Scoping review identifies campaigns targeting illicit tobacco and vaping product sales, highlighting funding sources and effectiveness implications.
Objective This scoping review aims to identify public education or mass media campaigns aimed at discouraging purchasing or selling illicitly traded tobacco and/or vaping products and to summarise the characteristics of the campaigns. Method We searched six databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO and CINAHL) for peer-reviewed articles and conducted targeted Google searches to identify relevant campaigns implemented in English-speaking countries. Eligible campaigns aimed to lower demand for, raise public awareness of and/or deter purchasing or selling of illicit tobacco/vaping products. Results We identified 28 campaigns; of these, 15 were funded and distributed by government/health charity organisations, nine by tobacco companies, three by Crime Stoppers chapters and one by a consumer lobby group. 24 focused on illicit tobacco products (12 government/health charity), three on tobacco and vaping products (all government/health charity) and one on vaping products only (lobby group funded). Most government/health charity (n=10) and industry-funded (n=6) campaigns highlighted the association of illicit products with organised crime. Industry-funded campaigns featured messaging on lost tax revenue (n=5) and damages to legitimate businesses (n=5). The Keep IT Out campaign from England was the only campaign evaluated for effectiveness and resulted in increased public awareness and hotline reports. Discussion Our findings highlight the critical need for future research to identify effective campaign messages, especially those that avoid unintentionally reinforcing the use of illicit tobacco/vape products, increasing awareness of where or how to access these products, implying that taxed products are safer or legitimising the tobacco industry and its retail channels.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Puljević et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: