Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Tobacco retail policy landscape: a longitudinal survey of US states
  1. Douglas A Luke1,
  2. Amy A Sorg1,
  3. Todd Combs1,
  4. Christopher B Robichaux1,
  5. Sarah Moreland-Russell1,
  6. Kurt M Ribisl2,3,
  7. Lisa Henriksen4
  1. 1Center for Public Health Systems Science, George Warren Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA
  2. 2Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
  3. 3Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
  4. 4Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Douglas A Luke, Center for Public Health Systems Science, Washington University in St Louis, Campus Box 1196, One Brookings Drive, St Louis, MO 63130, USA; dluke{at}


Background There are ∼380 000 tobacco retailers in the USA, where the largest tobacco companies spend almost $9 billion a year to promote their products. No systematic survey has been conducted of state-level activities to regulate the retail environment, thus little is known about what policies are being planned, proposed or implemented.

Methods This longitudinal study is the first US survey of state tobacco control programmes (TCPs) about retail policy activities. Surveyed in 2012 and 2014, programme managers (n=46) reported activities in multiple domains: e-cigarettes, retailer density and licensing, non-tax price increases, product placement, advertising and promotion, health warnings and other approaches. Policy activities were reported in one of five levels: no formal activity, planning or advocating, policy was proposed, policy was enacted or policy was implemented. Overall and domain-specific activity scores were calculated for each state.

Results The average retail policy activity almost doubled between 2012 and 2014. States with the largest increase in scores included: Minnesota, which established a fee-based tobacco retail licensing system and banned self-service for e-cigarettes and all other tobacco products (OTP); Oregon, Kansas and Maine, all of which banned self-service for OTP; and West Virginia, which banned some types of flavoured OTP.

Conclusions Retail policy activities in US states increased dramatically in a short time. Given what is known about the impact of the retail environment on tobacco use by youth and adults, state and local TCPs may want diversify policy priorities by implementing retail policies alongside tax and smoke-free air laws.

  • Public policy
  • Price
  • Environment
  • Taxation
  • Advertising and Promotion

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See:

Statistics from

Request Permissions

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.