to the survey, though tobacco use has declined considerably over the last several years (1). This trend is encouraging, as more than 80% of adult smokers started smoking by age 18, and more than 90% began smoking during their teens (7). Children and teenagers constitute the majority of all new smokers, and the industry's advertising and promotion campaigns often have special appeal to these young people.
Tobacco continues to be one of the most heavily promoted and advertised products in the United States, especially in retail stores. Point-of-purchase (POP) advertising and promotions target consumers where they shop, attract their attention, and remind them of previously seen selling messages. As a result, the tobacco industry spends more than any other industry on point-of-purchase advertising, and spends more on advertising and promotions on the shelves and behind the scenes in retail stores than they spend on any other aspect of tobacco marketing (9). In fact, the store environment is important because it is the main channel used by the tobacco companies to advertise and market to new and future customers, with 2.5% of all tobacco expenditures spent on point-of-sale advertising. An additional 40% is spent on promotional allowances, and 42.5% is spent on retail value added items, such as "buy-one-pack-get-one-free" discount offers for cigarettes, and music CDs sold with a double pack (9). All tobacco companies together had an annual $11.2 billion advertising budget in 2001, and 85% of that budget was devoted to advertising in the store environment, in order to influence buyers at the place that they are most likely to make a purchase (9).
Of concern to many tobacco control experts is the volume of advertising that appears to be directed at young people--through displays near candy and posters often hung at children's eye level. Little research exists on the link between retail-specific advertising and tobacco use. A recent study, however, indicates that teens smoked the brand that takes up the most space in convenience stores nearest their schools, brands such as Marlboro or Camel and that there is a strong association between point-of-sale advertising and promotions with choice of usual brand among teenage smokers (10). Other research shows that 85% of adolescent smokers who buy their own cigarettes buy either Marlboro, Camel or Newport, which are the three most heavily advertised brands of cigarettes in the United States (5).
Policies
Approach retailers and ask them to reduce the amount or restrict the placement of point-of-purchasing (POP) advertising in places with high volume youth access.
Voluntary policies are a good approach to use to curb tobacco marketing in stores because the First Amendment and the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act make it very difficult to pass state or local laws restricting tobacco advertising. Indoor advertising generally must be addressed with a voluntary policy. Exterior advertising can often be covered by a law if it is not specific to tobacco. Voluntary policies are easier to get passed than a law, and they can say whatever the store and policy drafters agree upon. They can also be publicized in ways that honor the store for the policy. However, they do not carry the force of law. A good policy will include definitions for important terms, be very specific about what is covered and where, state that it covers "tobacco" rather than just cigarettes, and will state who is responsible for seeing that it is carried out.
Community groups interested in reducing youth access to tobacco products often target one or more of the following areas: the placement of POP advertising, reducing the number of POP advertisements in one store and reducing the number of tobacco-related signs in store windows. For many communities, the first step has been one geared toward voluntary change on the part of the retailer.
Coast-side merchants in Oceanside, CA were asked to voluntarily eliminate tobacco advertisements and promotions within three feet of candy and/or at children's eye level (below three feet from the floor). At the outset of the 18-month intervention, 40% of the stores agreed to remove advertising near candy. Tobacco control staff formed a coalition with community members, developed resource packets for the merchants, promised media recognition, and conducted monthly visits to the stores. At the end of the effort, store advertising near candy had dropped from 72% to 48% of the stores (11).
Mariposa County merchants in California voluntarily agreed to protect children by getting rid of tobacco self-service displays and removing advertisements near candy or under 3.5 feet from the ground. The tobacco education program at the County Health Department contacted all stores in 2000 and new or non-compliant stores in 2002. Of those, most stores granted educational visits and over half adopted one or more of the recommended tobacco restrictions. All stores adopting these policies were recognized in the local paper (3).
A number of major national retailers, including Exxon Mobil and Walgreens, reached an agreement with the Attorneys General of 43 states in 2002 regarding sales to minors. Part of the agreement contained good business standards that responsible retailers should be willing to adopt: checking I.D.s of all customers who appear to be under age 27; prohibiting self-service displays of tobacco, and implements such as pipes and papers, and prohibiting the distribution of free tobacco product samples in stores (6).
In Sunnyvale, California, teens in TASK (Tobacco Ads Snare Kids) identified and targeted stores that had tobacco advertising near candy or below three feet. TASK teens phoned, wrote and visited merchants several times during a four-month campaign (4).
In San Francisco, a group of young Latinos became health promoters through the "Adopt a Street" project, the goal of which was to reduce tobacco advertisements in local stores and to clean up and beautify local neighborhoods. Participants made personal contact with store owners on a designated street, asking them to sign an agreement to reduce the impact of the POP advertising in their stores (for example, by not displaying tobacco advertisements that featured cartoon-like characters). In return for the pledge, the group gave merchants a garbage can with a sticker telling customers, in Spanish, that the store was working with the community for a healthier neighborhood (4).
Effectiveness Data
Although many of these efforts have been successful, there is no evidence that reductions achieved voluntarily are sustained over time (4). The amount or placement of POP in retail stores may drop for a while, but without continued pressure from the community, tobacco advertising displays most likely will return to their previous levels. Therefore, it is imperative that a community be mobilized around the issue of tobacco advertising, and that community members continue to participate in active campaigns to keep advertising levels low. Voluntary measures can provide a building block to policy change by demonstrating the need for a new law, or by encouraging better enforcement of an existing law (4).
Resources
American Lung Association
1740 Broadway
New York, New York 10019
(212) 315-8700
http://www.lungusa.org/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
Office on Smoking and Health
1600 Clifton Rd.
Atlanta, GA 30333
(404) 639-3311
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco
Kelli Bliss
STORE Campaign (Strategic Tobacco Retail Effort)
California Department of Health Services,
Tobacco Control Section
CDIC/Tobacco Control Section
MS7206
P.O. Box 997413
Sacramento, CA 95899-7413
916-449-5481
kbliss2@dhs.ca.gov
Technical Assistance Legal Center (TALC)
Public Health Institute
505 14th Street, Suite 810
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: 510-444-8252
http://talc.phi.org
References
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2004, May). Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance - United States, 2003. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 53(SS02).
- Everett, S., Warren, C., Sharp, D., Kan, L., Husten, C., Crossett, L. (1999). Initiation of cigarette smoking and subsequent smoking behavior among U.S. high school students. Preventive Medicine, 29:327-333.
- Foothill Express. (2003, March). Health Department Applauds Merchants for Tobacco Ad Cooperation. Pg. 6.
- Jensen, P., & Kole S. (1996, December). Reducing Tobacco Product Marketing in Retail Stores: Challenges and Opportunities. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Center for Research in Disease Prevention.
- Johnston, L., O'Malley, P., Bachman, J., Schulenberg, J. (1999). Cigarette brand preferences among adolescents. Monitoring the Future, Occasional Paper No. 45. Available at: http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/pubs.html#reports
- National Association of Attorneys General. (2003, September 30). Forty-Three Attorneys General Announce Agreement to Curb Tobacco Sales to Minors in Wal-Mart Stores. Retrieved June 17, 2004 at: http://www.naag.org/news/pr-20030930-walmart_tobacco.php
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). (2002). Results from the 2002 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Calculated based on 2002 data at: http://www.icspr.umich.edu:8080/SAMHDA-SERIES/00064.xml/#das.
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1994). Preventing Tobacco Use Among Young People: A Report of the Surgeon General. Washington, DC: Author.
- U.S. Federal Trade Commission. (2003). Federal Trade Commission : Cigarette Report for 2001. Retrieved June 15, 2004 from: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2003/06/2001cigreport.pdf
- Wakefield, M. Ruel, E., Chaloupka, F., Slater, S., Kaufman, N. (2002). Association of point-of-sale tobacco advertising and promotions with choice of usual brand among teenage smokers. Journal of Health Communication, 7:113-122.
- Walters, S., & Muir, J. (2000, June). Effectiveness of an Intervention to Achieve Voluntary Reductions in Point-of-Purchase Tobacco Advertising. Vista, CA: Council for Tobacco Control.
Acknowledgements
Tess B. Cruz, MPH, PhD, Director, TIME Project, Keck School of Medicine, Institute for Prevention Research, University of Southern California, Alhambra, CA
Alan Lieberman, JD, Deputy Attorney General, California State Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, CA
The Center for Health Improvement also acknowledges the following reviewers for providing comments on the original version of this policy profile:
Michael P. Eriksen, Sc.D., Former Director, Office of Smoking on Health, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, GA
David Fleming, M.D., Former State Epidemiologist, Oregon Health Division, Portland, OR
Sally Herndon-Malek, Former Director, Project ASSIST, DHHS, Raleigh, NC
Philip Huang, M.D., M.P.H., Chief, Bureau for Disease and Injury Prevention, Texas Department of Health, Austin, TX
Kevin Keane, Former Director, Cancer Control, American Cancer Society, California Division, Oakland, CA
Jon Lloyd, Director, Tobacco Control Program, Planning and Policy, California Department of Health Services, Sacramento, CA
Paul Minicucci, Former Executive Director, California Next Generation Tobacco Control Alliance, Sacramento, CA
Jane Pritzl, Field Director, Assist Project, Division of Prevention Programs, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Colorado, UT
Randy Schwartz, American Cancer Society, New England
Updated 6/30/04
