This review examined existing evidence to investigate the link between tobacco and poverty in Vietnam, to assess the impact of tobacco control policies on employment related to tobacco consumption and to identify information gaps that require further research for the purposes of advocating stronger tobacco control policies. A Medline, PubMed and Google Scholar search identified studies addressing the tobacco and poverty association in Vietnam using extensive criteria. In all, 22 articles related either to tobacco and health or economics, or to the potential impact of tobacco control policies, were identified from titles, abstracts or the full text. 28 additional publications were identified by other means. PHA, LTT and LTTH reviewed the publications and prepared the initial literature review. There is extensive evidence that tobacco use contributes to poverty and inequality in Vietnam and that tobacco control policies would not have a negative impact on overall employment. Tobacco use wastes household and national financial resources and widens social inequality. The implementation and enforcement of a range of tobacco control measures could prove beneficial not only to improve public health but also to alleviate poverty.
- Tobacco use
- public policy
- taxation and price
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Funding This literature review was funded by the Bloomberg Initiative to Reduce Tobacco Use (BI) through a grant from The International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (The Union). Neither the BI nor The Union played any role in the design of this review, in the collection, analysis and interpretation of the data, in the writing of the report or in the decision to submit this paper for publication.
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval This study did not involve human subjects and as such ethics approval was not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.